What if it takes highest paid player in the NFL to resign Allen?

[GoBills808]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

He wasn't a free agent. He was at the end of his 4th year going into his option year and he got the 3rd highest QB salary in the league. He signed for right around what his market was. If he had waited out the 5th year option he could have cashed in Joe Flacco style. But other than Flacco not sure who else has gone that way. Would have been a brave call but  it would have worked for him. 

He signed for what was a completely reasonable ask- more APY than Matt Ryan who happened to play for a divisional rival. The original question was someone asking if anyone could think of a QB who gave his team a discount on a second contract and that's Newton. Gettleman's said it, Panthers fans acknowledge it also.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

He signed for what was a completely reasonable ask- more APY than Matt Ryan who happened to play for a divisional rival. The original question was someone asking if anyone could think of a QB who gave his team a discount on a second contract and that's Newton. Gettleman's said it, Panthers fans acknowledge it also.

 

Gettleman said he did a deal that got his QB on the cheap? Gee, I wonder what his motivation for that was? 

 

Newton's second contract was right at his market value. It was not a hometown discount. 

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Gettleman said he did a deal that got his QB on the cheap? Gee, I wonder what his motivation for that was? 

 

Newton's second contract was right at his market value. It was not a hometown discount. 

Well ok then. 

[boater]

16 hours ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

Why are people scared to pay a player if they get really good?  Baffles me 

 

If you mega-pay a player (Allen in this hypothetical), and also overpay 2or 3 players you end up in salary cap jail. Jailed teams are less competitive.

 

Rookie contracts are very salary cap friendly. That's why the draft is so critical to success. A good draft gives you financial flexibility to pick up assets in free agency.

 

To the OP: my opinion is that in 2022 if Josh Allen is lighting up the league, back up the Brinks truck to his house.

[Kirby Jackson]

6 minutes ago, boater said:

 

If you mega-pay a player (Allen in this hypothetical), and also overpay 2or 3 players you end up in salary cap jail. Jailed teams are less competitive.

 

Rookie contracts are very salary cap friendly. That's why the draft is so critical to success. A good draft gives you financial flexibility to pick up assets in free agency.

 

To the OP: my opinion is that in 2022 if Josh Allen is lighting up the league, back up the Brinks truck to his house.

I guess that my philosophy is a little different when it comes to the draft and the cap. Good teams are comprised of stars. You have to pay stars. It is the middle and back of your roster that gets replaced with draft picks not your expensive stars. You let guys like Long go and draft a guy in the 4th or 5th to play that role. You let a guy like a mid-30’s Hughes go and slide Epenesa into that slot. You pay your stars in their prime. 

[papazoid]

josh the highest paid QB in NFL ?? 

 

 very unlikely....especially as i dont see him ever being in top 10

 

hypothetical.....would you pay any QB $45-50 MIl/yr ....risk of injury is so great to put so many eggs in one basket

 

i think you will see teams start to invest more first round draft choices on QB's and work with a rookie deal salary cap $

[GreggTX]

We should wait to see if he's any good first. He hasn't been so far. The real question is should we exercise his 5th year option?

Edited May 27, 2020 by GreggTX

[Prospector]

18 hours ago, Steve Billieve said:

So you would sign Allen as the highest paid QB without him improving from where he is currently at?

You think the Cowboys are winning Champtionships with Dak?

I’m thinking ‘Steve don’t Billieve’ be a better name. 

6 hours ago, FireChans said:

That list of FA’s is kinda funny when you think about how many of them are back up and rotational guys. Nice to have, but only a handful are difference makers at the NFL level.

 

The key point you are missing is by tearing down the entire roster to fix the cap hell that didn’t really exist, the new regime created enough holes that allowed the roster to fill out with all of those guys. You don’t need to sign a bunch of DL players if you have DL players on the roster. If you trade or cut all your DT’s or LB’s, then yeah you gotta sign them.

 

Either way, a ton of the players on your list are luxuries. Good teams don’t win with great depth at every position. They win with star talent. Klein and Matalevich may be better than all the back up LB’s on the Chiefs but that won’t be why we win a Super Bowl.

Is there an option on this board to change a profile name? I’m thinking this name has come to fruition and past due for a new one... or I may be wrong

[Steve Billieve]

16 hours ago, TwistofFate said:

Am I understanding you correctly? 

 

You want to let a legit franchise Qb walk because you'd  rather have our starting Qb on a rookie salary?

 

Taking a lot of heat so I guess I'll elaborate/dig a deeper hole. 

 

I guess it depends what you mean by franchise QB.  

IMO middle tier QBs are grossly overpaid, and they are the surest way to set yourself up to be a playoff bubble team at best with no real chance of going all the way.

I don't think there's a big difference between the perceived 10th best QB compared to the 20th best QB. 

