Dak turns downs 5 year 175 million deal from Cowboys

[ToxSocks]

As Chris Simms explained (kinda odd this is hitting the newswire now, as it was a comment he said in passing about 2 weeks ago) this issue isn't the total dollar figure. It's the structure of the contract. Dak wants the final year of his contract to rival what a new contract would look like 5 years from now. Hence the 45M+.

[Redbled]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

As Chris Simms explained (kinda odd this is hitting the newswire now, as it was a comment he said in passing about 2 weeks ago) this issue isn't the total dollar figure. It's the structure of the contract. Dak wants the final year of his contract to rival what a new contract would look like 5 years from now. Hence the 45M+.

Isn’t that just unheard of thinking? Not sure I’ve seen a contract that takes inflation into account.

[Sassy Squatch]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

As Chris Simms explained (kinda odd this is hitting the newswire now, as it was a comment he said in passing about 2 weeks ago) this issue isn't the total dollar figure. It's the structure of the contract. Dak wants the final year of his contract to rival what a new contract would look like 5 years from now. Hence the 45M+.

That's reeruned. He's butthurt he's getting his money too soon? What?

[Easy 6]

Alex Smith 2.0

[RINGLEADER]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

That's reeruned. He's butthurt he's getting his money too soon? What?

It’s not stupid to ask for it. It is stupid to walk away from life money over what your deal looks like 5 years from now. If he’s worth $45m then he’d probably just want a new agreement and if he’s not they’ll just cut him so not sure I understand his logic?

[Shields68]

Originally Posted by RINGLEADER

It’s not stupid to ask for it. It is stupid to walk away from life money over what your deal looks like 5 years from now. If he’s worth $45m then he’d probably just want a new agreement and if he’s not they’ll just cut him so not sure I understand his logic?

Most of these guys are not on the cut list simply due to the lack of options. I would guess he either plays out his 5 years or is extended. Border line top 10 QB's are rarely cut. Especially in their 26-31 seasons. But it does seem like it is a case of who blinks first, do not see either side holding up this deal over 10 million in year 5.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

As Chris Simms explained (kinda odd this is hitting the newswire now, as it was a comment he said in passing about 2 weeks ago) this issue isn't the total dollar figure. It's the structure of the contract. Dak wants the final year of his contract to rival what a new contract would look like 5 years from now. Hence the 45M+.

Unless the structure of the contract has language about Dak ****ing a sheep in Jerry’s office every Tuesday night or something extreme like that, I fail to see how that offer isn’t good for Dak.

I know I know... **** the billionaire owners. I get it. But I just don’t think the 10th best QB deserves to make top 3 money such that the value never goes out of date as the contract ages

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

I know I know... **** the billionaire owners. I get it. But I just don’t think the 10th best QB deserves to make top 3 money such that the value never goes out of date as the contract ages

Sure, but that's not how NFL QB contracts go though. Dak is playing by the rules that NFL Owners/GM's set themselves up for.

[tatorhog]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Sure, but that's not how NFL QB contracts go though. Dak is playing by the rules that NFL Owners/GM's set themselves up for.

Agreed, but at some point that wheel will stop spinning.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Sure, but that's not how NFL QB contracts go though. Dak is playing by the rules that NFL Owners/GM's set themselves up for.

Dak is bitching about making $35+ million five years from now because though he would be paid like a top 3 QB now, in that time he'll be closer to the 10th or so highest paid QB, which is no different than the contract extension process that Rodgers, Luck, Manning, and other top QBs have gone through before Dak.

Why is Dak so ****ing special that the game gets to be changed now that he's up to bat? If he's just playing the game the way it's set up and he gets top money that he doesn't deserve because it's just his turn, then why does he think he gets to be different than the other QBs and have a deal that doesn't show its age by the end of its span?

I'm not advocating for adopting a so-called league maximum offer like the NBA has, but this is getting kind of ridiculous.

Your starting RB is often on a day 2/3/undrafted rookie contract, and they're expected to account for sometimes upwards of 20% of a team's total offensive yardage output. They take the most punishment and wind up a brain in a jar if they manage to stick around the league for 7+ years, and they're told, "Sorry, we can't offer you that nice longterm extension. You're a RB." The best they can hope for is stringing together multiple seasons of fantasy football-relevant production and getting on the goddamn Campbell's Chunky Soup can.

The owners should have done something about THAT shit in the CBA.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

Dak is bitching about making $35+ million five years from now because though he would be paid like a top 3 QB now, in that time he'll be closer to the 10th or so highest paid QB, which is no different than the contract extension process that Rodgers, Luck, Manning, and other top QBs have gone through before Dak.

Why is Dak so ****ing special that the game gets to be changed now that he's up to bat? If he's just playing the game the way it's set up and he gets top money that he doesn't deserve because it's just his turn, then why does he think he gets to be different than the other QBs and have a deal that doesn't show its age by the end of its span?

I'm not advocating for adopting a so-called league maximum offer like the NBA has, but this is getting kind of ridiculous.

Your starting RB is often on a day 2/3/undrafted rookie contract, and they're expected to account for sometimes upwards of 20% of a team's total offensive yardage output. They take the most punishment and wind up a brain in a jar if they manage to stick around the league for 7+ years, and they're told, "Sorry, we can't offer you that nice longterm extension. You're a RB." The best they can hope for is stringing together multiple seasons of fantasy football-relevant production and getting on the goddamn Campbell's Chunky Soup can.

He has leverage, I don't blame him to be honest. It's not like he made 30 mill off his rookie deal like some of the other guys.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

As Chris Simms explained (kinda odd this is hitting the newswire now, as it was a comment he said in passing about 2 weeks ago) this issue isn't the total dollar figure. It's the structure of the contract. Dak wants the final year of his contract to rival what a new contract would look like 5 years from now. Hence the 45M+.

Yes and no.

Because if it was just the final year of the deal that he was irritated about, they'd end up settling in on a 4 year deal instead.

It's an AAV issue if you really boil it down. Prescott would take less in year 5 if the AAV (and up front money) was high enough. He's essentially saying that the $35 million AAV is too low.

And let's be honest here - is Dak likely to repeat a 300 yard/gm season with any regularity going forward? He's smart to try to leverage as much out of this last season as possible. He had an excellent platform season and he's going to do everything he can to capitalize on that. Afterall, he's played 4 years on a 3rd rounder's deal - he's been wildly underpaid for awhile now.

And the Cowboys have done nothing to set up a plan B behind him, so he's got Jerrah by the nesmonds here. He's not gonna get tossed over the side for Cam Newton.