Update: Dak may be franchised (offered $33M) and Cooper transition tagged = at min $43M cap hit

[Billl]

32 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

Really? So how does Dallas improve next year by signing a worse FA QB to big money and then also using a draft pick on another worse QB? What percentage of late first/second round QB’s ever win 10 games in a season, let alone twice? Or win a playoff game? Or throw 30 TDs? 

 

I thought BILLS FANS of all people would recognize just how difficult it is to find an above average starting QB in this league. This is crazy.

Many fans here are incapable of acknowledging that there are good QBs on other teams.  It’s as if it’s somehow an insult to JA to say that throwing 97 TDs vs 36 INTs and posting a 40-24 record as a starter is impressive.  The guy threw for nearly 5,000 yards last year including 9 games in which he threw for more than any game of Allen’s career.  He’s a franchise QB, and he’s going to get paid like one.

 

Lol at the fans who simultaneously praise one QB for improving his YPG from 173 to 193, his completion percentage from 53 to 59, and his TDs from 10 to 20 but think the 26 year old who upped his YPG from 243 to 306, completed 65% of his passes, and upped his TD passes from 22 to 30 should be dumped for some washed up FA and a day 2 draft pick.

2 minutes ago, BigBillsFan said:

 

You changed my perspective on signing him for the Cowboys. Your last few posts have been excellent.

 

My question is can you afford to pay him and expect he keeps up that production if he swallows that much cap? I mean he's worth starter money, but the most in the league? Something has to give (o-line or good WRs) and I don't know if I believe a player like him is worth it but I guess if you have to roll the dice he's the best the Cowboys have.

He will never play a game as the highest paid QB in the league.  Mahomes and Watson will sign much larger deals before then.

[BringBackOrton]

4 minutes ago, BigBillsFan said:

 

You changed my perspective on signing him for the Cowboys. Your last few posts have been excellent.

 

My question is can you afford to pay him and expect he keeps up that production if he swallows that much cap? I mean he's worth starter money, but the most in the league? Something has to give (o-line or good WRs) and I don't know if I believe a player like him is worth it but I guess if you have to roll the dice he's the best the Cowboys have.

This may be the first person to change their position in TBD history. I may frame this post and put it on my mantle.

 

You answered your own question. You don’t know. Something will have to give, it always does. Russell Wilson once upon was in this exact same boat. His contract was the beginning of the end for that incredible roster. But no one is talking about how the Seahawks should have let him walk and instead drafted Paxton Lynch. You’d much rather keep a star QB and lose a star DB or OG than keep a star at any position and lose the QB. 

 

Russell Wilson may never win another Super Bowl again. Lots of great players don’t win Superbowls. But the Seahawks have a chance every year that guy plays. The 49ers had ZERO chance of winning with Richard Sherman when CJ Beathard was under center.

[Alphadawg7]

50 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

Brandon Beane hasn’t even GMed a team that’s won a playoff game. His record since taking over as GM is WORSE than Dallas’ in the same time period. Dallas also has a better roster almost entirely across the board. Buffalo is a much better coached, but less talented roster.

 

I honestly do not fathom this discussion. They have a worse chance of winning the Super Bowl with Rivers than Dak so why sign him at all? Do you honestly think Jordan Love or Jake Fromm will be a better NFL QB than Dak Prescott? What is your end game strategy as the Dallas GM? Let your superstar OL, RB, WR, DE and LB groups age (and sign large contracts/leave the team) while you pay Rivers $15M, and hope you land a HoF QB outside of the top 15 in the draft while ignoring the statistical reality that makes that nearly impossible? Is that the secret plan? 

 

Lol, they are not sniffing the SB next year...they got the best seasons ever out of Dak and Cooper and won EIGHT games in a BAD division.  

 

And its utterly foolish to dismiss any QB prospect before they have even been drafted.  And they don't have to draft a QB this year if they say signed Rivers.

 

Rivers is a HOF QB.  Dak wont sniff the HOF.  I dont think they lose much with Rivers over Dak anyway.  But again, it does NOT matter.  They are an 8 win team playing in a weak division.  They are not going to win the SB with this roster, and if they over commit to Dak and Cooper, then this is the roster they are gonna have a for awhile with all the other money they have shelled out already to other players.  

