Quarterback Merry Go Round

[Erie Dawg]

15 hours ago, SdBacker80 said:

No on
Ryan, Tannehill, Burrow, Goff, Cousins, Carr, Herbert, Stafford or Jimmy G. 
 

Yes on the remaining.
 

Puts him just inside of the Top 10. 
 

I'd take him over Ben and close on Mayfield. I watched Allen put up some good throws and make some dumb plays as well.

[Erie Dawg]

7 hours ago, hoorta said:

He's good- but $37 million good? Tagging him really doesn't make financial sense, but we're talking Jerrah World here. 

Yeah that's the point of the conversation. Cowboys can't afford it. 

 

[SdBacker80]

8 minutes ago, Erie Dawg said:

I'd take him over Ben and close on Mayfield. I watched Allen put up some good throws and make some dumb plays as well.

I must have missed Ben - me too. 
 

 

[Unsympathetic]

8 hours ago, hoorta said:

MHO is there's going to be some roll backs

Seriously, I bet you money there won't be. 

An additional knock-on effect of this storm is on home insurance and family lives due to thousands of houses destroyed from the frozen pipes.  

This is the entire point of not being on the federal grids -- the operator profits off charging people usurious rates [they paid normal rates for the production] and will not get prosecuted for it due to owning the politicians.  I bet the politicians cost less than winterizing the grid... why bother with actual operating expenses?

Welcome to late-stage capitalism.

This is also how/why you hear the phrase.. socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the rest of us : Through the ownership of the politicians, companies and entire industries [Wall Street, airlines just to name a couple] can get bailed out for trillions daily.. and nothing for anyone else.  Also one of several reasons why companies deliberately don't do preventative maintenance even on foreseeable dangers because "the disaster" is what's used to "justify" the trillions.  Hence the name... disaster capitalism.

And we haven't even discussed the fun of markets consisting of only one company - aka a monopoly - and the reasons why monopolies are bad for workers and customers.  Yes, the company will "do the right thing" - but their definition of "right" is very different than yours.  The Uber pitch deck to middle east governments explicitly states that once they achieve market moving power in an area, prices ramp massively. 

 

Companies have always and will always intend to screw both customers and workers alike for $.  If you really think anything else.. corporate PR is sold to you.

The notion that corporations are in any way "good actors" without the force of law directly applied is.. foolish at best, deliberately disingenuous at worst.  Or cognitive dissonance perhaps.. if it's too painful to contemplate a society in which companies are actually that evil.

[The Gipper]

3 hours ago, Dutch Oven said:

Sam Darnold, better than Dak Prescott. 

Hilarious. 

Give Darnold Amari Cooper, CeeDee Lamb, Michael Gallup and it would prove to be true. 

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Erie Dawg said:

 

Lol if cam was so great why isn't he in Carolina still and on his way out of NE?  Turbisky was benched how many times last year? If he was so great why'd they bench him? Darnold is just another USC over hyped QB.  That hasn't proven any thing other than he can throw just as many TD as int.

Note, I put neither Newton nor Trubisky ahead of Dak. (I only mentioned that Cam historically had been better).   And see above re  Darnold.

 

Sure...but they still control that situation.

Ok? If you feel that is somehow a win. Because if he walks and makes more who won. Not cash strapped Dallas.

Actually, yes, Dallas may still win....because  they let some other team to overpay Dak and they don't have to.  Plus, they can take all the money they save on not paying Dak and put it into other parts or their team that desperately need help.....and they can go with Dalton/and eventual first round pick. 

What ever the word is Jerry backed himself into the corner by either tagging him which they can't or paying him what his market value is which they may not be able to. But it's hard to let a franchise QB walk out the door. Which may happen if there are better offers out there.

They can tag and pay him if they want...they just have to pay him all that money that perhaps could be better spent elsewhere.  And IMO  37 million is IMO  way above his market value. (again....if he hits free agency...what other team is going to pay him that?  Others may want him...but not at that price).  As far as  "franchise QB"....is the 14th or 15th best QB in the NFL a "franchise" QB?  Only if you define "franchise QB"  as an "unchallenged starter for his team".