 

Even the contracts seem to bear this out.  There are 18 QBs making 20+ mil a year.  I bet every team that signed one of those thought they were getting a top 10 guy, but with the emergence of Watson, Mahomes, and Jackson some aren't even in the top 20 (and that's before you count the potential of guys like Allen, Darnold, Tua, Burrow, Mayfield, Jones, etc)

 

In any given year I think there are usually 5 QBs who are just better than the rest, and they are usually the same QBs year in and year out.  Paying someone big money who obviously isn't in that tier is a mistake imo.  The league is filled with average replaceable QBs on bloated salaries.  

 

Seems like the consensus rank for Dak is around 8 (+/- 2), where as Allen is usually mid 20s.  That's a huge difference, but imo neither player is really ensuring their teams success or holding them back. Dak = 40 mil vs. Allen, Diggs, Morse, Hughes = 40 mil

 

IMO Dak is not in that top 5, so if he wants to hold out for 40 mil like it appears I would definitely let him walk.  I'd rather go with Fitz (4 mil) or Foles (8 mil) or Dalton (3 mil) and try to replace with a rookie. I get we've been in QB purgatory for too long, but it's better than QB hell.

 

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

1 hour ago, GreggTX said:

We should wait to see if he's any good first. He hasn't been so far. The real question is should we exercise his 5th year option?

 

I think the Bills should keep with their tradition of a QB every three years...it's really worked out well for us.

 

 

			Passing
	Player	Gms	Att	Cmp	Pct	Yds	Int	TD	Lg	Rating
1.	Jim Kelly, 1986-96	160	4,779	2,874	60.1	35,467	175	237	84t	84.4
2.	Joe Ferguson, 1973-84	164	4,166	2,188	52.5	27,590	190	181	92t	68.9
3.	Jack Kemp, 1962-67,69	88	2,240	1,039	46.4	15,134	132	77	94t	55.8
4.	Ryan Fitzpatrick, 2009-12	55	1,742	1,041	59.8	11,654	64	80	98t	79.8
5.	Drew Bledsoe, 2002-04	48	1,531	905	59.1	10,151	43	55	73t	79.2
6.	Tyrod Taylor, 2015-18	44	1,236	774	62.6	8,857	16	51	84t	92.5
7.	Doug Flutie, 1998-00	39	1,063	598	56.3	7,582	30	47	84t	81.7
8.	Dennis Shaw, 1970-73	45	916	485	52.9	6,286	67	35	75t	57.1
9.	J.P. Losman, 2004-08	42	941	558	59.3	6,211	34	33	87t	75.6
10.	Trent Edwards, 2007-10	34	878	535	60.9	5,739	27	25	70t	76.8
11.	Josh Allen, 2018-19	28	781	440	56.3	5,163	21	30	75t	78.2
12.	Rob Johnson, 1998-01	30	663	401	60.5	4,798	17	27	74t	85.5
13.	E.J. Manuel, 2013-16	28	547	319	58.3	3,502	15	19	80t	77.5
14.	Todd Collins, 1995-97	28	519	284	54.7	3,218	19	16	95t	68.5
15.	Kyle Orton, 2014	12	447	287	64.2	3,018	10	18	84	87.8
16.	Alex Van Pelt, 1994-03	32	477	262	54.9	2,985	24	16	80t	64.1
17.	Frank Reich, 1985-94	93	377	222	58.9	2,540	12	18	63t	81.9
18.	Daryle Lamonica, 1963-66	56	353	150	42.5	2,499	23	16	93	55.0
19.	Johnny Green, 1960-61	18	354	145	41.0	2,170	15	16	70t	59.2
20.	Warren Rabb, 1961-62	23	251	101	40.2	1,782	16	15	76t	58.6
21.	Vince Ferragamo, 1985	10	287	149	51.9	1,677	17	5	48	50.8
22.	Bruce Mathison, 1985	10	228	113	49.6	1,635	14	4	60t	53.5
23.	Kelly Holcomb, 2005-06	10	230	155	67.4	1,509	8	10	65	85.6
24.	Gary Marangi, 1974-76	19	283	104	36.7	1,373	21	12	64t	36.1
25.	Dan Darragh, 1968-70	17	296	127	42.9	1,353	22	4	53	30.4
26.	James Harris, 1969-72	18	189	90	47.6	1,120	11	5	62	51.0
27.	Thaddeus Lewis, 2013-14	6	157	93	59.2	1,092	3	4	57	81.0
28.	Tommy O'Connell, 1960-61	15	150	66	44.0	1,044	14	7	64	44.4
29.	M.C. Reynolds, 1961	12	181	83	45.9	1,004	13	2	52	37.2
30.	Matt Kofler, 1982-84	36	154	68	44.2	872	8	6	70t	53.8
31.	Joe Dufek, 1983-85	10	150	74	49.3	829	8	4	64t	52.9
32.	Richie Lucas, 1960-61	22	99	43	43.4	596	7	4	45	47.4
33.	Matt Barkley, 2018-19	3	76	42	55.3	591	3	2	47	72.9
34.	Nathan Peterman, 2017-18	8	130	68	52.3	548	12	3	26	32.5
35.	Derek Anderson, 2018-19	2	70	42	60.0	465	4	0	40	56.0
36.	Ed Rutkowski, 1963-68	83	102	41	40.2	380	6	0	37	26.6
37.	Kay Stephenson, 1968	10	79	29	36.7	364	7	4	55t	31.8
38.	Travis Brown, 2001,03	3	51	29	56.9	361	3	1	34	61.0
39.	Bill Munson, 1978-79	7	50	27	54.0	359	2	4	43	87.0
40.	Al Dorow, 1962	4	75	30	40.0	333	7	2	34	23.9
41.	Jeff Tuel, 2013-15	2	59	26	44.1	309	3	1	59t	45.1
42.	Tom Flores, 1967-69	17	74	27	36.5	291	9	0	59	9.3
43.	Brian Brohm, 2009-10	3	52	27	51.9	252	5	0	33	26.0
44.	Brian McClure, 1987	1	38	20	52.6	181	3	0	30	32.9
45.	Mike Taliaferro, 1972	5	33	16	48.5	176	4	1	24	35.2
46.	Willie Totten, 1987	2	33	13	39.4	155	2	2	37	49.4
47.	Billy Joe Hobert, 1997	2	30	17	56.7	133	2	0	20	40.0
48.	Dan Manucci, 1979-80,87	19	27	12	44.4	132	2	0	22	28.6
49.	O.J. Simpson, 1969-77	112	16	6	37.5	110	0	1	34	82.8
50.	Gale Gilbert, 1990-93	2	15	8	53.3	106	2	2	23	76.0