 

Again, I expect Dak to stay in Dallas.  But no way would I invest this much money in an 8 win team if I was the GM.  I would strip it down and rebuild with the new staff.  

 

Like I said, but you seem to have completely missed and overlooked:  SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO TAKE A STEP BACK BEFORE YOU CAN TAKE A STEP FORWARD.  Yet you keep coming at me about being BETTER next year when I am NOT advocating for being "better", I am advocating to tear it down with a new regime coming as this roster and this direction has done NOTHING for Dallas and its not going to change by handing a butt load of money to an over rated QB and over rated WR.  

45 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

The Bills go 10-6 against a historically easy schedule and all of a sudden Beane is the best GM in sports.

 

Dallas has no choice but to pay Dak. Not sure what the argument is. 

 

Who said he was the best GM in sports?  I am simply saying hes doing a fantastic job at managing the cap while stock piling talent through the draft.  Dallas has done a terrible job with how they spent money and managed their cap and are now poised to have cap troubles for years after they over pay an over rated QB and over pay an over rated WR.

 

Again, I FULLY EXPECT DAK to remain in Dallas.  Which is also why I fully expect Dallas to be a mediocre team battling for 8 or 9 wins for the net 5+ years.  

[BringBackOrton]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Lol, they are not sniffing the SB next year...they got the best seasons ever out of Dak and Cooper and won EIGHT games in a BAD division.  

 

And its utterly foolish to dismiss any QB prospect before they have even been drafted.  And they don't have to draft a QB this year if they say signed Rivers.

 

Rivers is a HOF QB.  Dak wont sniff the HOF.  I dont think they lose much with Rivers over Dak anyway.  But again, it does NOT matter.  They are an 8 win team playing in a weak division.  They are not going to win the SB with this roster, and if they over commit to Dak and Cooper, then this is the roster they are gonna have a for awhile with all the other money they have shelled out already to other players.  

 

Again, I expect Dak to stay in Dallas.  But no way would I invest this much money in an 8 win team if I was the GM.  I would strip it down and rebuild with the new staff.  

 

Like I said, but you seem to have completely missed and overlooked:  SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO TAKE A STEP BACK BEFORE YOU CAN TAKE A STEP FORWARD.  Yet you keep coming at me about being BETTER next year when I am NOT advocating for being "better", I am advocating to tear it down with a new regime coming as this roster and this direction has done NOTHING for Dallas and its not going to change by handing a butt load of money to an over rated QB and over rated WR.  

I mean, they just hired a decent coach in McCarthy and got rid of a bad one in Garrett. You’re telling me there’s no way Dallas wins more than 8 games next year if they pay Dak and Cooper?

 

Rivers is WASHED. He didn’t get to the HoF playing like he did last year. He’s terrible. You’re being silly.

 

Foolish to write off any QB prospect huh? Why don’t you tell me what late first/early second round QB next year or the next year or the next year will be better than Dak then? Or is it just a mythical “prospect” that you don’t know? Or better yet, why don’t you tell me where that opinion was when you claimed over and over the 2017 draft was a bad QB draft and none of them deserved to be top 10 picks? 

 

How bout we stop listening to your QB “analysis” and “grass is greener” team-building approach, mmmkay?

[Alphadawg7]

9 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

I mean, they just hired a decent coach in McCarthy and got rid of a bad one in Garrett. You’re telling me there’s no way Dallas wins more than 8 games next year if they pay Dak and Cooper?

 

Rivers is WASHED. He didn’t get to the HoF playing like he did last year. He’s terrible. You’re being silly.

 

Foolish to write off any QB prospect huh? Why don’t you tell me what late first/early second round QB next year or the next year or the next year will be better than Dak then? Or is it just a mythical “prospect” that you don’t know? Or better yet, why don’t you tell me where that opinion was when you claimed over and over the 2017 draft was a bad QB draft and none of them deserved to be top 10 picks? 