 

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, SdBacker80 said:

I must have missed Ben - me too. 
 

 

I had said, yes, he is probably better than what  39 year old BR would be. 

[hoorta]

3 hours ago, Unsympathetic said:

Seriously, I bet you money there won't be. 

An additional knock-on effect of this storm is on home insurance and family lives due to thousands of houses destroyed from the frozen pipes.  

This is the entire point of not being on the federal grids -- the operator profits off charging people usurious rates [they paid normal rates for the production] and will not get prosecuted for it due to owning the politicians.  I bet the politicians cost less than winterizing the grid... why bother with actual operating expenses?

Welcome to late-stage capitalism.

This is also how/why you hear the phrase.. socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the rest of us : Through the ownership of the politicians, companies and entire industries [Wall Street, airlines just to name a couple] can get bailed out for trillions daily.. and nothing for anyone else.  Also one of several reasons why companies deliberately don't do preventative maintenance even on foreseeable dangers because "the disaster" is what's used to "justify" the trillions.  Hence the name... disaster capitalism.

And we haven't even discussed the fun of markets consisting of only one company - aka a monopoly - and the reasons why monopolies are bad for workers and customers.  Yes, the company will "do the right thing" - but their definition of "right" is very different than yours.  The Uber pitch deck to middle east governments explicitly states that once they achieve market moving power in an area, prices ramp massively. 

 

Companies have always and will always intend to screw both customers and workers alike for $.  If you really think anything else.. corporate PR is sold to you.

The notion that corporations are in any way "good actors" without the force of law directly applied is.. foolish at best, deliberately disingenuous at worst.  Or cognitive dissonance perhaps.. if it's too painful to contemplate a society in which companies are actually that evil.

Interesting points- let's see how this plays out. However, if enough customers howl to their politicians they just got butt raped on their electric bill? MHO is I'll bet something will be done. Some of those folks will qualify for FEMA disaster relief repairing their houses- with the concurrent government red tape. Texas home insurance rates will skyrocket- Insurance Companies aren't in the business of losing money.  Yeah, ERCOT is paying the price for running a monopoly, being too cheap to winterize the wind turbines- "it will never happen here". Except it did.  

[The Gipper]

7 minutes ago, hoorta said:

Interesting points- let's see how this plays out. However, if enough customers howl to their politicians they just got butt raped on their electric bill? MHO is I'll bet something will be done. Some of those folks will qualify for FEMA disaster relief repairing their houses- with the concurrent government red tape. Texas home insurance rates will skyrocket- Insurance Companies aren't in the business of losing money.  Yeah, ERCOT is paying the price for running a monopoly, being too cheap to winterize the wind turbines- "it will never happen here". Except it did.  

I am of the opinion that those  Texas energy companies (Jerry Joneses among them)....should just be forced  to eat those ridiculous bills.  After all, those bills  are only where they are because those companies are trying to vastly gouge the consumers there. They would still make a good profit if they were to charge the regular rates.  If that government does not want to do it, then they need to get a new government.   I don't know if they have recall of elected officials in Texas, but this would be a good case to use it if they don't do the right things.  Or, they could have a statewide referendum to repeal and replace the law that allows the bribery, corruption, incompetence and malfeasance in the form of this gouge.  Maybe for once the DumbAss Texans could stand up for themselves against these energy companies that control that state and the politicians therein. 

[Erie Dawg]

On 2/24/2021 at 11:23 AM, The Gipper said:

 

Actually, yes, Dallas may still win....because  they let some other team to overpay Dak and they don't have to.  Plus, they can take all the money they save on not paying Dak and put it into other parts or their team that desperately need help.....and they can go with Dalton/and eventual first round pick. 

Oh yes, the if we suck we will instantly be great because we drafted a high first round QB delusion. Lol. Again you being a browns fan should know better. And if you swing and miss with the pick then what? Try and try again. 

