The issue of a small competing window due to a QB on a rookie deal- what’s your solution?

[whatdrought]

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

If you have a sure fire QB you keep him

 

and don’t overpay until he proves it.  

200 mil is overpriced 

[GunnerBill]

If you have Pat Mahomes that doesn't matter. If this year is anything to go by he will give you a chance to win. If you have Dak Prescott now you have an issue. I like Dak. He is a better Quarterback than many give credit for. He is a leader and a winner. Is he a guy who raises the level of everyone around him with his play? No. But you can't abandon him because the alternatives are a lot worse. So you end up overpaying for a guy who as you inevitably start taking other pieces away finds it harder and harder to get it done. That is the bind for the Cowboys. You already saw the effect on their offensive line a bit this year. They have drafted remarkably well though in the last 5 years. They have young talent almost everywhere so even if they pay Dak I think that extends their window by a couple of years.

[whatdrought]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

If you have Pat Mahomes that doesn't matter. If this year is anything to go by he will give you a chance to win. If you have Dak Prescott now you have an issue. I like Dak. He is a better Quarterback than many give credit for. He is a leader and a winner. Is he a guy who raises the level of everyone around him with his play? No. But you can't abandon him because the alternatives are a lot worse. So you end up overpaying for a guy who as you inevitably start taking other pieces away finds it harder and harder to get it done. That is the bind for the Cowboys. You already saw the effect on their offensive line a bit this year. They have drafted remarkably well though in the last 5 years. They have young talent almost everywhere so even if they pay Dak I think that extends their window by a couple of years.

 

Good point on both ends, but either way, it still causes massive problems.

 

Mahomes can raise the level, but you can’t replace a Hill, Or a Kelce, or that offensive line with underpaid nobody’s and expect that much of a difference. They were a decent team with Smith last year. 

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. (And the argument could be made that Brady didn’t do that, but Bill did)

 

 

 

 

For me, it just doesn’t seem like the current explosion of QB salaries is a sustainable model. 

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Good point on both ends, but either way, it still causes massive problems.

 

Mahomes can raise the level, but you can’t replace a Hill, Or a Kelce, or that offensive line with underpaid nobody’s and expect that much of a difference. They were a decent team with Smith last year. 

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. (And the argument could be made that Brady didn’t do that, but Bill did)

 

 

 

 

For me, it just doesn’t seem like the current explosion of QB salaries is a sustainable model. 

 

You still have to put pieces around them. It is like the Drew Brees stat. If his defense is 26th or better he makes the playoffs. When his defense was 32nd in the league on  record breaking inept pace for two years as great as he is he couldn't carry them. But Drew doesn't need a good defense (though he has one at the moment) he just needs one that isn't ***** awful. 

 

The Chiefs offensive line isn't an expensive unit really either their left tackle is well paid but not as massively paid as he might be because he struggled his first 3 years. Mitchell Schwartz on the other side is well paid for a RT but then Morse was a mid round pick and is on a rookie deal, their left guard was on the scrap heap and their right guard was an UDFA cut by the Colts. You can't keep everybody but there is no law that you can't carry on drafting well and finding gems others have missed on the waiver wire. The pieces you have to let go are the bad apple cornerback and the luxury #2 receiver (looking at you Sammy). 

[Dave Allen]

To me, the 'rookie deal window' strategy is foolish. Surround a rookie QB with a bunch of high-priced players and hope to get lucky before you see them all leave as FAs. That's how you pin your hopes on Blake Bortles.

 

In the past 20 years, I count (I eyeballed the list - correct me if I'm wrong) five QBs who won on their rookie deal. Brady, Rothlisberger, Eli, Wilson and Flacco. Four of those are going to the HOF, and Flacco played out of his mind. (They also all had top-tier coaches, but that's another argument for another time). 

 

Smart way to go is to build for long-term success. Good coaching, franchise quarterback, smart drafting, and you have a super bowl contender every year for the next decade. Not rubbing a rabbit's foot hoping to get lucky before the salary cap screws you. 

[Dkollidas]

1 Only giving the money to a franchise guy. 5yrs is enough to prove whether he’s your guy or not. And I’d even say 4 years. Give the 5th year option and trade him if it’s not working, but that money, if given, only goes to a guy who’s top-10 in the league.

 

2. Trade down down down. In the draft, look tot trade down and gain more picks, not every time, but I would say trade down twice for every time you trade up. 