 

How bout we stop listening to your QB “analysis” and “grass is greener” team-building approach, mmmkay?

 

Im not penciling them in for 8 wins.  But McCarthy didn't exactly light the NFL on fire the last few years with an elite QB with Rodgers, so I am not sold hes suddenly going to make Dallas a SB contender on his own.  Point is, with Dak and Cooper having their best years, they still won 8 games.  And I am more talking about paying them BOTH big money versus say just keeping Dak.  

 

And come on, stop with the "predict which QB will be better" from the draft this year or next year non sense.  Thats a silly statement/question to make.  

 

I agree with you about Rivers, I am not even advocating they sign Rivers.  Just named him among several I named they could sign as Veterans who are capable of getting that roster to 8 wins or better.  Im not even saying any of those FA QB's available are "better" than Dak.  I am saying another route would be not to over pay both Dak and Cooper, sign a FA QB for less to hold the spot down and look to draft a QB for the future in the next 2 drafts.  Start rebuilding the team and the cap structure.  

 

And keep in mind, I am more against them paying BOTH Dak and Amari.  I get QB's basically always get over paid, so like I said before and saying again, if they keep one I would expect it to be Dak.  But reports is they are keeping both.

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, BringBackOrton said:

This may be the first person to change their position in TBD history. I may frame this post and put it on my mantle.

 

You answered your own question. You don’t know. Something will have to give, it always does. Russell Wilson once upon was in this exact same boat. His contract was the beginning of the end for that incredible roster. But no one is talking about how the Seahawks should have let him walk and instead drafted Paxton Lynch. You’d much rather keep a star QB and lose a star DB or OG than keep a star at any position and lose the QB. 

 

Russell Wilson may never win another Super Bowl again. Lots of great players don’t win Superbowls. But the Seahawks have a chance every year that guy plays. The 49ers had ZERO chance of winning with Richard Sherman when CJ Beathard was under center.

Very different than the Wilson situation in that Wilson had already won a Super Bowl when he got his deal. You can't not pay your QB if he wins a Super Bowl. Dak, for all his regular season accomplishments, has won exactly one more playoff game than our guy has. That's why it's not completely crazy to suggest the Cowboys might have other options, even though they really don't.

[BringBackOrton]

5 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

Very different than the Wilson situation in that Wilson had already won a Super Bowl when he got his deal. You can't not pay your QB if he wins a Super Bowl. Dak, for all his regular season accomplishments, has won exactly one more playoff game than our guy has. That's why it's not completely crazy to suggest the Cowboys might have other options, even though they really don't.

If you remember the time, it wasn’t that different at all. There were lots of prognosticators saying Russell Wilson only won with a stacked roster and didn’t deserve to be paid like Aaron Rodgers for it. Those people now have retreated back under the floor boards, but they existed and it was a hot TBD debate.

[JMF2006]

If I were Jerry I would let Dak walk and sign one of the FA QB's.

 

I think Teddy would love to be the Cowgirls QB and would take 5x20m 100m to get the gig.

 

Dak is a middle of the road QB and he just might be pricing himself out of a job.

 

He should have jumped at the 33m per offer as he is not likely to get a better one.

BTW Rivers or Brady at 30m or 35m for one or two years buys them time to draft and develop.

[Captain Hindsight]

15 hours ago, jeremy2020 said:

 

Justifiable, but you always kind of hope people won't adhere to a "screw everybody else as long as I get mine" philosophy.

Of course. And generally I believe that, but I'm also not going to leave money on the table if I've earned it 

[DCOrange]

To me, Dak is pretty much on the borderline of the caliber of QB I'm okay with signing to a big deal. I think in Dallas' position I would lean towards keeping him. It would be a lot easier if they hadn't burned up so much of their cap on Zeke, who was the least important of their 4 big FAs IMO. At any rate, I will be genuinely shocked if Dak doesn't return to Dallas this offseason.

[BeastMaster]

9 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

I mean, they just hired a decent coach in McCarthy and got rid of a bad one in Garrett. You’re telling me there’s no way Dallas wins more than 8 games next year if they pay Dak and Cooper?