 

They can tag and pay him if they want...they just have to pay him all that money that perhaps could be better spent elsewhere.  And IMO  37 million is IMO  way above his market value. (again....if he hits free agency...what other team is going to pay him that?  Others may want him...but not at that price).  As far as  "franchise QB"....is the 14th or 15th best QB in the NFL a "franchise" QB?  Only if you define "franchise QB"  as an "unchallenged starter for his team".

In my opinion 37 mil for your QB puts every team in a bind. That's is just the allocation for the tag. Also remember the dollar amount for highest paid QB seems to go up yearly. Now it's at 45 mill / year.  Now look at what the top 10 make and where the money is for his slot.

Just because you say 14-15 best QB doesn't mean it's so. That's your rating that's gone from 15-20 to 10-15 now dialed in at 14-15. Going into last year he was in the top 10 behind Wentz. Knowing more about Wentz he jumped him Imo. What  is the ranking in which you feel constitutes a franchise QB? 

 

[The Gipper]

Oh yes, the if we suck we will instantly be great because we drafted a high first round QB delusion. Lol. Again you being a browns fan should know better. And if you swing and miss with the pick then what? Try and try again. 

I am not talking about going forward.  I am talking about this year:  using the #10 pick.   

And, by the way, the Cowboys have not drafted a QB in the first round since 1989......when they took Troy Aikman.  How did that work out? 

 

In my opinion 37 mil for your QB puts every team in a bind. That's is just the allocation for the tag.

It is also the number that counts against the cap.   It is 20% of the team's cap...on a 53 man roster.  Its a huge chunk  of your budget.

Also remember the dollar amount for highest paid QB seems to go up yearly. Now it's at 45 mill / year.  Now look at what the top 10 make and where the money is for his slot.

If you show it to me, I will look at it.  Post it. 

Just because you say 14-15 best QB doesn't mean it's so. That's your rating that's gone from 15-20 to 10-15 now dialed in at 14-15.

Yes,  in analyzing it I eliminated a few that brought him up a bit:  BR,  Brees and Rivers due to retirement.  (I did NOT put him behind any projected upcoming rookies like Lawrence etc.) 

Going into last year he was in the top 10 behind Wentz

He was not Top 10 in my opinion,  and in doing what I just did above I certainly did not have Wentz above him. 

. Knowing more about Wentz he jumped him Imo. Well...it is more a case of Wentz  falling way back than of Dak jumping him

 What  is the ranking in which you feel constitutes a franchise QB? 

Top 10 probably.....and I have said numerous times, Dak ain't that. 

 

[Erie Dawg]

6 hours ago, The Gipper said:

  

And, by the way, the Cowboys have not drafted a QB in the first round since 1989......when they took Troy Aikman.  How did that work out? 

Well since that first rounder retired they have as many winning seasons as loosing. A pitiful playoff record and 0 Superbowls. Romo was undrafted and was training camp foder for 3.5 years while they experimented with Drew bledsoe, Vinny Testeverde, Quincy Carter, and Drew Henson. In Typical Jerry fashion spend on has been free agents. So if being average since Aikman retired they nailed it.

In my opinion 37 mil for your QB puts every team in a bind. 

It is also the number that counts against the cap.   It is 20% of the team's cap...on a 53 man roster.  Its a huge chunk  of your budget.

??? Isn't that basically what I said, LoL???

 

He was not Top 10 in my opinion

I tend to rely on stats, and more, I guess professional opinions.

 Well...it is more a case of Wentz  falling way back than of Dak jumping him 

Lol, ok however you want to spin it forward is forward.

 

 

Top 10 probably.....and I have said numerous times, Dak ain't that. 

So if a QB isn't in the top10 you cut him and let him walk?  

What dollar figure is he worth 

Years and $ amount?

 

 

 

[The Gipper]

And, by the way, the Cowboys have not drafted a QB in the first round since 1989......when they took Troy Aikman.  How did that work out? 