 

3. Pass rushers on defense. That’s the biggest part of your defense. And elite pass rush makes everything a lot easier for the rest of the defense, pressure helps cause mistakes, and if you pay that money to your QB, he needs to be the kind of guy that can take advantage of those turnovers

 

 

[NoSaint]

54 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

 

You still have a fantastic qb after, and if you nail a draft or two you can have a Michael Thomas and Kamara and... on rookie deals far below market.

 

but yes, having a an on one of those deals is the biggest savings possible and gives you a shot at the best 52 around him he will ever have. 

6 minutes ago, Dave Allen said:

To me, the 'rookie deal window' strategy is foolish. Surround a rookie QB with a bunch of high-priced players and hope to get lucky before you see them all leave as FAs. That's how you pin your hopes on Blake Bortles.

 

In the past 20 years, I count (I eyeballed the list - correct me if I'm wrong) five QBs who won on their rookie deal. Brady, Rothlisberger, Eli, Wilson and Flacco. Four of those are going to the HOF, and Flacco played out of his mind. (They also all had top-tier coaches, but that's another argument for another time). 

 

Smart way to go is to build for long-term success. Good coaching, franchise quarterback, smart drafting, and you have a super bowl contender every year for the next decade. Not rubbing a rabbit's foot hoping to get lucky before the salary cap screws you. 

 

The past 10 years simply hasn’t seen many franchise qbs come out. If Blake bortles was a great qb they’d be fine still but likely have a ring or two to boot. That he’s terrible and still came close says a ton about what that big discount does. A cheap qb is akin to like 2-3 other all pros on rookie deals as far as impact on capology 

[Franchiseneedsme]

Save 10m a season and keep rolling it over for the 5 years. Then put it all down in the 1st year of the new deal.

Example: we save 10M this year, and roll it over, then roll over 20m year 2,and 30M year 3....

After year 5 sign your superstar QB to a contract like 200m for 8 years. But put all that roll over money in the first year of the deal.

So  pay 70m year 1, then it turns into a 7 year 130m deal after that. 

If the qb sux, then you have a ton of $$ to put around the new QB you draft.

[JoeF]

This speaks to overall cap management.

 

Let's take Josh for example.  His maximum cap hit on his rookie deal is $6.75 Million.  His second contract may be an average cap hit of $30 million, so where do you get the $24 Million more without having to trash the rest of the roster.

 

Here are my thoughts:

1) Accumulate a ton of room and don't spend it all so there is a $10-15 Million per year rollover budget- Bills can check this box

2) Put a coaching staff in place where you can grow your own - Jury still out

3) Build a class A pro and college scouting staff- there is no cap here-- load up on known scouting talent and pay them well-Pegula bucks allow this

4) Extend deals before the player has all the leverage at contract expiration - If they have good years in 2019 - Bills should begin to work on Milano, Jones, Dawkins, Phillips, Taron Johnson, Levi Wallace, and Robert Foster in the 19 offseason.  They will save money by extending early rather than waiting until the player has increased leverage.  

5) Sign on the rise free agents-(young but over the rookie "prove it" hump)-big established names cost big money and usually fall short of expectation.  Micah Hyde -- long-time starter; great reputation but not break the bank money would be the top level I would limit myself too; otherwise look for more Jordan Poyers while scouting...recoverable injury under the radar Free Agents and turn them into high contributing starters.

6) Sign Vets on their last contract for the Interior OL and Interior DL -- this is where you can find some quick fix bargains where the athleticism doesn't wane as quickly with age.  You get OG, Centers, and DTs at the end of their career that can still give you 2 or 3 years at a reduced price.  Look for that this year.

 

If you manage the system in this way--consuming Josh's second contract does not have to kill the roster.  Plus I think Josh will be fair.......he knows that if he takes up too much room -- it kills the rest of the roster.  He already shows signs of caring more about winning than an extra $3-4 million per year...but we will see.

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by JoeF

[vincec]

1 hour ago, whatdrought said:

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

Your business model has to be like the Patriots. You keep your QB, spend money on defense and then try to make chicken salad from chicken #$&# with the rest of the team. Unfortunately, you can’t have a balanced, stacked team once your QB passes his rookie contract in the salary can era.