 

Rivers is WASHED. He didn’t get to the HoF playing like he did last year. He’s terrible. You’re being silly.

 

Foolish to write off any QB prospect huh? Why don’t you tell me what late first/early second round QB next year or the next year or the next year will be better than Dak then? Or is it just a mythical “prospect” that you don’t know? Or better yet, why don’t you tell me where that opinion was when you claimed over and over the 2017 draft was a bad QB draft and none of them deserved to be top 10 picks? 

 

How bout we stop listening to your QB “analysis” and “grass is greener” team-building approach, mmmkay?

Always funny to read a triggered post that ends with condescending remarks to other posters.

 

Your idea of what is best for Dallas is no better than his idea. Fact is neither has been proven to be the formula to success, and I'd argue yours has history firmly against sticking with the guy that hasn't won squat and paid him top dollar, but that's neither here or there.

 

At least tearing it down will give them a shot at building the team and possibly finding a comparable if not better option down the road while the QB is not eating up a huge portion of cap space.

 

It'll be fun to re-visit this one in a year or two. My money is on Dallas being the same disappointment that they've been with most saying paying Dak was a mistake. 

 

 

[Billl]

3 hours ago, JMF2006 said:

If I were Jerry I would let Dak walk and sign one of the FA QB's.

 

I think Teddy would love to be the Cowgirls QB and would take 5x20m 100m to get the gig.

 

Dak is a middle of the road QB and he just might be pricing himself out of a job.

 

He should have jumped at the 33m per offer as he is not likely to get a better one.

BTW Rivers or Brady at 30m or 35m for one or two years buys them time to draft and develop.

Dallas should definitely dump their 26 year old QB who threw 30 TDs and 11 INTs and pay $35 million to a 38 year old who threw 23 TDs and 20 INTs.

[JMF2006]

1 minute ago, Billl said:

Dallas should definitely dump their 26 year old QB who threw 30 TDs and 11 INTs and pay $35 million to a 38 year old who threw 23 TDs and 20 INTs.

 

I think 33m is reasonably on the teams part and its very unreasonable on Daks part to turn it down. JMHO

2 hours ago, Captain Hindsight said:

Of course. And generally I believe that, but I'm also not going to leave money on the table if I've earned it 

 

Russ W had already won a SB and played in two before he won the lottery.

 

What has Dak done?

[Billl]

4 minutes ago, JMF2006 said:

 

I think 33m is reasonably on the teams part and its very unreasonable on Daks part to turn it down. JMHO

He's been ridiculously underpaid for the past 4 seasons.  He should get every penny he can.  $35 million seems high today, but that will be middle of the pack in two years. If he gets 4 years for $140mm, that would still mean Dallas got 8 seasons of top 10 QB play for an average of $18,000,000 a season.

[Bill from NYC]

10 minutes ago, Billl said:

He's been ridiculously underpaid for the past 4 seasons.  He should get every penny he can.  $35 million seems high today, but that will be middle of the pack in two years. If he gets 4 years for $140mm, that would still mean Dallas got 8 seasons of top 10 QB play for an average of $18,000,000 a season.

Much of this is because he got a dui just before he was drafted. Also, isn't he a free agent sooner because of the round he was drafted in?

 

Look, I have nothing against the kid. As I said, I liked him a lot in college, but I'm having a tough time feeling sorry for him.

[ngbills]

Going to be interesting on here when Josh comes up for free agency. Most likely his numbers will fall well short of what Dak has done to date. No doubt the contracts will keep going up and the $'s for Josh will seem ridiculous. But as Bills fans should know it is very hard to find a solid QB. That is why you cant compare the $ to the ranking of the QB. It is basically if this guy is even a top 15-20 QB in the league he is likely getting top 1-3 QB when when his contract is due. Just how it works. You either pay your above average guy or play the QB shuffle until you hit on another draft pick. 

[Captain Hindsight]

1 hour ago, JMF2006 said:

 

I think 33m is reasonably on the teams part and its very unreasonable on Daks part to turn it down. JMHO

 

Russ W had already won a SB and played in two before he won the lottery.