Well since that first rounder retired they have as many winning seasons as loosing. A pitiful playoff record and 0 Superbowls. Romo was undrafted and was training camp foder for 3.5 years while they experimented with Drew bledsoe, Vinny Testeverde, Quincy Carter, and Drew Henson. In Typical Jerry fashion spend on has been free agents. So if being average since Aikman retired they nailed it.

And Dak's presence hasn't really changed that. 

In my opinion 37 mil for your QB puts every team in a bind.    It does.

It is also the number that counts against the cap.   It is 20% of the team's cap...on a 53 man roster.  Its a huge chunk  of your budget.

??? Isn't that basically what I said, LoL???   So, we agree.

 

He was not Top 10 in my opinion

I tend to rely on stats, and more, I guess professional opinions.  I tend to rely on results.  I don't think Dak significantly elevates his team's performance. 

 Well...it is more a case of Wentz  falling way back than of Dak jumping him 

Lol, ok however you want to spin it forward is forward.

Well, you cannot disagree that Wentz has seriously regressed. 

 

 

Top 10 probably.....and I have said numerous times, Dak ain't that. 

So if a QB isn't in the top10 you cut him and let him walk?  

What dollar figure is he worth 

Years and $ amount?

I said before:   about  $25 mill, which I think would put him on par with other  QBs of his quality.    4 years sounds good.    

Also let me say this:  I acknowledge that Dak is by no means the major problem with that team. 

[Erie Dawg]

He took them to the playoffs 2 out of his first 3 years he played. 

13-3 his first year lost to Rodgers in the playoffs by a field goal. . And threw 4 picks that season.As a rookie. And he hasn't changed that???

97 qbr rating doesn't throw a ton of picks says it's more of a team issue than QB.

25 mil is what the going rate for a ring chasing old war horse QB Is, not a young first contract QB. 

Just so you know Mayfield will get a lot more than that, and he's not on the same level yet.

[SdBacker80]

1 hour ago, Erie Dawg said:

He took them to the playoffs 2 out of his first 3 years he played. 

13-3 his first year lost to Rodgers in the playoffs by a field goal. . And threw 4 picks that season.As a rookie. And he hasn't changed that???

97 qbr rating doesn't throw a ton of picks says it's more of a team issue than QB.

25 mil is what the going rate for a ring chasing old war horse QB Is, not a young first contract QB. 

Just so you know Mayfield will get a lot more than that, and he's not on the same level yet.

Co-Sign this post too.  But Mayfield showed us something last season I’m saying he’s there. 

The alternative is Dalton with a guy like Trey Lance waiting in the wings.  But Dalton apparently to some on here can give you something on par with what Dak gives you...ignorant thought if you watched Cowboy games last season.

 

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Erie Dawg said:

He took them to the playoffs 2 out of his first 3 years he played. 

13-3 his first year lost to Rodgers in the playoffs by a field goal. . And threw 4 picks that season.As a rookie. And he hasn't changed that???

So?  You think that all had to do with a rookie QB? 

97 qbr rating doesn't throw a ton of picks says it's more of a team issue than QB.

The Cowboys being really bad IS a team issue, absolutely.  But this guy has a ceiling to him that says at best:  a first round playoff guy, maybe.  And the "Cowboys being a really bad team" thing will be further excaserbated (sp?)  by giving him 37 mill. 

25 mil is what the going rate for a ring chasing old war horse QB Is, not a young first contract QB. 

A first contract for a young QB is only 3-4 million...its called a rookie deal.   25 mill is what it should be for a second contract for a good, not great QB...

Just so you know Mayfield will get a lot more than that, and he's not on the same level yet.

Baker is better, with more upside, IMO.

 

[The Gipper]

52 minutes ago, SdBacker80 said:

Co-Sign this post too.  But Mayfield showed us something last season I’m saying he’s there. 

The alternative is Dalton with a guy like Trey Lance waiting in the wings.  But Dalton apparently to some on here can give you something on par with what Dak gives you...ignorant thought if you watched Cowboy games last season.