[The Now Moment]

If the guy is a franchise QB, you will always have a chance to win.  However, when you sign a Cousins or a Dalton to a large contract, it's probably better to roll the dice on the next rookie.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Buffalo30

[BigdaddyinOrlando]

Would like them in the next bargaining agreement maybe count the QBs cap value at 50%, that way there would monies left to help keep the rest of your team around and keep open the so called window . Just my opinion 

[PlayoffsPlease]

I dont think Tom Brady or Drew Brees are still on a rookie contract, but I could be wrong. 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

 

I think there is alot of truth to this argument.  If your rookie QB is really good, pay them whatever they want to keep them. As was pointed out a guy like Prescott, if you pay him what he likely will want and can get on the open market you can easily find yourself in trouble with not enough $$ left to surround him with good enough players to compete at the highest level.  Guys like Tannerhill Flacco, maybe Daulton also fall into this bucket too.

 

Often when you get to the 3rd contract it sometimes gets a little easier as by then the QB has made enough money that he may take a little less to keep some other talented players around.

 

Could Allen fall into this boat, too good to let walk, but not quite good enough to go all the way with, likely will know in another year or two.

[LSHMEAB]

The entire premise of this line of thought is derived from the Seahawks run. It's a logical fallacy IMO. Many of the departed defensive players haven't done much elsewhere or retired. If Seattle had drafted well and didn't screw up the Jimmy Graham trade, they'd be in better shape. They also DID happen to make the playoffs.

 

The bottom line is you must pay your QB's top dollar and they're difficult to find. Many of the QB's people talk about are simply not elite. (Stafford, Cousins, Flacco to name a few).

 

If your QB is truly elite, it will work itself out.

[Thurman#1]

4 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

Good point on both ends, but either way, it still causes massive problems.

 

Mahomes can raise the level, but you can’t replace a Hill, Or a Kelce, or that offensive line with underpaid nobody’s and expect that much of a difference. They were a decent team with Smith last year. 

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. (And the argument could be made that Brady didn’t do that, but Bill did)

 

 

For me, it just doesn’t seem like the current explosion of QB salaries is a sustainable model. 

 

 

A well-paid QB makes it harder. But not impossible.

 

You can argue that Brady isn't highly paid compared to most QBs and you'd certainly be right, but he's still expensive. This year his cap hit is $22M, and next year $27 M. And the Pats seem to do OK. The Broncos won recently with a highly paid QB. The Giants and the Saints too.

[Thurman#1]

3 hours ago, JoeF said:

This speaks to overall cap management.

 

Let's take Josh for example.  His maximum cap hit on his rookie deal is $6.75 Million.  His second contract may be an average cap hit of $30 million, so where do you get the $24 Million more without having to trash the rest of the roster.

 

Here are my thoughts:

1) Accumulate a ton of room and don't spend it all so there is a $10-15 Million per year rollover budget- Bills can check this box

2) Put a coaching staff in place where you can grow your own - Jury still out

3) Build a class A pro and college scouting staff- there is no cap here-- load up on known scouting talent and pay them well-Pegula bucks allow this

4) Extend deals before the player has all the leverage at contract expiration - If they have good years in 2019 - Bills should begin to work on Milano, Jones, Dawkins, Phillips, Taron Johnson, Levi Wallace, and Robert Foster in the 19 offseason.  They will save money by extending early rather than waiting until the player has increased leverage.  

5) Sign on the rise free agents-young but over the rookie prove it hump-big established names cost big money and usually all short of expectation.  Micah Hyde -- long-time starter; great reputation but not break the bank money would be the top level I would limit myself too; otherwise look for more Jordan Poyers while scouting...recoverable injury under the radar Free Agents and turn them into high contributing starters.

6) Sign Vets on their last contract for the Interior OL and Interior DL -- this is where you can find some quick fix bargains where the athleticism doesn't wane as quickly with age.  You get OG, Centers and DTs at the end of their career that can still give you 2 or 3 years at a reduced price.  Look for that this year.

 

If you manage the system in this way--consuming Josh's second contract does not have to kill the roster.  Plus I think Josh will be fair.......he knows that if he takes up too much room -- it kills the rest of the roster.  He already shows signs of caring more about winning than an extra $3-4 million per year...but we will see.

 

 

 

I like your post a lot.

 

Worth noting, though, that on guys like Taron Johnson and Phillips, you're not allowed to renegotiate before three years are finished.