 

What has Dak done?

Survived being coached by Jason Garrett?

[MJS]

5 minutes ago, ngbills said:

Going to be interesting on here when Josh comes up for free agency. Most likely his numbers will fall well short of what Dak has done to date. No doubt the contracts will keep going up and the $'s for Josh will seem ridiculous. But as Bills fans should know it is very hard to find a solid QB. That is why you cant compare the $ to the ranking of the QB. It is basically if this guy is even a top 15-20 QB in the league he is likely getting top 1-3 QB when when his contract is due. Just how it works. You either pay your above average guy or play the QB shuffle until you hit on another draft pick. 

Exactly. Contracts are not indicative of QB rankings. They are indicative of the year you signed your contract.

[BigBillsFan]

12 minutes ago, ngbills said:

Going to be interesting on here when Josh comes up for free agency. Most likely his numbers will fall well short of what Dak has done to date. No doubt the contracts will keep going up and the $'s for Josh will seem ridiculous. But as Bills fans should know it is very hard to find a solid QB. That is why you cant compare the $ to the ranking of the QB. It is basically if this guy is even a top 15-20 QB in the league he is likely getting top 1-3 QB when when his contract is due. Just how it works. You either pay your above average guy or play the QB shuffle until you hit on another draft pick. 

I think that's true if they are coming off their rookie contract, but a mid-tier QB is 15-18/mil a year: Dalton, Keenum, FItz, et al..

 

I'm not sold a mid-tier talent QB on their rookie contract should be done. Dak was not mid-tier. In one of the biggest categories he's been in the top 8 for several years.

 

I'm almost of the belief you're better off draft in the mid-tier rounds, keep a mid-tier vet and focus your attention on running and defense until you find a 2-5rd stud that you plan on extending on a huge contract.

[BringBackOrton]

3 hours ago, BeastMaster said:

Always funny to read a triggered post that ends with condescending remarks to other posters.

 

Your idea of what is best for Dallas is no better than his idea. Fact is neither has been proven to be the formula to success, and I'd argue yours has history firmly against sticking with the guy that hasn't won squat and paid him top dollar, but that's neither here or there.

 

At least tearing it down will give them a shot at building the team and possibly finding a comparable if not better option down the road while the QB is not eating up a huge portion of cap space.

 

It'll be fun to re-visit this one in a year or two. My money is on Dallas being the same disappointment that they've been with most saying paying Dak was a mistake. 

 

 

His idea of letting a franchise QB walk, signing Rivers (a guy who was let walk for being bad) and drafting a random day 2 QB isn’t clearly a worse option?  

 

Okay bro. Show me where “in history” that works? 

 

I bet you were a “don’t pay Russell Wilson” guy too.

Edited March 10, 2020 by BringBackOrton

[ngbills]

32 minutes ago, BigBillsFan said:

I think that's true if they are coming off their rookie contract, but a mid-tier QB is 15-18/mil a year: Dalton, Keenum, FItz, et al..

 

I'm not sold a mid-tier talent QB on their rookie contract should be done. Dak was not mid-tier. In one of the biggest categories he's been in the top 8 for several years.

 

I'm almost of the belief you're better off draft in the mid-tier rounds, keep a mid-tier vet and focus your attention on running and defense until you find a 2-5rd stud that you plan on extending on a huge contract.

Isnt that kind of where the Bills have been since Kelly?

 

1997 - 2001 - Rob Johnson / Collins with Flutie / Van Pelt

Gave up on Johnson and Collins as future QB's; Flutie as the midtier

2002 - 2004 - Bledsoe / Van Pelt after failed Johnson

2005 - 2007 Losman / Holcomb

Losman failed

2007 - 2009 Edwards / Losman / Fitz

Edwards failed

2010 -2012 - Fitz after Edwards failed

2013 - 2015 Manuel / Fitz / Orton

Manuel failed

2015 - 2017 Taylor after Manuel failed with help from Cassel / C Jones / Peterman

2018 - ? Allen

Allen fails? Allen does not fail but dont want to pay big $; Start cycle all over again. 

