Cowboys and Dak reach deal

[Alphadawg7]

17 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I can't disagree with this. I think they have some serious coaching issues, however, and that makes the problems worse. And the owner is always going to be a problem. I mean, they are paying a ton of money to what is now a league-average running back. He has a $14 million cap hit and a $24 million dead cap hit this upcoming season. A lot of guys who we think of as JAGs could equal his production too (4.0 ypc and under 7 yards per reception).

 

Totally agree with this too

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Dak is the best player on the roster though. They screwed the pooch not signing him two years ago when he wanted $32m AAV.

 

I cant really disagree with this, at $32M I think that would have been a great spot for him until his next contract.  And even though I am critical of Dak in terms of the upper elite pay category he is in, I recognize the kid is a good football player still.  

 

There are just some guys that can not lift their teams above their other deficiencies.  And so far, I think Dak falls into that category, but there is still plenty of career to change this perception.  That place where the Stafford, Rivers, Ryans, etc have lived.  Guys who can put up individual statistical achievements, but still not win enough because the team around them wasn't strong enough.  Then you have guys like Brady, Rodgers, and Wilson for example that win despite having bad deficiencies such as bad defenses, weak OL, poor weapons to work with, etc.  They are so good and so clutch they can win with just about any personnel on the field.  They wont always win the SB, but they are a perennial contender despite what the rest of the roster looks like.  

 

If I am paying a guy a cap killing contract, I want that guy to be my field general.  Its easier said than done to get one of those guys clearly, so I get why Dallas has to pay what is in front of them too.  

 

Bringing this convo home to the Bills, I sincerely believe we have a QB in Josh Allen that is in that elite category of elevating his team beyond its deficiencies.  I mean he just led us to 13-3 record (and lets be honest, should have been 14-2) despite fielding a defense that has no idea how to cover a TE, defense the middle of the field, cant win in the trenches, and struggles badly to defend the run.  

[GunnerBill]

8 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I cant really disagree with this, at $32M I think that would have been a great spot for him until his next contract.  And even though I am critical of Dak in terms of the upper elite pay category he is in, I recognize the kid is a good football player still.  

 

There are just some guys that can not lift their teams above their other deficiencies.  And so far, I think Dak falls into that category, but there is still plenty of career to change this perception.  That place where the Stafford, Rivers, Ryans, etc have lived.  Guys who can put up individual statistical achievements, but still not win enough because the team around them wasn't strong enough.  Then you have guys like Brady, Rodgers, and Wilson for example that win despite having bad deficiencies such as bad defenses, weak OL, poor weapons to work with, etc.  They are so good and so clutch they can win with just about any personnel on the field.  They wont always win the SB, but they are a perennial contender despite what the rest of the roster looks like.  

 

If I am paying a guy a cap killing contract, I want that guy to be my field general.  Its easier said than done to get one of those guys clearly, so I get why Dallas has to pay what is in front of them too.  

 

Bringing this convo home to the Bills, I sincerely believe we have a QB in Josh Allen that is in that elite category of elevating his team beyond its deficiencies.  I mean he just led us to 13-3 record (and lets be honest, should have been 14-2) despite fielding a defense that has no idea how to cover a TE, defense the middle of the field, cant win in the trenches, and struggles badly to defend the run.  

 

But you either pay the guys who are in that next tier or you don't have a Quarterback. The argument doesn't change. If you pay them when their time comes within two years they are reasonable value. That is just the market. 

[dave mcbride]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But you either pay the guys who are in that next tier or you don't have a Quarterback. The argument doesn't change. If you pay them when their time comes within two years they are reasonable value. That is just the market. 

Translated: the Bills should absolutely pay Allen now, and it shouldn't be a debate. 

[Alphadawg7]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But you either pay the guys who are in that next tier or you don't have a Quarterback. The argument doesn't change. If you pay them when their time comes within two years they are reasonable value. That is just the market. 

 

I don't disagree with that.  But I would say, when you make the mistake and miss the chance to lock them up more reasonably, you are potentially doubling down on that mistake by over paying them later.  

 

For example, Kirk Cousins and the WFT were in a similar showdown.  And while the WFT is still in the rebuilding process and has not adequately replaced Cousins yet, they are on a better trajectory because they did not cave and pay Cousins.  If I am WFT, I would rather be where they are now and have guys like Chase Young on the roster than still having Kirk Cousins.  Yes, they still need to solve the QB position, but Cousins clearly was not going to get them anywhere either.  (Yes I know Dak is also better than Kirk, but just saying it was a similar situation). 

 

I think the bigger issue is Jerry Jones and just not having the stomach to rebuild.  If I was a GM in Dallas, I wouldn't be afraid to tear it down and rebuild the cap and roster.  I don't think Jerry Jones wants to even remotely consider doing that despite just twisting in the wind of mediocrity for over a decade.  

[dave mcbride]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I don't disagree with that.  But I would say, when you make the mistake and miss the chance to lock them up more reasonably, you are potentially doubling down on that mistake by over paying them later.  