 

Dalton HAS given you on par with what Dak has performed in his career.  But, OK, I would take Dak over Dalton as my permanent starter, now.  But Dalton's role would be only as the "bridge" QB....and that is all I am saying. 

[SdBacker80]

15 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

Dalton HAS given you on par with what Dak has performed in his career.  But, OK, I would take Dak over Dalton as my permanent starter, now.  But Dalton's role would be only as the "bridge" QB....and that is all I am saying. 

And as I mentioned before do you think Good Ole Jerry Jones is gonna just throw away a year.  He brought in McCarthy he’s got Zeke in his prime and Jerry is getting old.  He pressed the go button last year, the year before last and so forth.

Get in Jerry’s head for one second his QB options are Trevor Lawrence or Dak. One isn’t realistic and the other is expensive.

[The Gipper]

47 minutes ago, SdBacker80 said:

And as I mentioned before do you think Good Ole Jerry Jones is gonna just throw away a year.  He brought in McCarthy he’s got Zeke in his prime and Jerry is getting old.  He pressed the go button last year, the year before last and so forth.

Get in Jerry’s head for one second his QB options are Trevor Lawrence or Dak. One isn’t realistic and the other is expensive.

LOL.  Yea.  Certainly discussing any sort of strategy that involves trying to think what Jerry Jones would do is a different exercise from trying to think what what a competent owner/gm would do. 

[The Gipper]

OK, here you go for another round of " What should Yada yada do in the best interests of their team".

Let's look at the Jets.    They seem to have a number of options,  and it seems to me they are probably in serious debate mode over these.  (Note:   Jets now have a new GM and a new HC..and perhaps, maybe they have someone competent trying to make these decisions...unlike before)

Options:

A.   Keep Darnold as their QB.  Use their  #2 and #23 picks  on non QBs  who can hopefully help the team.

B. Keep Darnold as their QB.  Use their #2 pick as trade bait for some other team to take a QB in exchange for  more high draft picks.  Either a couple of more  1st and second rounders this year, or more first rounders next year....and maybe some current players that could help.

C. Try to package Darnold, and their #2 pick in an attempt to trade with Houston for DeShaun Watson.

D. Punt on Darnold.  Try to get the best you can from him in a trade.  Use #2 pick on a new QB. 

E. Keep Darnold,  but still take a QB with the #2 pick to eventually replace him.    That move, naturally would have Darnold demanding a trade anyway. 

F.   Some  other options I have not thought of?

Give your pros and cons on any of these  Options.  

[Tour2ma]

On 2/23/2021 at 2:35 PM, SdBacker80 said:

I like Justin Fields.  But Fields and Trey Lance they will need some time.  They are projects.  That’s probably what’s left at their spot.   But Maybe we give credit to the Cowboys scouting department Dak was selected late and was ROY.  

You are forgetting Kellen Mond... the Dak of 2021.

Not joking... I see a lot of similarities. 'Boys can resign Dalton and groom Mond most of the season.

 

The 'Boys have put themselves in cap hell and resigning Dak to a big deal simply perpetuates that condition. Add in the uncertainty of Dak's horrendous injury and it just doesn't make sense for Jerrah & Co. to sign Dak...

Of course that only increases the likelihood that is exactly what Jonsey will do...

[The Gipper]

My feelings:   

1.  While it would be good to acquire Watson.....it is not certain that Houston will even attempt to trade him   "Watson strategy"  could/should be another thread, but as far as the Jets are concerned,  is getting Watson at the cost of say  Darnold, the #2 pick their #23 pick, plus more  really worth it?   That team is already emasculated in most areas besides QB.  Would they really improve by getting Watson and giving all their other assets that could improve the team in so many other areas?  I say no.   It would be unaffordable for the present and future of one of the worst current teams on the league.

2.  Getting rid of Darnold, nor keeping him and using the #2 pick on another QB  do not seem prudent to me.  Darnold was the #3 pick.  What is to say the #2 pick QB this will be any better than him...particularly if you do not give him any help beside a disgruntled young QB to compete against.  Further, who knows what kind of value you can get for Darnold.  I don't think he is that bad.  He is young and learning and growing,  but he needs help. 

