Dak Prescott thread

[Micah Prescott]

You likely won't find someone better right away. But teams have to evaluate the cost. Is it worth paying Dak close to $60m/yr or finding his replacement for a fraction of the cost? It's why rookie QB contracts are so valuable for teams when it comes to the cap. You may not find someone who's better than him. But can you find someone who can produce at a similar level without having to put a ton of money towards the position? That's the question that they're currently weighing (likely) & it's a valid one. It's ultimately why they decided to move on from Romo when they did. They had his replacement in house at a much lower cap number.

I don't really care for the idea the you have to try and win while the QB makes pennies. I mean sure it's easier, but not only is it rare for a QB to win on his rookie deal, but eventually you're going to have to pay the guy anyway.

Purdy is going to land a huge contract, there is no way out of it. Are the 49ers supposed to let him walk because of that?

Meanwhile we see Mahomes and Lamar winning games as top-10 paid QBs.

I'm confused as to why you wouldn't? There's a huge built-in advantage. Just take a look at some of the Super Bowl contending teams as of late:

SF- Purdy
Philly- Hurts
Cincinnati- Burrow
Rams- Goff
Eagles- Wentz

All of these teams had QB's on rookie contracts.

The argument is for paying guys who are true difference makers. The Elite QB- Mahomes, Burrow, Allen. These are guys worth paying because they make a significant difference for the team they play for. Even a guy like Lamar is part of that conversation.

Paying someone who needs a solid supporting cast around them to succeed, makes it inherently more difficult to pull off. Paying Daniel Jones- big money, isn't a recipe for success.

Yes, the more money a QB makes, the harder it is to surround him with talent ultimately. Mahomes is somewhat of an outlier. Because he's just so freaking good.

The Niners will pay Purdy. But it will impact the rest of the roster. Will he be good enough to offset that? That's the question that every team has to decide when making these decisions.

If you give Dak a larger share, then it will have a trickle down affect. It always does. But, Is it worth it?

The list you have there is not only small but just "contenders". The last 10 QBs who actually won a SB were all on a vet contract except for Foles and Mahomes 1 time of his 3 rings.

2 out of 10 makes it rare.

If the SB winners always featured a QB on his rookie contract? Then you might be onto something, but the really is that most winners have a highly paid QB.


Also the notion that constantly letting a good QB walk once it becomes contract time just isn't feasible. It's strategy that no team uses. And I highly doubt that SF will let Purdy walk.

[Cactus Jack]

I'm confused as to why you wouldn't? There's a huge built-in advantage. Just take a look at some of the Super Bowl contending teams as of late:

SF- Purdy
Philly- Hurts
Cincinnati- Burrow
Rams- Goff
Eagles- Wentz

All of these teams had QB's on rookie contracts.

The argument is for paying guys who are true difference makers. The Elite QB- Mahomes, Burrow, Allen. These are guys worth paying because they make a significant difference for the team they play for. Even a guy like Lamar is part of that conversation.

Paying someone who needs a solid supporting cast around them to succeed, makes it inherently more difficult to pull off. Paying Daniel Jones- big money, isn't a recipe for success.

Yes, the more money a QB makes, the harder it is to surround him with talent ultimately. Mahomes is somewhat of an outlier. Because he's just so freaking good.

The Niners will pay Purdy. But it will impact the rest of the roster. Will he be good enough to offset that? That's the question that every team has to decide when making these decisions.

If you give Dak a larger share, then it will have a trickle down affect. It always does. But, Is it worth it?

The list you have there is not only small but just "contenders". The last 10 QBs who actually won a SB were all on a vet contract except for Foles and Mahomes 1 time of his 3 rings.

2 out of 10 makes it rare.

If the SB winners always featured a QB on his rookie contract? Then you might be onto something, but the really is that most winners have a highly paid QB.


Also the notion that constantly letting a good QB walk once it becomes contract time just isn't feasible. It's strategy that no team uses. And I highly doubt that SF will let Purdy walk.

Brady & Mahomes have won a bunch in that time. The two best & biggest outliers for that position.

If teams took that approach, they'd be in a much better spot from a competitive standpoint. The Eagles might be the best example of this. Going from Wentz to Hurts was the right move & it made them into a contender. You keep taking swings until you find the right guy.

[Micah Prescott]

I'm confused as to why you wouldn't? There's a huge built-in advantage. Just take a look at some of the Super Bowl contending teams as of late:

SF- Purdy
Philly- Hurts
Cincinnati- Burrow
Rams- Goff
Eagles- Wentz

All of these teams had QB's on rookie contracts.