[BigBillsFan]

4 minutes ago, ngbills said:

Isnt that kind of where the Bills have been since Kelly?

 

1997 - 2001 - Rob Johnson / Collins with Flutie / Van Pelt

Gave up on Johnson and Collins as future QB's; Flutie as the midtier

2002 - 2004 - Bledsoe / Van Pelt after failed Johnson

2005 - 2007 Losman / Holcomb

Losman failed

2007 - 2009 Edwards / Losman / Fitz

Edwards failed

2010 -2012 - Fitz after Edwards failed

2013 - 2015 Manuel / Fitz / Orton

Manuel failed

2015 - 2017 Taylor after Manuel failed with help from Cassel / C Jones / Peterman

2018 - ? Allen

Allen fails? Allen does not fail but dont want to pay big $; Start cycle all over again. 

 

I'm not sure I agree with that conclusions although the QBs and the history is obvious and factual.

 

Edwards could have been more than serviceable until he went into a cocoon after the concussion.

 

I still think what I said has not been tried which is a mid-tier pick + a vet. We've tried Vets or 1st rounders. 1st rounders IMO carry the most risk because teams feel like they are married to them or the GM gets fired.

 

We should have had an Orton and drafted the best QB from rounds 2-5 every other year until we found one we liked. Only Peterman and Edwards fit that mold. Edwards could have been successful, but that could have happened to a 1st rounder as well. So 2 players in 24 years does not fit my argument.

[H2o]

BigBillsFan, hijacking threads since January 5, 2020  

[MJS]

1 hour ago, BigBillsFan said:

I think that's true if they are coming off their rookie contract, but a mid-tier QB is 15-18/mil a year: Dalton, Keenum, FItz, et al..

 

I'm not sold a mid-tier talent QB on their rookie contract should be done. Dak was not mid-tier. In one of the biggest categories he's been in the top 8 for several years.

 

I'm almost of the belief you're better off draft in the mid-tier rounds, keep a mid-tier vet and focus your attention on running and defense until you find a 2-5rd stud that you plan on extending on a huge contract.

Those aren't mid tier. Those are low tier.

[Alphadawg7]

17 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If you think that is what I have been doing in this thread you really haven't been paying attention. I did point out Dak is more of a proven commodity than Josh but in the same breath said that Josh still has a higher ceiling.

 

The question in this thread is not about whether I or anyone else wants Josh or Dak because that is utterly irrelevant - it isn't a real choice. The question here is should the Cowboys pay Dak? And in my view they absolutely should. I think in a year or two years time we will be having the exact same conversation on Josh Allen and if he continues to progress then I will be arguing we should "overpay" him too by making him a top 3 salaried QB. 

The big difference is the team and cap management.  Buffalo is not throwing out huge or bad contracts and screwing their cap up along the way to the day Josh is due for a new deal.  Buffalo will be in position to pay Josh and also put a good team around him and keep improving the roster after as well.

 

Dallas has put themselves in a bad spot now and is going to be handcuffed to a tighter cap situation moving forward (especially if they keep Cooper too) because they have dealt out a butt load of money, including to a RB, along the way.  Now they get to over pay a QB (which is to be expected) who hasn’t been able to carry that team.  In fact, they were a better team when Zeke was the key cog over the passing game.  And with the cap space limited, they may struggle to build the roster around him better to put him in better chance of sustained playoff success.  

 

So the two situations aren’t the same.  Dak isn’t close to a top 3 QB, but as the NFL goes, will get paid like one. And if you’re gonna do that, you better manage your roster, draft picks, and cap well...if not, you are going to be stuck in mediocrity and not able to put the necessary pieces around him to get to the next level.

 

 

Edited March 10, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

The big difference is the team and cap management.  Buffalo is not throwing out huge or bad contracts and screwing their cap up along the way to the day Josh is due for a new deal.  Buffalo will be in position to pay Josh and also put a good team around him and keep improving the roster after as well.