[Big Turk]

5 hours ago, whatdrought said:

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

 

There is some truth to it because they take up a disproportionate amount of the salary cap.  Talking over $30 million a year now...so when you are only paying $3 or $4 million a year, you have lots of extra money to put towards other resources that you normally wouldn't have, while getting the same type of performance.

 

What happens is it starts eroding your depth...players that you could give an extra million or two to keep around no longer can be afforded due to the cap crunch you are in and you have to let them go.  Injuries can derail your season easier because the depth behind them is often untested.

 

Look at the teams in the Super Bowl the last 2 years...Philly/NE and LA/NE...

 

Philly and LA have QBs on rookie contracts(although Foles was the guy who won the SB, Wentz was the guy who got them to where they were) and Brady is taking far less than market value for various reasons giving New England an extra $15 million+ in cap space relief they shouldn't have.

4 hours ago, vincec said:

Your business model has to be like the Patriots. You keep your QB, spend money on defense and then try to make chicken salad from chicken #$&# with the rest of the team. Unfortunately, you can’t have a balanced, stacked team once your QB passes his rookie contract in the salary can era.

You forgot to mention:

 

Get your GOAT QB to take $15 million+ a year less than what he should for the past 12 years with a 'wink wink, nod nod' "side business deal" between the owner and the star QB's company---makes it a lot easier when you have an extra $15 million in cap space no other team in their situation has.

Edited January 22, 2019 by matter2003

[JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS]

4 hours ago, JoeF said:

 

If you manage the system in this way--consuming Josh's second contract does not have to kill the roster.  Plus I think Josh will be fair.......he knows that if he takes up too much room -- it kills the rest of the roster.  He already shows signs of caring more about winning than an extra $3-4 million per year...but we will see.

 

I get the sense Josh would take a $1 contract if he were guaranteed a SB run.  His agent may not let him, but he would want to.  His family isn't Rosen rich, but they aint poor, and he's not in this for the money.  He wants to be a Sunday afternoon hero and he knows he needs a supporting cast.

[HappyDays]

The salary cap goes up about $10 million per year. I would front load the contract, give him 6 years, and guarantee all of it at signing in exchange for a few million less per year. By year 3 it won't take up too much of the cap space anymore. It would be a risk but if your QB proves he is good enough to be your franchise QB for 15 years you take it. The Colts did it right. In 2021 Luck's cap hit is only $21 million. That leaves them negotiating power for his 2nd big contract.

[Dr.Sack]

Patrick Mahomes is worth twice the value of Marcel Dareus. Or Dareus & Mario Williams combine. Mahomes should get a $200 million contract at $40 million per season and $100 million upfront. And by age 29/30 he will sign another $300 million contract. I hope Josh Allen proves he’s worth this kind of $.

[gobills1212]

Ill lyk when it becomes and issue

[Prickly Pete]

4 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

I dont think Tom Brady or Drew Brees are still on a rookie contract, but I could be wrong. 

 

Tom Brady (most hated man in Buffalo) actually accepts less money to help keep his team competitive. He wants to win. He loves to win. He HAS to win.

I love that about him.

 

Drw Brees takes the big bucks....I have to wonder if he would have another SB Ring or 2 if he took less so his team had more money to throw around.

[MJS]

The teams that win the most are still the ones with elite, experienced, big contract QB's. Brady, Rothlisburger, Brees, Rivers, etc. I think it is silly that people believe the best chance to win a championship is with a QB on a rookie deal. Certainly there are examples of that, but usually it is the elites that are winning.

 

2 hours ago, Dr.Sack said:

Patrick Mahomes is worth twice the value of Marcel Dareus. Or Dareus & Mario Williams combine. Mahomes should get a $200 million contract at $40 million per season and $100 million upfront. And by age 29/30 he will sign another $300 million contract. I hope Josh Allen proves he’s worth this kind of $.

 

Wow. I guess we'll see in a few years. Lots can happen. Everyone thought Dak was the real deal after his first year and now people question that. Everyone thought RGIII was the real deal after one year.

 

If Mahomes can consistently do it, great for him and he'll get the big bucks. But consistency is the key. For all we know he could be battling injuries like a Sam Bradford a few years from now.

Edited January 22, 2019 by MJS

[reddogblitz]

8 hours ago, whatdrought said:

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. 

 

how can you say Brady can?

 

When has he ever been on a team with issues to hide? He took over a playoff team.  He has always had a primo OLine. Who can forget Fraud and Monitoring, and Identity Theft Protection?  He's always had a lights out kicker and a good defense and WR s that are a perfect fit for the system, The Gronk, and a solid run game.  not to mention coaching.  And then there's the cheating ...