 

Sponsored Content

[BillsNutHawaii]

20 hours ago, SydneyBillsFan said:

How about we just let him play out his pivotal third year with an improved offence against a stronger schedule of opponents and then evaluate his performance before hyperventilating over what we might do in year 4 or 5.

 

No! I’m wanna hyperventilate now.  And if you push me, I’m going to hold my breathe till I pass out! Don’t test me.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Not to worry.

 

Soon after someone else will be the next highest payed QB. 

[Kirby Jackson]

58 minutes ago, Steve Billieve said:

 

Taking a lot of heat so I guess I'll elaborate/dig a deeper hole. 

 

I guess it depends what you mean by franchise QB.  

IMO middle tier QBs are grossly overpaid, and they are the surest way to set yourself up to be a playoff bubble team at best with no real chance of going all the way.

I don't think there's a big difference between the perceived 10th best QB compared to the 20th best QB. 

 

Even the contracts seem to bear this out.  There are 18 QBs making 20+ mil a year.  I bet every team that signed one of those thought they were getting a top 10 guy, but with the emergence of Watson, Mahomes, and Jackson some aren't even in the top 20 (and that's before you count the potential of guys like Allen, Darnold, Tua, Burrow, Mayfield, Jones, etc)

 

In any given year I think there are usually 5 QBs who are just better than the rest, and they are usually the same QBs year in and year out.  Paying someone big money who obviously isn't in that tier is a mistake imo.  The league is filled with average replaceable QBs on bloated salaries.  

 

Seems like the consensus rank for Dak is around 8 (+/- 2), where as Allen is usually mid 20s.  That's a huge difference, but imo neither player is really ensuring their teams success or holding them back. Dak = 40 mil vs. Allen, Diggs, Morse, Hughes = 40 mil

 

IMO Dak is not in that top 5, so if he wants to hold out for 40 mil like it appears I would definitely let him walk.  I'd rather go with Fitz (4 mil) or Foles (8 mil) or Dalton (3 mil) and try to replace with a rookie. I get we've been in QB purgatory for too long, but it's better than QB hell.

 

I don’t necessarily agree with you but I applaud you for elaborating and defending your position. This place functions so much better when people explain “why” they feel a certain way. 

[Mango]

If we had to make the decision tomorrow, it is a very hard pass. I am not sure there is much disagreement on that. 

 

Outside of that, it is wait and see. 

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

21 hours ago, Zerovoltz said:

It's simple.  If you think he's a super bowl QB, you sign him.  If you don't, then you don't pay him at all and move on.

Sounds like we are backing up the Brinks truck then. Allen definitely has all the tools to be a super bowl MVP.

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

20 hours ago, Dadonkadonk said:

At his current level of play? No. If he cracks the top 10 of QB play then you overpay to keep him because it would be very difficult to replace him. 