 

Dallas has put themselves in a bad spot now and is going to be handcuffed to a tighter cap situation moving forward (especially if they keep Cooper too) because they have dealt out a butt load of money, including to a RB, along the way.  Now they get to over pay a QB (which is to be expected) who hasn’t been able to carry that team.  In fact, they were a better team when Zeke was the key cog over the passing game.  And with the cap space limited, they may struggle to build the roster around him better to put him in better chance of sustained playoff success.  

 

So the two situations aren’t the same.  Dak isn’t close to a top 3 QB, but as the NFL goes, will get paid like one. And if you’re gonna do that, you better manage your roster, draft picks, and cap well...if not, you are going to be stuck in mediocrity and not able to put the necessary pieces around him to get to the next level.

 

 

 

I don't think Dallas have managed that cap that poorly actually. I think they still have options available to them. The guys they have tied up are all excellent players. They need to continue to draft well but luckily for them they have drafted extremely well in recent years. 

 

The biggest problem in Dallas was on the sideline in my opinion. Jason Garrett was a poor leader and a poor gameday coach. His overall record would have been a lot worse if the front office wasn't doing an excellent job restacking his team for him. Dallas to win the NFC East is the absolute no brainer bet of the 2020 NFL season in my mind. 

[BeastMaster]

2 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

His idea of letting a franchise QB walk, signing Rivers (a guy who was let walk for being bad) and drafting a random day 2 QB isn’t clearly a worse option?  

 

Okay bro. Show me where “in history” that works? 

 

I bet you were a “don’t pay Russell Wilson” guy too.

Actually, I was ok with Wilson getting paid because he proved he could win.

 

I did believe that it would hurt their roster and they wouldn't be as good, and that was true. His line was patchwork for a few years after and it hurt them.

 

Dallas will get weaker after a Dak deal and they weren't even a playoff team last season with a very soft schedule.

 

Dak has an argument to get a paid...I won't dispute that. What I dispute is whether it's a good move for the Cowboys, and I don't believe it will be.

 

Like anything else, time will tell

[BigBillsFan]

3 hours ago, MJS said:

Those aren't mid tier. Those are low tier.

Today they are. I meant in their best years from 26-32 yrs old. Dalton was the picture perfect definition of mid-tier until recently. He'll never blow you away, but he's not a back-up. I consider bottom tier rookies, 2nd year guys, older QBs or early injuries backups with extended time. Guys that show up between 12-20 year in and year out. They move around as coaches look for their chosen one.

 

Let's for example revisit Fitz being cut. Do you think the Bills would have done better if he stayed in Buffalo and if we did draft a QB let them ride the pine until they were ready? I do.

[BringBackOrton]

2 hours ago, BeastMaster said:

Actually, I was ok with Wilson getting paid because he proved he could win.

 

I did believe that it would hurt their roster and they wouldn't be as good, and that was true. His line was patchwork for a few years after and it hurt them.

 

Dallas will get weaker after a Dak deal and they weren't even a playoff team last season with a very soft schedule.

 

Dak has an argument to get a paid...I won't dispute that. What I dispute is whether it's a good move for the Cowboys, and I don't believe it will be.

 

Like anything else, time will tell

That's because your definition of good is wonky. The Seahawks haven't won since Russell Wilson got paid. In fact, they've gone 2-3 in the postseason (of course, one of those losses to the Boys), missed the playoffs one season.

 

Maybe the Seahawks should have traded Wilson, brought in Josh McCown and drafted Paxton Lynch.  I can smell the success already,

[GoBills808]

15 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

That's because your definition of good is wonky. The Seahawks haven't won since Russell Wilson got paid. In fact, they've gone 2-3 in the postseason (of course, one of those losses to the Boys), missed the playoffs one season.

 

Maybe the Seahawks should have traded Wilson, brought in Josh McCown and drafted Paxton Lynch.  I can smell the success already,

Remember though that they would have been more able to keep LoB together...could have Fitz plus that defense won a Super Bowl? It's an interesting thought experiment at least

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Remember though that they would have been more able to keep LoB together...could have Fitz plus that defense won a Super Bowl? It's an interesting thought experiment at least

 

No. And I am an unabashed, unrepentant Fitz fan. 