The argument is for paying guys who are true difference makers. The Elite QB- Mahomes, Burrow, Allen. These are guys worth paying because they make a significant difference for the team they play for. Even a guy like Lamar is part of that conversation.

Paying someone who needs a solid supporting cast around them to succeed, makes it inherently more difficult to pull off. Paying Daniel Jones- big money, isn't a recipe for success.

Yes, the more money a QB makes, the harder it is to surround him with talent ultimately. Mahomes is somewhat of an outlier. Because he's just so freaking good.

The Niners will pay Purdy. But it will impact the rest of the roster. Will he be good enough to offset that? That's the question that every team has to decide when making these decisions.

If you give Dak a larger share, then it will have a trickle down affect. It always does. But, Is it worth it?

The list you have there is not only small but just "contenders". The last 10 QBs who actually won a SB were all on a vet contract except for Foles and Mahomes 1 time of his 3 rings.

2 out of 10 makes it rare.

If the SB winners always featured a QB on his rookie contract? Then you might be onto something, but the really is that most winners have a highly paid QB.


Also the notion that constantly letting a good QB walk once it becomes contract time just isn't feasible. It's strategy that no team uses. And I highly doubt that SF will let Purdy walk.

Brady & Mahomes have won a bunch in that time. The two best & biggest outliers for that position.

If teams took that approach, they'd be in a much better spot from a competitive standpoint. The Eagles might be the best example of this. Going from Wentz to Hurts was the right move & it made them into a contender. You keep taking swings until you find the right guy.

I mean I am not denying that the contract is a big facet in the decision, it certainly is. I just don't have much faith in rookie QBs and I don't think that should be the predominant reasoning here. At the end of the day you're going to have to give a QB big money no matter what.

If Trey Lance actually goes on to show promise? We are going to have to pay him big. Even crappy starting QBs get big money. And it isn't feasible to constantly draft QBs to avoid it so that you can spend a bit more on defense.

[WentzerWuver]

I'm confused as to why you wouldn't? There's a huge built-in advantage. Just take a look at some of the Super Bowl contending teams as of late:

SF- Purdy
Philly- Hurts
Cincinnati- Burrow
Rams- Goff
Eagles- Wentz

All of these teams had QB's on rookie contracts.

The argument is for paying guys who are true difference makers. The Elite QB- Mahomes, Burrow, Allen. These are guys worth paying because they make a significant difference for the team they play for. Even a guy like Lamar is part of that conversation.

Paying someone who needs a solid supporting cast around them to succeed, makes it inherently more difficult to pull off. Paying Daniel Jones- big money, isn't a recipe for success.

Yes, the more money a QB makes, the harder it is to surround him with talent ultimately. Mahomes is somewhat of an outlier. Because he's just so freaking good.

The Niners will pay Purdy. But it will impact the rest of the roster. Will he be good enough to offset that? That's the question that every team has to decide when making these decisions.

If you give Dak a larger share, then it will have a trickle down affect. It always does. But, Is it worth it?

The list you have there is not only small but just "contenders". The last 10 QBs who actually won a SB were all on a vet contract except for Foles and Mahomes 1 time of his 3 rings.

2 out of 10 makes it rare.

If the SB winners always featured a QB on his rookie contract? Then you might be onto something, but the really is that most winners have a highly paid QB.


Also the notion that constantly letting a good QB walk once it becomes contract time just isn't feasible. It's strategy that no team uses. And I highly doubt that SF will let Purdy walk.

Brady & Mahomes have won a bunch in that time. The two best & biggest outliers for that position.

If teams took that approach, they'd be in a much better spot from a competitive standpoint. The Eagles might be the best example of this. Going from Wentz to Hurts was the right move & it made them into a contender. You keep taking swings until you find the right guy.

It was the right move for my Eagles even though it was painfully shocking on how it happened. No top QB still in his prime, following a league record-setting contract, should EVER be replaced by his young non-protégé, heir apparent. It's like Dak being replaced by Trey where his on field performance immediately out plays the veteran.

https://youtu.be/1cFhN4Tx_Zg?si=XGYaz2vOPwL3DKv0

Just need Dak to get his record-setting extension before that happens Lol

[Mr B]

The Cowboys will never completely tank. The Jones’ won’t allow that, which is part of the problem.

I don't think any team ever has actually set out to lose, no team allows that. I mean maybe if they are already 12-2 or something I could see a team going soft the last few games.

Players need their stats...for money

Coaches need wins....for money

Owners need to sell tickets....for money

The reality is that that playing well and winning is in their best interest even if the season is lost.