Most indications are that Josh is improving in most aspects of the game.  He still has a long way to go to be a top 10 guy.

With the supporting cast and defense, if he keeps the turnovers down this team should win 10 games and the division even with the schedule they have. 

 

Problem is, Allen is so unconventional and McDermott a little too conservative that I don't know that Allen will ever be a top 10 QB on paper by almost all metrics. But that's not to say he won't actually have the skills of a top 10 QB. 

 

Also, top 10 get's thrown around a little too loosely I think. Basically top 10 QB has grown to include any franchise QB which then gets stretched closer to top 16-18. 

20 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So they either pay Josh Allen or shout "stop the world I want to get off" and go back to trying to convince themselves that you can win if you put a team around Kelly Holcomb, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Tyrod Taylor. 

 

Just thinking of option B and the three guys you named makes me want to extend Allen to $100 million dollar deal now.

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

13 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

EDIT: Just to return to the headline, of course if Josh becomes a top 10 guy they should pay him, even if he becomes the highest-paid. It's a cost of doing business intelligently.

 

 

And by what metric do we determine Allen is top 10? I love Allen. I think he is our future and will be worth a contract that could make him the highest paid. At the same time I am extremely doubtful he will be top 10 in traditionally meaningful QB stats. Passing yards? No chance. Completion percentage? No way. QB Rating? Probably not. Passing TD's? Unlikely.

 

Maybe total TD's and QBR?

 

The most meaningful stat might be wins. I don't care if his next two seasons are identical to his 2019 season. If we extend our playoff streak to 3 straight years I think he get's paid even if statistically he feels more like the 20th best QB. 

[KGun12TD]

Did Josh win the super bowl in those couple of years in your hypothetical? There is your answer! Ugh!!!

[TwistofFate]

2 hours ago, Steve Billieve said:

 

Taking a lot of heat so I guess I'll elaborate/dig a deeper hole. 

 

I guess it depends what you mean by franchise QB.  

IMO middle tier QBs are grossly overpaid, and they are the surest way to set yourself up to be a playoff bubble team at best with no real chance of going all the way.

I don't think there's a big difference between the perceived 10th best QB compared to the 20th best QB. 

 

Even the contracts seem to bear this out.  There are 18 QBs making 20+ mil a year.  I bet every team that signed one of those thought they were getting a top 10 guy, but with the emergence of Watson, Mahomes, and Jackson some aren't even in the top 20 (and that's before you count the potential of guys like Allen, Darnold, Tua, Burrow, Mayfield, Jones, etc)

 

In any given year I think there are usually 5 QBs who are just better than the rest, and they are usually the same QBs year in and year out.  Paying someone big money who obviously isn't in that tier is a mistake imo.  The league is filled with average replaceable QBs on bloated salaries.  

 

Seems like the consensus rank for Dak is around 8 (+/- 2), where as Allen is usually mid 20s.  That's a huge difference, but imo neither player is really ensuring their teams success or holding them back. Dak = 40 mil vs. Allen, Diggs, Morse, Hughes = 40 mil

 

IMO Dak is not in that top 5, so if he wants to hold out for 40 mil like it appears I would definitely let him walk.  I'd rather go with Fitz (4 mil) or Foles (8 mil) or Dalton (3 mil) and try to replace with a rookie. I get we've been in QB purgatory for too long, but it's better than QB hell.

 

Paying top 10 Qbs a ton of money is the trend and it wont change. 

 

If Allen jumps to middle of the pack this year, (real progress) pick up the 5th year option.  If he jumps to the top 10 in year at the end of year 4 (more real progress) you sign him long term to a big time deal.   I'd have zero problem with that route.   Pay the man his money and lets win some championships. 

 

If he fails to make that jump this year, no 5th year option.  Bring in a solid vet, or if Fromm shows he's capable, you have a qb battle for the starter heading into year 4.  No more free ride or benefit of the doubt, make Allen earn it or lose it. 

 

I believe he's come to a crossroad.  If he loses out, offer him a back up contract or let him walk. 

 

This team is ready for the next step in its evolution. Without a franchise guy we are wasting the rest of our talent. Our window is the next 3 years to put it all together and compete for actual titles. 

[ALLEN1QB]

No because Fromm will be the starting QB.

[Steve Billieve]

44 minutes ago, TwistofFate said:

Paying top 10 Qbs a ton of money is the trend and it wont change. 

 

If Allen jumps to middle of the pack this year, (real progress) pick up the 5th year option.  If he jumps to the top 10 in year at the end of year 4 (more real progress) you sign him long term to a big time deal.   I'd have zero problem with that route.   Pay the man his money and lets win some championships. 

 

If he fails to make that jump this year, no 5th year option.  Bring in a solid vet, or if Fromm shows he's capable, you have a qb battle for the starter heading into year 4.  No more free ride or benefit of the doubt, make Allen earn it or lose it. 