Edited March 10, 2020 by GunnerBill

[GoBills808]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

No. And I am an unabashed, unrepentant Fitz fan. 

Yeah but it's not him specifically, just your average FA or mid-round pick is the point. 

 

That defense was legendary

[GunnerBill]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

Yeah but it's not him specifically, just your average FA or mid-round pick is the point. 

 

That defense was legendary

 

Yea. They couldn't. Russ was always a big part of that success in my mind. 

[Meatloaf63]

On 3/8/2020 at 8:20 PM, BringBackOrton said:

Uh what?

 

Case Keenum didn't even start 16 games with the Vikings. He went 11-3 as a starter, and then went 6-10 with Denver the following year. Oh, and then he went 1-7 with the Skins.

 

Thanks for playing.

You just made his case for him Einstein, it’s the talent at Minnesota that’s helping the Qb’s be successful and the lack of it hurting them in other teams....

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea. They couldn't. Russ was always a big part of that success in my mind. 

They didn't ask him to do a ton his early years. IMO they relied just as heavily on Lynch as they did Wilson.

 

Now in hindsight, it's a no brainer because he turned into one of the best in the game, but I do not foresee a similar trajectory for Prescott and that's just being honest.

[BringBackOrton]

3 minutes ago, Meatloaf63 said:

You just made his case for him Einstein, it’s the talent at Minnesota that’s helping the Qb’s be successful and the lack of it hurting them in other teams....

Kirk was at least .500 on the deadskins. Keenum could barely win a game. Einstein.

[Meatloaf63]

4 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

Kirk was at least .500 on the deadskins. Keenum could barely win a game. Einstein.

Listen Moose Knuckle, Different team some different players. I’m not arguing about your position on Dak , just that Cousins landed in a sweet position....

Edited March 10, 2020 by Meatloaf63

[BeastMaster]

2 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

That's because your definition of good is wonky. The Seahawks haven't won since Russell Wilson got paid. In fact, they've gone 2-3 in the postseason (of course, one of those losses to the Boys), missed the playoffs one season.

 

Maybe the Seahawks should have traded Wilson, brought in Josh McCown and drafted Paxton Lynch.  I can smell the success already,

My definition is just fine. Reading comprehension would have had you understand that I said that their line was bad for a few years after the deal which had them take a step back. They seem to have figured it out now, but they are not the same team as when they were a true threat to win it all.

 

Wilson carries them for the most part...something Dak can't do even with an all pro supporting cast.

 

You are clearly the type that wants to settle for the safe option and stick with what you know. I'm more of the all or nothing type.

 

It depends on what you're looking for from your franchise. I understand where your coming from...even if I don't subscribe to that philosophy. 

[BringBackOrton]

1 hour ago, BeastMaster said:

My definition is just fine. Reading comprehension would have had you understand that I said that their line was bad for a few years after the deal which had them take a step back. They seem to have figured it out now, but they are not the same team as when they were a true threat to win it all.

 

Wilson carries them for the most part...something Dak can't do even with an all pro supporting cast.

 

You are clearly the type that wants to settle for the safe option and stick with what you know. I'm more of the all or nothing type.

 

It depends on what you're looking for from your franchise. I understand where your coming from...even if I don't subscribe to that philosophy. 

The Seahawks obviously went for the safe option with Wilson, and uh, they haven’t done anything since. That’s nothing, right? Didn’t they fail by playing it safe?

 

FYI, Wilson did not carry his team when he had an All-Pro supporting cast either.

Edited March 11, 2020 by BringBackOrton

[BeastMaster]

14 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

The Seahawks obviously went for the safe option with Wilson, and uh, they haven’t done anything since. That’s nothing, right? Didn’t they fail by playing it safe?

 

FYI, Wilson did not carry his team when he had an All-Pro supporting cast either.

Again...reading comprehension.

 

I said he carries that team now. They were stronger when they had all those studs on defense (Wilson's deal played a part in losing them).

 

They have stayed relevant with Wilson and he gives you a shot. But Dak is no Wilson...make no mistake about that.