 

For example, Kirk Cousins and the WFT were in a similar showdown.  And while the WFT is still in the rebuilding process and has not adequately replaced Cousins yet, they are on a better trajectory because they did not cave and pay Cousins.  If I am WFT, I would rather be where they are now and have guys like Chase Young on the roster than still having Kirk Cousins.  Yes, they still need to solve the QB position, but Cousins clearly was not going to get them anywhere either.  (Yes I know Dak is also better than Kirk, but just saying it was a similar situation). 

 

I think the bigger issue is Jerry Jones and just not having the stomach to rebuild.  If I was a GM in Dallas, I wouldn't be afraid to tear it down and rebuild the cap and roster.  I don't think Jerry Jones wants to even remotely consider doing that despite just twisting in the wind of mediocrity for over a decade.  

Cousins is good enough to take you pretty far with an elite defense. He's not great, but he's *so* much better than what Washington rolled out there after he left. 

[HappyDays]

23 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Cousins is good enough to take you pretty far with an elite defense. He's not great, but he's *so* much better than what Washington rolled out there after he left. 

 

I think Cousins is in the worst tier of QBs, the one just good enough to make the playoffs but just bad enough to never give you a championship. Having a QB in that tier is actively worse than having a bad QB because it prevents you from looking to improve the position and you basically tread water for a few years. Minnesota has put some really good teams around him over the years and he's never been able to elevate them to the level needed to win a Super Bowl.

[GoBills808]

22 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I think Cousins is in the worst tier of QBs, the one just good enough to make the playoffs but just bad enough to never give you a championship. Having a QB in that tier is actively worse than having a bad QB because it prevents you from looking to improve the position and you basically tread water for a few years. Minnesota has put some really good teams around him over the years and he's never been able to elevate them to the level needed to win a Super Bowl.

ie Prescott

[HappyDays]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

ie Prescott

 

I put Prescott in a tier above that. He has shown he can lead a top offense, the problem is his defenses and coaching have been bottom barrel. I mean Mike McCarthy only made it to a single Super Bowl with Aaron Rodgers in his prime. I suppose eventually Prescott will have a real head coach and a solid defense and then maybe he will prove to be championship caliber.

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I put Prescott in a tier above that. He has shown he can lead a top offense, the problem is his defenses and coaching have been bottom barrel. I mean Mike McCarthy only made it to a single Super Bowl with Aaron Rodgers in his prime. I suppose eventually Prescott will have a real head coach and a solid defense and then maybe he will prove to be championship caliber.

IMO Prescott and Cousins are interchangeable by the definition you gave (which I agree with btw)

 

From a pure statistical analysis you can  make the argument that Cousins is superior to Prescott. Neither is a quarterback I would commit to long term because of their limitations.

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

Cousins is good enough to take you pretty far with an elite defense. He's not great, but he's *so* much better than what Washington rolled out there after he left. 

 

Its not a matter of did the QB after him play as well, its about is the team in a better position to win.  There is no way WFT would be a contender right now if Cousins would have stayed.  Instead, they are now on a better path towards future success.  Minnesota isnt winning any more, in fact, winning less, with Cousins than they did with lower priced journeyman QB's.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Cousins is good enough to take you pretty far with an elite defense. He's not great, but he's *so* much better than what Washington rolled out there after he left. 

 

I agree. I don't buy that WFT has done better. Minnesota have won playoff games with Kirk. WFT made the playoffs, sure, but as a 7-9 after 3 consecutive losing seasons and still with no Quarterback. 

 

I just don't buy that if you don't have a top 5 QB you should just prefer to be bad. Jimmy G made a Superbowl last year, not on a rookie deal and he is worse than Cousins and Dak. Nick Foles won a Superbowl and he is a backup. 

 

If you have a top 5 QB you are a contender almost every year. You are not that with Dak but he has never had a losing season until being 2-3 and getting hurt, he has won 2 divisions and won a playoff game in his first 4 years. How many QBs in the league right now can match that? It isn't that many. I get that the market means the guys like Dak (8th-12th) best QB get money that puts them in the mix with the top 5 or 6 guys and that hurts because it means you take probably one extra good starter off your cap... but it is what it is. The alternative is suckitude and I don't think being Washington is something to aspire to, even though I love their front 4 first rounders. Even with no QB they are going to find it impossible to keep that 4 together.

2 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Translated: the Bills should absolutely pay Allen now, and it shouldn't be a debate. 

 

100%. Pay them early. It never gets cheaper. Even with the cap going down and Dak coming off an injury... his price went up. Basic supply and demand economics. Not enough supply, too much demand.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Its not a matter of did the QB after him play as well, its about is the team in a better position to win.  There is no way WFT would be a contender right now if Cousins would have stayed.  Instead, they are now on a better path towards future success.  Minnesota isnt winning any more, in fact, winning less, with Cousins than they did with lower priced journeyman QB's.  

 

I mean they are not winning anymore than Case Keenum's career year. But Keenum played darn well that year. Do you honestly think had they kept Keenum he'd have outperformed Kirk the past 3 years, or they'd have won more games? I don't. 