 

I believe he's come to a crossroad.  If he loses out, offer him a back up contract or let him walk. 

 

This team is ready for the next step in its evolution. Without a franchise guy we are wasting the rest of our talent. Our window is the next 3 years to put it all together and compete for actual titles. 

 

Yeah, I agree completely, that's how it should be done. If Allen improves we should try to sign him, and if they like where he's headed the sooner the better.  I just don't think a fringe "top 10" QB is 40 mil/year (currently).  QB contracts are so big now that you can't really make a mistake and recover, you're talking about an entire rebuild. 

 

If we actually do sign Allen long term after 4 we won't have to pay record money.

[GunnerBill]

8 hours ago, Steve Billieve said:

QB contracts are so big now that you can't really make a mistake and recover, you're talking about an entire rebuild. 

 

 

See I just don't believe this is true.

 

Let's take a couple of examples - the first two picks in the 2016 NFL Draft - Carson Wentz and Jared Goff. Both signed big contracts last offseason (after 3 years in the league) to much gnashing of teeth from the "Quarterbacks are so expensive!!" crowd.

 

Wentz signed a 4 year extension that pays him $128m, $32m apy, $66.5m guaranteed.

Goff signed a 4 year extension that pays him $134m, $33.5m apy, $57m guaranteed.

 

Goff became the tied 3rd (with Rodgers) best paid QB in the NFL and Went became the 5th best paid. The way both of those extensions were constructed were, in essence to guarantee every penny left on their rookie deals (ie. the money in their 4th year and the money in their 5th year option). Then the first year of the new extensions (ie 2021 are essentially fully guaranteed too) leaving just some amortised signing bonus as the guarantees on those contracts beyond 2021.

 

The Rams can get out of Goff's deal after that season for $31m in dead cap (that is a cut if they could find a trade partner that halves the cap hit and unless he really sucks for two years he would be attractive for a team looking to trade because he'd be bringing a reasonable contract with him with the Rams taking the $17.5m hit) which while not a small number, if designated as a post June cut and therefore spread over two years means a maximum single year cap hit of $22m. I think something pretty drastic would have to happen for the Rams to be sick of Goff by then even though I know a lot of fans really think he sucks (he doesn't). If they keep him through 2022 they can get out for $8.6m dead cap.

 

The Eagles have structured Wentz's deal to give them even more flexibility. They can get out after 2021 for $24.5m with no single year of dead cap hit bigger than $15.5m. If they keep him an extra year they can get out for $15m total and no single year hit bigger than $9m.

 

None of those number are numbers that necessitate a total rebuild. They are numbers that a clever cap manager can absorb while continuing to field a competitive team. The cap is more flexible than most fans think it is remains my point. You can use money from as many years into the future as your players are willing to extend for. The reason this used to be much more an issue for BUFFALO and I think is clouding the thinking of some fans on these issues is the Bills were a cash to cap team for a number of years under Ralph because they couldn't afford to manage contracts in the way that provides for the most team flexibility. The way you do NFL contracts these days is you load the guarantees in early and you have big (but unguaranteed) numbers late. That way if the guy is still producing into those later years of the deal you are in a great spot to move money around his deal, reduce his hit in exchange for extra guarantees and if he isn't you can get out for numbers that don't kill your cap. You can't do that when you are cash to cap because you are not able to frontload guarantees in the same way (because you simply can't afford to give Carson Wentz $17m up front on the day he signed).

[BarleyNY]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

See I just don't believe this is true.

 

Let's take a couple of examples - the first two picks in the 2016 NFL Draft - Carson Wentz and Jared Goff. Both signed big contracts last offseason (after 3 years in the league) to much gnashing of teeth from the "Quarterbacks are so expensive!!" crowd.

 

Wentz signed a 4 year extension that pays him $128m, $32m apy, $66.5m guaranteed.

Goff signed a 4 year extension that pays him $134m, $33.5m apy, $57m guaranteed.

 

Goff became the tied 3rd (with Rodgers) best paid QB in the NFL and Went became the 5th best paid. The way both of those extensions were constructed were, in essence to guarantee every penny left on their rookie deals (ie. the money in their 4th year and the money in their 5th year option). Then the first year of the new extensions (ie 2021 are essentially fully guaranteed too) leaving just some amortised signing bonus as the guarantees on those contracts beyond 2021.

 

The Rams can get out of Goff's deal after that season for $31m in dead cap (that is a cut if they could find a trade partner that halves the cap hit and unless he really sucks for two years he would be attractive for a team looking to trade because he'd be bringing a reasonable contract with him with the Rams taking the $17.5m hit) which while not a small number, if designated as a post June cut and therefore spread over two years means a maximum single year cap hit of $22m. I think something pretty drastic would have to happen for the Rams to be sick of Goff by then even though I know a lot of fans really think he sucks (he doesn't). If they keep him through 2022 they can get out for $8.6m dead cap.