[reddogblitz]

6 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

The entire premise of this line of thought is derived from the Seahawks run. It's a logical fallacy IMO. Many of the departed defensive players haven't done much elsewhere or retired. If Seattle had drafted well and didn't screw up the Jimmy Graham trade, they'd be in better shape. They also DID happen to make the playoffs.

 

The bottom line is you must pay your QB's top dollar and they're difficult to find. Many of the QB's people talk about are simply not elite. (Stafford, Cousins, Flacco to name a few).

 

If your QB is truly elite, it will work itself out.

 

 

Hawks already had decent talent when Russell arrived. They had gone 7-9 the 2 years before.  They won a playoff game (Beast Quake) one of those years.  They had the Beast and Sydney Rice.

 

Seems to me they had a better plan. Get some decent talent together, THEN add the QB on rookie contract.  We did the opposite. Hopefully it works.

 

 

[PlayoffsPlease]

5 hours ago, OJ Tom said:

 

Tom Brady (most hated man in Buffalo) actually accepts less money to help keep his team competitive. He wants to win. He loves to win. He HAS to win.

I love that about him.

 

Drw Brees takes the big bucks....I have to wonder if he would have another SB Ring or 2 if he took less so his team had more money to throw around.

You can't confuse Brady's 22 million 2018 (27 mm in 2019) with a Rookie contract. My implied point was that some GM and coaching staffs are superior to others, and find a way to be consistently competitive without a rookie contract QB>

But I agree with your post. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

"Great" QB's w/o a good supporting cast often get looked down on.  If you are one of the "great ones" you can find plenty of Ketchup endorsement deals to offset the lack of an extra $100Mil.  

 

examples 

Brees - only 1 SB 

Rivers - No SB

Matt Ryan - only 1 SB 

Andrew Luck

Tony Romo

Andy Dalton

Matthew Stafford

Edited January 22, 2019 by ShadyBillsFan

[NoSaint]

ultimately I’m curious why this needs to be “fixed”

 

How much of a slam dunk should the super bowl be for teams with decent QBs and why do we need to widen the gap long term between the haves and have nots? 

 

Shouldnt hitting a high pick at the most important position give you a short term perk of great value?

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

Max contracts maybe? But then ur limiting the income of the player

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

5 hours ago, OJ Tom said:

 

Tom Brady (most hated man in Buffalo) actually accepts less money to help keep his team competitive. He wants to win. He loves to win. He HAS to win.

I love that about him.

 

Drw Brees takes the big bucks....I have to wonder if he would have another SB Ring or 2 if he took less so his team had more money to throw around.

and many of his teammates go to TB12 for treatment.     He's making $ off of that 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

6 hours ago, OJ Tom said:

 

Tom Brady (most hated man in Buffalo) actually accepts less money to help keep his team competitive. He wants to win. He loves to win. He HAS to win.

I love that about him.

 

Drw Brees takes the big bucks....I have to wonder if he would have another SB Ring or 2 if he took less so his team had more money to throw around.

Brady taking less money is so overblown. He takes a few percentage points less than the top paid QBs. Its the Patriots moving on from high priced veterans that has saved them. Not signing Welker and Vinatieri and replcing with Edelman, Hogan, and Gostkowski. 

[dubs]

That’s the recipe for winning with a good QB and a good Coach. 

 

To win year after year after that window, you need a truly great QB and great coach (and GM). 

[Mr. WEO]

12 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

Good point on both ends, but either way, it still causes massive problems.

 

Mahomes can raise the level, but you can’t replace a Hill, Or a Kelce, or that offensive line with underpaid nobody’s and expect that much of a difference. They were a decent team with Smith last year. 

Only two players that I’ve ever seen play QB could truly hide all of the issues on a team- Manning and Brady. (And the argument could be made that Brady didn’t do that, but Bill did)

 

 

 

 

For me, it just doesn’t seem like the current explosion of QB salaries is a sustainable model. 

 

 

Didn't we hear this about Brees's salary bump years ago?  How it would destroy the team's chances of finding a winning roster going forward?

 

Most of the "explosion" is due to veteran free agent contracts or guys like Rodgers on their 3rd or more contract, not former rookie deals signing their second contract.  In fact, there's not one QB in the top 10 annual salary in that category.  Wilson is close at #11.