NFL teams don't purposely tank. It's not at all like the NBA in that regard.

Coaches & execs have too much on the line to try to lose games. It's why we see so much coaching turnover every year. There are at least five or six head coaches that are fired every year. Sometimes more.

Teams who land the #1 pick are just flat out bad for the most part. The Bears got incredibly fortunate this year because the Panthers made a monumental mistake & Chicago is reaping the benefits of it.

The Colts landed Luck because Manning was hurt & couldn't play. Sometimes it just comes down to Luck. No pun intended.

True tanking is not the same in the NFL as it is in the NBA. We have seen NFL teams trade away their best players for draft picks. We’ve also seen teams let high priced free agents walk to get their cap number down. That may not exactly be tanking however it is behavior that tanking teams do.

[wco81]

Also don't forget Jerry's age.

I don't think he wants to bottom out.

As far as tanking in the NFL, Lions were winless a few years ago. I think the Bucs suffered through 2 winless seasons early in their history.

Not saying they purposely tanked but once they start out 0-8 or something like that, it would be interesting to see if they shut down certain players later in the season.

[Mr B]

I think it is a really tough spot because starting over at QB does not sound like fun times and replacing Dak with someone better is not going to happen over night, and possibly wouldn't happen over the next decade. Some teams get stuck looking for their QB for years and years.

You likely won't find someone better right away. But teams have to evaluate the cost. Is it worth paying Dak close to $60m/yr or finding his replacement for a fraction of the cost? It's why rookie QB contracts are so valuable for teams when it comes to the cap. You may not find someone who's better than him. But can you find someone who can produce at a similar level without having to put a ton of money towards the position? That's the question that they're currently weighing (likely) & it's a valid one. It's ultimately why they decided to move on from Romo when they did. They had his replacement in house at a much lower cap number.

I don't really care for the idea the you have to try and win while the QB makes pennies. I mean sure it's easier, but not only is it rare for a QB to win on his rookie deal, but eventually you're going to have to pay the guy anyway.

Purdy is going to land a huge contract, there is no way out of it. Are the 49ers supposed to let him walk because of that?

Meanwhile we see Mahomes and Lamar winning games as top-10 paid QBs.

There have been a few QB’s that won a SB while still being on their rookie deal.

[Micah Prescott]

Salary cap goes up 13% this coming season....$30m dollars.

From $225m to 255m

Good QBs always going to take up around 20% of the cap it's always been that way, which is $51m/year on a $255m cap. They will go $60m with QBs now though on the basis that it $60m will equate to 20% of the cap in 2026, then they will be under 20% the years following.

[Cactus Jack]

Salary cap goes up 13% this coming season....$30m dollars.

From $225m to 255m

Good QBs always going to take up around 20% of the cap it's always been that way, which is $51m/year on a $255m cap. They will go $60m with QBs now though on the basis that it $60m will equate to 20% of the cap in 2026, then they will be under 20% the years following.

Cool graph.

But again, why would you want to pay Dak that kind of money? When only a very select few have actually won & proven worthy of it (Mahomes, Brady, etc.). Since we're arguing Super Bowls here. Why give him a big payday (again) when history says he'll fall short of meeting expectations. Why not try a different avenue?

So, from that pov it makes a lot of sense. Why Jerry has been so noncommittal. It's like he see's the writing on the wall. I think I have to side with him & Bjj on this one!

[QB_Eagles]

Here is an interesting debate. Who is the better QB? Dak or Jalen Hurts? Not who has the better team around him but who plays the QB position better? No surprise James Jones is the only one that would pick Dak (and Cam Newton).

https://youtu.be/FdV3T7molw8?si=FM6ERotR-FL-fYH5

Ultimately it doesn't matter who of the two is better.

If Hurts doesn't live up to his contract, Howie will find a replacement like he did with Wentz.

That is the fundamental difference here. Dak might still get another contract extension by Jerry.

[Mariner]

Here is an interesting debate. Who is the better QB? Dak or Jalen Hurts? Not who has the better team around him but who plays the QB position better? No surprise James Jones is the only one that would pick Dak (and Cam Newton).

https://youtu.be/FdV3T7molw8?si=FM6ERotR-FL-fYH5

Ultimately it doesn't matter who of the two is better.

If Hurts doesn't live up to his contract, Howie will find a replacement like he did with Wentz.

That is the fundamental difference here. Dak might still get another contract extension by Jerry.