 

The Eagles have structured Wentz's deal to give them even more flexibility. They can get out after 2021 for $24.5m with no single year of dead cap hit bigger than $15.5m. If they keep him an extra year they can get out for $15m total and no single year hit bigger than $9m.

 

None of those number are numbers that necessitate a total rebuild. They are numbers that a clever cap manager can absorb while continuing to field a competitive team. The cap is more flexible than most fans think it is remains my point. You can use money from as many years into the future as your players are willing to extend for. The reason this used to be much more an issue for BUFFALO and I think is clouding the thinking of some fans on these issues is the Bills were a cash to cap team for a number of years under Ralph because they couldn't afford to manage contracts in the way that provides for the most team flexibility. The way you do NFL contracts these days is you load the guarantees in early and you have big (but unguaranteed) numbers late. That way if the guy is still producing into those later years of the deal you are in a great spot to move money around his deal, reduce his hit in exchange for extra guarantees and if he isn't you can get out for numbers that don't kill your cap. You can't do that when you are cash to cap because you are not able to frontload guarantees in the same way (because you simply can't afford to give Carson Wentz $17m up front on the day he signed).

You’re looking at the dead cap numbers wrong.  Wentz’s dead cap would be $59.2M in 2021.  The $24.5M is the amount of dead cap over his expected $34.7M cap number for that season.  Goff’s is the same.  $67M dead cap in 2021.  $31.7M in addition to $34.3M expected cap hit. 
 

These deals are absolutely crippling to get out of at that point.  It can be done, but it’ll hurt badly.  Realistically when you do a deal like those you are committing to your QB for 5 years.

 

Wentz Spotrac

 

Goff Spotrac

Edited May 28, 2020 by BarleyNY

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

You’re looking at the dead cap numbers wrong.  Wentz’s dead cap would be $59.2M after 2021.  The $24.5M is the amount of dead cap over his expected $34.7M cap number for that season.  Goff’s is the same.  These deals are absolutely crippling to get out of at that point.  It can be done, but it’ll hurt badly.  Realistically when you do a deal like those you are committing to your QB for 5 years.  

 

I think you are looking at it wrong. $59.2 is to get out BEFORE 2021. 

[BarleyNY]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think you are looking at it wrong. $59.2 is to get out BEFORE 2021. 

Oh. I thought that’s what you meant.  Sorry. 
Wentz would have a dead cap hit of $24.5M before 2022 and Goff would have a dead cap hit of $32.7 before the 2022 season. 

Edited May 28, 2020 by BarleyNY

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, BarleyNY said:

Oh. I thought that’s what you meant. 

 

I pretty clearly say after in both case... but no worries.

[BarleyNY]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I pretty clearly say after in both case... but no worries.

Yup. You did. 

 

[GunnerBill]

12 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Oh. I thought that’s what you meant.  Sorry. 
Wentz would have a dead cap hit of $24.5M before 2022 and Goff would have a dead cap hit of $32.7 before the 2022 season. 

 

Yea I think the Goff number is wrong. I know that is what Spotrac says but I think they have counted the $1.8m restructure bonus once too often. There would be three in play (2022, 2023, 2024) and I think they have counted it 4 times. So I think it is actually $30.9m. 

 

EDIT: and yes... I am sad enough to have been studying the contract details and checking Sptrac's working. 

Edited May 28, 2020 by GunnerBill

[dogbyte]

Look at the Flacco contract, he got a huge deal which destroyed the Ravens team. They had to let a lot of players walk, the team was never the same. Football is a team sport, a great qb with no team around him does not work in the NFL. Teams have to get a balanced result. Teams can not have a few players taking up 50% of the cap and winning constantly. Also the cap will not go up all the time.

[BarleyNY]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I think the Goff number is wrong. I know that is what Spotrac says but I think they have counted the $1.8m restructure bonus once too often. There would be three in play (2022, 2023, 2024) and I think they have counted it 4 times. So I think it is actually $30.9m. 

 

EDIT: and yes... I am sad enough to have been studying the contract details and checking Sptrac's working. 

Yeah, I’ve done that too.  Their available cap space figures were a mess for awhile. 
 

Back to the topic at hand though.  I don’t want to downplay the impact of these kinds of extensions on a team.  Using Goff as an example (and round numbers), he was set to make about $4M in new money in 2019.  His fifth year option in 2019 would’ve been about $23M.  Franchise tag in 2020 would’ve been less than $28M.  So $4M for one season, $27M for two seasons or $55M for three with no future commitments.  