 

That isn't to say I love Kirk Cousins, I don't. I was verciferous in my view that the Bills should not pursue him as a FA but Minnesota was out of position to draft a guy, and had a roster too good to suck, so you find the best vet you can and try to make a run. It hasn't worked out and the probably are a year away from a tear down (and maybe a house clearing) but the decision to sign Cousins when they did was a good one... and they actually have more chance of getting up in this draft for a QB than Washington if they were so inclined. 

[HappyDays]

28 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

I just don't buy that if you don't have a top 5 QB you should just prefer to be bad. Jimmy G made a Superbowl last year, not on a rookie deal and he is worse than Cousins and Dak. Nick Foles won a Superbowl and he is a backup. 

 

I think the NFL has changed radically just over the last 2 years. Really with the appearance of Mahomes in the league. In my mind it is now impossible to win a Super Bowl without top 5 QB play. It used to be more difficult but possible. Now you're not beating anyone in the Mahomes tier without someone capable of matching him. Garrappolo is a great example. He had an elite run game and defense backing him. Didn't matter because eventually Mahomes just outpaced him. Brady is the counterexample. If he had played at an average level I bet the Chiefs would have gotten back into it. So no I don't think it is worth trying to win with the Cousins and the Garrappolos of the league. If your QB isn't capable of playing at a top 5 level, use every resource you have to find someone better. Prescott I do think is capable of playing at that level, he is just going need to need a better team around him to be successful, and to be fair that's true of all QBs including Mahomes.

Edited March 10, 2021 by HappyDays

[FireChans]

3 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I don't disagree with that.  But I would say, when you make the mistake and miss the chance to lock them up more reasonably, you are potentially doubling down on that mistake by over paying them later.  

 

For example, Kirk Cousins and the WFT were in a similar showdown.  And while the WFT is still in the rebuilding process and has not adequately replaced Cousins yet, they are on a better trajectory because they did not cave and pay Cousins.  If I am WFT, I would rather be where they are now and have guys like Chase Young on the roster than still having Kirk Cousins.  Yes, they still need to solve the QB position, but Cousins clearly was not going to get them anywhere either.  (Yes I know Dak is also better than Kirk, but just saying it was a similar situation). 

 

I think the bigger issue is Jerry Jones and just not having the stomach to rebuild.  If I was a GM in Dallas, I wouldn't be afraid to tear it down and rebuild the cap and roster.  I don't think Jerry Jones wants to even remotely consider doing that despite just twisting in the wind of mediocrity for over a decade.  

Washington has won 17 games in 3 seasons. Let’s not go crazy about their “trajectory.”

[Chicken Boo]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Washington has won 17 games in 3 seasons. Let’s not go crazy about their “trajectory.”

 

They're a QB away.  Tall order, I know, but that roster is stacked on both sides of the ball!

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

I think Cousins is in the worst tier of QBs, the one just good enough to make the playoffs but just bad enough to never give you a championship. Having a QB in that tier is actively worse than having a bad QB because it prevents you from looking to improve the position and you basically tread water for a few years. Minnesota has put some really good teams around him over the years and he's never been able to elevate them to the level needed to win a Super Bowl.

Washington has drafted one QB since losing Cousins.

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

They're a QB away.  Tall order, I know, but that roster is stacked on both sides of the ball!

For who? Certainly not the previous FO and HC who thought letting Cousins walk was a “smart” move.

[dave mcbride]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Its not a matter of did the QB after him play as well, its about is the team in a better position to win.  There is no way WFT would be a contender right now if Cousins would have stayed.  Instead, they are now on a better path towards future success.  Minnesota isnt winning any more, in fact, winning less, with Cousins than they did with lower priced journeyman QB's.  

 

 

They beat an elite Saints team last year (and Cousins delivered big time late in the game) but then ran into a juggernaut in the 2019 Niners. In most any other year, that Vikings team had a chance to get to the SB. Remember that SF disemboweled GB the next week too. 

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

I think the NFL has changed radically just over the last 2 years. Really with the appearance of Mahomes in the league. In my mind it is now impossible to win a Super Bowl without top 5 QB play. It used to be more difficult but possible. Now you're not beating anyone in the Mahomes tier without someone capable of matching him. Garrappolo is a great example. He had an elite run game and defense backing him. Didn't matter because eventually Mahomes just outpaced him. Brady is the counterexample. If he had played at an average level I bet the Chiefs would have gotten back into it. So no I don't think it is worth trying to win with the Cousins and the Garrappolos of the league. If your QB isn't capable of playing at a top 5 level, use every resource you have to find someone better. Prescott I do think is capable of playing at that level, he is just going need to need a better team around him to be successful, and to be fair that's true of all QBs including Mahomes.

Sucking sucks. @GunnerBill is totally right about that. And Sabres fans should know it too. 

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

Washington has won 17 games in 3 seasons. Let’s not go crazy about their “trajectory.”

 

Yeah its called a rebuild, so I dont care about years 1 and 2.  They have a new staff and some impressive young players in place on both sides of the ball with a good cap.  I would much rather be the team they are right now then the team they would be if they kept Kirk Cousins and paid him that money.