Wentz was garbage though at the end. Can’t really praise the eagles for that.
Between Aikman and Romo the cowboys dumped a lot of QBs too. lol

[Mr B]

Here is an interesting debate. Who is the better QB? Dak or Jalen Hurts? Not who has the better team around him but who plays the QB position better? No surprise James Jones is the only one that would pick Dak (and Cam Newton).

https://youtu.be/FdV3T7molw8?si=FM6ERotR-FL-fYH5

Ultimately it doesn't matter who of the two is better.

If Hurts doesn't live up to his contract, Howie will find a replacement like he did with Wentz.

That is the fundamental difference here. Dak might still get another contract extension by Jerry.

Wentz was garbage though at the end. Can’t really praise the eagles for that.
Between Aikman and Romo the cowboys dumped a lot of QBs too. lol

Once upon a time the savior of our team.

[Micah Prescott]

Salary cap goes up 13% this coming season....$30m dollars.

From $225m to 255m

Good QBs always going to take up around 20% of the cap it's always been that way, which is $51m/year on a $255m cap. They will go $60m with QBs now though on the basis that it $60m will equate to 20% of the cap in 2026, then they will be under 20% the years following.

Cool graph.

But again, why would you want to pay Dak that kind of money? When only a very select few have actually won & proven worthy of it (Mahomes, Brady, etc.). Since we're arguing Super Bowls here. Why give him a big payday (again) when history says he'll fall short of meeting expectations. Why not try a different avenue?

So, from that pov it makes a lot of sense. Why Jerry has been so noncommittal. It's like he see's the writing on the wall. I think I have to side with him & Bjj on this one!

Market has always been around 20% for top tier QBs. SB wins are a team achievement. I completely disagree with the notion that only QBs who have won multiple rings are worth that. Plenty of elite QBs out there who have played at a high level and their "TEAM" fell short.

I was pointing out that instead of looking at total dollar value for a contract, people need to look at % of the cap instead.

If a player or position always takes up the same percentage% of the cap space, then it is all relative to previous years. At some point QBs are going to make $100m+ per year and these current contracts will feel small. But it will still be 20% of the cap space they are taking.

[Micah Prescott]

Like Cam said, it's the market that dictates this anyway. NOT opinions.

There is only ONE Mahomes...all the other teams are left with no choice but to spend their cap space on whatever is left to choose from. So if there is only one or two "decent" QBs out there to choose from, those guys are going to rake in big money no matter what.

It isn't that the teams want to do that...it's that they are left with no other options.

[QB_Eagles]

Here is an interesting debate. Who is the better QB? Dak or Jalen Hurts? Not who has the better team around him but who plays the QB position better? No surprise James Jones is the only one that would pick Dak (and Cam Newton).

https://youtu.be/FdV3T7molw8?si=FM6ERotR-FL-fYH5

Ultimately it doesn't matter who of the two is better.

If Hurts doesn't live up to his contract, Howie will find a replacement like he did with Wentz.

That is the fundamental difference here. Dak might still get another contract extension by Jerry.

Wentz was garbage though at the end. Can’t really praise the eagles for that.
Between Aikman and Romo the cowboys dumped a lot of QBs too. lol

I remember when I speculated about the logistics of moving on from Wentz (largest dead cap hit in history at that point by like 2-3 times the previous amount) people were telling me why I'm thinking about something that will never happen.

In contrast the Cowboys were expected to move on from Romo.

[DOT]

Statistically speaking, since 2000 there have been more Superbowl winners with a QB taken 199th than 1st overall

Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that you should draft a QB in the 5th round rather than 1st overall if you want to win a Superbowl.

[wco81]

Mahomes, the one thing overlooked is that the Chiefs drafted a lot of starters a few drafts ago who turned out great for them.

That is how they stayed up despite high salaries for Mahomes, Jones, Kelsey.

[Cactus Jack]

Mahomes, the one thing overlooked is that the Chiefs drafted a lot of starters a few drafts ago who turned out great for them.

That is how they stayed up despite high salaries for Mahomes, Jones, Kelsey.

OT, but if Shanahan would stick with the run, he would have won one by now. Change my mind.

[QB_Eagles]

Mahomes, the one thing overlooked is that the Chiefs drafted a lot of starters a few drafts ago who turned out great for them.

That is how they stayed up despite high salaries for Mahomes, Jones, Kelsey.

OT, but if Shanahan would stick with the run, he would have won one by now. Change my mind.

Definitely would have won one as OC with the Falcons.

[Nunuu]

Dak could go out this season and tear his ACL and still get the contract Jerry wants him to take right now in FA next off season.

Or he could have a great statistical season and sign the most lucrative contract in NFL history next off season.

There is no reason for dak to sign now unless jerry offers him like 65m annually.