The extension changed that to $85M for three years, $110M for four years, $135 for five or $161 for six.  Being wrong about how good your QB is can be costly not only in terms of cap space/dollars spent, but also in terms of tying your team to that QB.  From a player personnel perspective the only worse thing than not having a franchise QB is not having a franchise QB and paying a guy like you do.  You’re going to be stuck with that guy at FQB rates for four years (and that’s if he’s only on the team for three).

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Yeah, I’ve done that too.  Their available cap space figures were a mess for awhile. 
 

Back to the topic at hand though.  I don’t want to downplay the impact of these kinds of extensions on a team.  Using Goff as an example (and round numbers), he was set to make about $4M in new money in 2019.  His fifth year option in 2019 would’ve been about $23M.  Franchise tag in 2020 would’ve been less than $28M.  So $4M for one season, $27M for two seasons or $55M for three with no future commitments.  

The extension changed that to $85M for three years, $110M for four years, $135 for five or $161 for six.  Being wrong about how good your QB is can be costly not only in terms of cap space/dollars spent, but also in terms of tying your team to that QB.  From a player personnel perspective the only worse thing than not having a franchise QB is not having a franchise QB and paying a guy like you do.  You’re going to be stuck with that guy at FQB rates for four years (and that’s if he’s only on the team for three).

 

Yea that is true. But I think you rarely find out he isn't your guy in year 1 of that. The most, and I mean most, you are stuck paying a guy who after 3 or 4 years you thought was your guy and it turns out isn't is 2 years. And in most cases it is 1. It doesn't truly require a team to rip it down and rebuild. 

[BarleyNY]

11 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea that is true. But I think you rarely find out he isn't your guy in year 1 of that. The most, and I mean most, you are stuck paying a guy who after 3 or 4 years you thought was your guy and it turns out isn't is 2 years. And in most cases it is 1. It doesn't truly require a team to rip it down and rebuild. 

No, a full year down would not be necessary, but that QB is going to prevent the team from retaining some other talent whether you’re right or wrong about him.  The real issue is when you see teams ignore some real concerns and talk themselves into believing they have their guy when they should be more cautious.  Sometimes that’s because the GM and HC expect to be out the door anyway if that QB doesn’t pan out.  You need a strong owner who understands that and can roll with that situation.  Oh, and if you do decide that your starting QB isn’t the guy and let him walk, then you gotta hope it wasn’t Drew Brees.  It’s a tough situation to be sure. 

[Billl]

23 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Yeah, I’ve done that too.  Their available cap space figures were a mess for awhile. 
 

Back to the topic at hand though.  I don’t want to downplay the impact of these kinds of extensions on a team.  Using Goff as an example (and round numbers), he was set to make about $4M in new money in 2019.  His fifth year option in 2019 would’ve been about $23M.  Franchise tag in 2020 would’ve been less than $28M.  So $4M for one season, $27M for two seasons or $55M for three with no future commitments.  

The extension changed that to $85M for three years, $110M for four years, $135 for five or $161 for six.  Being wrong about how good your QB is can be costly not only in terms of cap space/dollars spent, but also in terms of tying your team to that QB.  From a player personnel perspective the only worse thing than not having a franchise QB is not having a franchise QB and paying a guy like you do.  You’re going to be stuck with that guy at FQB rates for four years (and that’s if he’s only on the team for three).

Like just about every other problem in the NFL, drafting a star QB and paying him a rookie contract is the solution.  If Goff craters, the team will suck next season no matter what he’s being paid.  If the Rams draft the next big thing to replace him, they can afford to keep him around on his contract for a while because their total outlay for the QB position will be manageable.

[GunnerBill]

19 minutes ago, Billl said:

Like just about every other problem in the NFL, drafting a star QB and paying him a rookie contract is the solution.  If Goff craters, the team will suck next season no matter what he’s being paid.  If the Rams draft the next big thing to replace him, they can afford to keep him around on his contract for a while because their total outlay for the QB position will be manageable.

 

Exactly. That is my point. Missing on a QB hurts. Finding out you have missed after paying him hurts more. But ultimately it is BAD QB play that hurts.  It is possible to structure the contracts the way the Rams and Eagles have done where you can get out after three years of the contract and only two years of the really big money (and their are particularly that because they were 1 and 2 in the draft so their options are expensive accordingly) and there is nothing to stop you drafting another one in the meantime. It really doesn't necessitate a full rebuild if you do it right. 

[Kirby Jackson]

Not to totally derail the conversation but if the Bills decide “Allen isn’t the guy” I fully expect them to trade for Matt Stafford. I see, little to no chance,  that this particular group plays with a young QB. The roster is too good.

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Not to totally derail the conversation but if the Bills decide “Allen isn’t the guy” I fully expect them to trade for Matt Stafford. I see, little to no chance,  that this particular group plays with a young QB. The roster is too good.

I would not be opposed to that idea unless there's some can't miss guy in the draft. 