 

MAnning never had to "hide" issues on Offense....he was surrounded by O talent in Indy for most if not all of his career.

 

 

 

 

[dollars 2 donuts]

14 hours ago, whatdrought said:

That’s a weird title, I know, but I didn’t want to be vague.

 

I’ve heard a lot lately about how team building is all about getting a good young QB, then surrounding him with pieces while you can before he commands an ungodly amount of money. The Seahawks, I think are an example bandied about. I had someone mention that Reid only has like 2 years left to figure out how to win in the playoffs before Mahomes is the million dollar man x200.

 

But this seems crazy to me to think that getting a good QB can actually become a crutch after a couple of years. I suppose this thought could be blown out of preportion, but it seems like there’s some truth to it.

 

All that to say- what would be your solution? You have a young QB whose playing great and you know in the next year or two you’re gonna have to pay him. How do you handle this?

 

14 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

If you have a sure fire QB you keep him

 

and don’t overpay until he proves it.  

200 mil is overpriced 

 

 

Forgive me, whatdrought, I am not trying to over simplify this, I am just being concise.

 

I agree with what Shady says above, and additionally...have a good GM that keeps picking good young talent.  Maybe not great, but just good enough, and through multiple rounds,  to spread across the board on your team and keep you competitive as you lose some very higher end talent as a result of your QB salary.

Edited January 22, 2019 by dollars 2 donuts

[PetermansRedemption]

6 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

how can you say Brady can?

 

When has he ever been on a team with issues to hide? He took over a playoff team.  He has always had a primo OLine. Who can forget Fraud and Monitoring, and Identity Theft Protection?  He's always had a lights out kicker and a good defense and WR s that are a perfect fit for the system, The Gronk, and a solid run game.  not to mention coaching.  And then there's the cheating ...

Brady’s O-line is anything but primo. Do we forget how quickly Nate Solder looked like trash without Brady? Brady has an impeccable internal clock that allows him to avoid sacks without being particularly mobile. That makes his O-line look good, not the other way around. He’s never had a top WR, look how great Danny Ammendola produced in Miami without Brady. Brady’s RB’s have rarely been top of the line. Sony Michel could turn into that, or it could be the threat of Brady’s passing game that opens up the run game. A good defense? The past two years the Patriots defense have been anything but top notch. Buffalo bias comes in huge with Brady, I understand that. But try putting it aside for a while and realize the best QB to ever play the game makes all the other facets of the team appear better than they are. 

[BillsVet]

17 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Didn't we hear this about Brees's salary bump years ago?  How it would destroy the team's chances of finding a winning roster going forward?

 

Most of the "explosion" is due to veteran free agent contracts or guys like Rodgers on their 3rd or more contract, not former rookie deals signing their second contract.  In fact, there's not one QB in the top 10 annual salary in that category.  Wilson is close at #11.

 

Manning never had to "hide" issues on Offense....he was surrounded by O talent in Indy for most if not all of his career.

 

Bills fans haven't been faced with sustaining a winning team since the 90s, and that was during the infancy of free agency.  Things are way more complicated, but that's what guys like Beane and the front office are for:  developing innovative solutions to emerging problems like cap management.

 

First, it's important to identify the players you can't live without and then build around them. Drafting well is absolutely necessary to avoid needing to spend in free agency. The better teams use UFA sparingly. Prioritize the positions in the draft which aren't typically found in UFA: QB, DE, WR, perhaps OT.  You can find RBs, interior OL, LBs, interior DL and safety in free agency.

 

As Beane has noted, once your're drafting well, then re-sign your own guys, especially at the in-demand positions.  Move players who show signs of regressing.  Better to get rid of a player 1 year early than 1 year late.  Have a player in place ready to step up, again through solid drafting.  

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

6 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

how can you say Brady can?

 

When has he ever been on a team with issues to hide? He took over a playoff team.  He has always had a primo OLine. Who can forget Fraud and Monitoring, and Identity Theft Protection?  He's always had a lights out kicker and a good defense and WR s that are a perfect fit for the system, The Gronk, and a solid run game.  not to mention coaching.  And then there's the cheating ...

 

He had Moss at the tail of a career, but how many HOF candidates did Brady play with on offense?  WR's?  RB's?

[Jobot]

Solution - play cupid and set your young qb up with with rich/famous model so he doesn't have to care about money.