 

I actually thought they were going to go after Cousins when the Redskins cut him loose and the team now is WAY better now.

[GunnerBill]

10 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Not to totally derail the conversation but if the Bills decide “Allen isn’t the guy” I fully expect them to trade for Matt Stafford. I see, little to no chance,  that this particular group plays with a young QB. The roster is too good.

 

Agree. Stafford would make a lot of sense.

7 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I would not be opposed to that idea unless there's some can't miss guy in the draft. 

 

I actually thought they were going to go after Cousins when the Redskins cut him loose and the team now is WAY better now.

 

Cousins could even come back into the equation if they decide Josh is not the guy after 2021 rather than after 2020. So could a certain guy up in Green Bay....

 

I think this is all academic though. I fully expect Josh to be good enough for them to pick up the option next spring and extend Josh the following Summer. 

Edited May 28, 2020 by GunnerBill

[Kirby Jackson]

27 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I would not be opposed to that idea unless there's some can't miss guy in the draft. 

 

I actually thought they were going to go after Cousins when the Redskins cut him loose and the team now is WAY better now.

 

22 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agree. Stafford would make a lot of sense.

 

Cousins could even come back into the equation if they decide Josh is not the guy after 2021 rather than after 2020. So could a certain guy up in Green Bay....

 

I think this is all academic though. I fully expect Josh to be good enough for them to pick up the option next spring and extend Josh the following Summer. 

I expect Josh to become the guy too. With that being said, I guess the point that I was trying to make is that we should be prepared for a large QB contract either way. I don’t think that it will be a scrub(ish) vet or a young guy. We aren’t going to waste this window HOPING to find a QB. We are either going with Josh or Stafford (or Cousins even).

[Steve Billieve]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

See I just don't believe this is true.

 

Let's take a couple of examples - the first two picks in the 2016 NFL Draft - Carson Wentz and Jared Goff. Both signed big contracts last offseason (after 3 years in the league) to much gnashing of teeth from the "Quarterbacks are so expensive!!" crowd.

 

Wentz signed a 4 year extension that pays him $128m, $32m apy, $66.5m guaranteed.

Goff signed a 4 year extension that pays him $134m, $33.5m apy, $57m guaranteed.

 

Goff became the tied 3rd (with Rodgers) best paid QB in the NFL and Went became the 5th best paid. The way both of those extensions were constructed were, in essence to guarantee every penny left on their rookie deals (ie. the money in their 4th year and the money in their 5th year option). Then the first year of the new extensions (ie 2021 are essentially fully guaranteed too) leaving just some amortised signing bonus as the guarantees on those contracts beyond 2021.

 

The Rams can get out of Goff's deal after that season for $31m in dead cap (that is a cut if they could find a trade partner that halves the cap hit and unless he really sucks for two years he would be attractive for a team looking to trade because he'd be bringing a reasonable contract with him with the Rams taking the $17.5m hit) which while not a small number, if designated as a post June cut and therefore spread over two years means a maximum single year cap hit of $22m. I think something pretty drastic would have to happen for the Rams to be sick of Goff by then even though I know a lot of fans really think he sucks (he doesn't). If they keep him through 2022 they can get out for $8.6m dead cap.

 

The Eagles have structured Wentz's deal to give them even more flexibility. They can get out after 2021 for $24.5m with no single year of dead cap hit bigger than $15.5m. If they keep him an extra year they can get out for $15m total and no single year hit bigger than $9m.

 

None of those number are numbers that necessitate a total rebuild. They are numbers that a clever cap manager can absorb while continuing to field a competitive team. The cap is more flexible than most fans think it is remains my point. You can use money from as many years into the future as your players are willing to extend for. The reason this used to be much more an issue for BUFFALO and I think is clouding the thinking of some fans on these issues is the Bills were a cash to cap team for a number of years under Ralph because they couldn't afford to manage contracts in the way that provides for the most team flexibility. The way you do NFL contracts these days is you load the guarantees in early and you have big (but unguaranteed) numbers late. That way if the guy is still producing into those later years of the deal you are in a great spot to move money around his deal, reduce his hit in exchange for extra guarantees and if he isn't you can get out for numbers that don't kill your cap. You can't do that when you are cash to cap because you are not able to frontload guarantees in the same way (because you simply can't afford to give Carson Wentz $17m up front on the day he signed).

 

I would say those are two examples of doing it right. I should have been more clear, I meant that if you sign some silly record setting deal for 40/ and over a 100+ guaranteed, it gets pretty tough to walk back.  I have no problem with paying a QB what they're worth, but if you overpay because you just can't let your "franchise" guy go things can get dicey fast and you have zero flexibility. 

QBs aren't too expensive.  They're just too expensive to make bad deals with.

You can overpay a guy like Spain no big deal.