3. Ergo, I say  do either A or B above.  If someone will give you a buttload for the #2 pick, go for it....and hope you have a new GM who can really capable of making the best of the picks.  They need weapons on offense,  protection for the QB,  and help in the DL and DB .    As bad as that team,  they can't do everything they need even with 2 first round picks.  If they could drop down,  get a 1 this year,  a 1 next year,  and another 2d and a 3rd...and maybe more, it would be best for them IMO. 

[The Gipper]

So, this represents a consensus between myself,  Unsympathetic and Tour. 

And, in the other corner are?  : 

 

But, for the sake of hoping the Cowboys mire themselves in suckage for a long time,  I hope the other corner's position prevails.  

[The Gipper]

As promised,  here is a thread on what the Texans Strategy, vis a vis Deshaun Watson, should be.

Note...this is not titled  'Watson's strategy".    Watson has claimed he wants out, and I believe him.  If the DATs  accommodate him, he just has to decide where he would approve a move to.  There is no issue of money involved.  He has a long term deal in place.  If he goes somewhere they have to either accept it, or try to renegotiate  (and why would Watson do that?)

No, the issue is:  What action should the Texans take:

A. Play hardball.  Continue to insist he is not going to be traded, and follow through on that,  even if it means he sits out a year.  Of course, continue to try to  woo and cajole him and try to convince him staying put is his best option.

B. Concede and  try to trade him.   But, to where and for what?    

.....1. To Jets for Darnold and their two first round picks..plus extra

.....2. To Dolphins for Tua and their two first round picks...and extra.

....3. Say to Watson....We will trade you, but only for an acceptable package...and ONLY to an NFC team.  Say to him, if you insist on leaving, we don't want to see your ass except once every 4 years. 

...4. Or just say...we will trade you to the team that gives us the best offer in return regardless of division or conference, as long as we get a ton of picks/young veteran players.  In other words, go Sonny Weaver on them:  "You want Bo Callahan, we want  3 first round picks and a punt returner".  Or something like that.   (except, unlike with Bo...you know you won't be getting a potential bust". 

C.  Something else I have not thought of? 

[Unsympathetic]

Trade demand ripple effect

As to what Texans accept in a trade? Easterby is a shitposter in human form, so I can't see his "logic" for anything.  If you guess correctly, go immediately to Vegas..

[The Gipper]

Just now, Unsympathetic said:

It almost doesn't matter what we "think" will happen.. Texans have no chance of winning until they fire Easterby.

Trade demand ripple effect

As to what they'll accept? Easterby is a shitposter in human form, so "logic" can't be included.

While all that may be true,  (it really NEVER matters what sports fans think)..... we can still talk about it  as if, perhaps there were someone with logic running the show for these teams. 

And, to quote someone:  "We just stand back and let it all be". 

[Unsympathetic]

Some men just want to watch the world burn

I don't think anyone has that kind of space.. although he had a 70% completion rate last season with that roster and that dysfunction.. Watson is unreal.

[SdBacker80]

53 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

So, this represents a consensus between myself,  Unsympathetic and Tour. 

And, in the other corner are?  : 

 

But, for the sake of hoping the Cowboys mire themselves in suckage for a long time,  I hope the other corner's position prevails.  

I’m with you assuming we know the Cowboys find another draftee that will have a 42-27 record and win rookie of the year.

[The Gipper]

7 hours ago, SdBacker80 said:

I’m with you assuming we know the Cowboys find another draftee that will have a 42-27 record and win rookie of the year.

Most accomplished during first season.... on a rookie deal with a great OL and defense.  

Now they are shite.....and now  he wants to be paid  20% of his team's salary cap.

Notes, just for reference:  On a 53 man roster with a  185 million salary cap,  the average salary...i.e if each and every player got 1/53 of the team's salary cap, that would be 3.5 million per player.   But if one guy gets  37 million, that means that  means the other  52 players must share 148 million....or  2.84 million.    Zeke Elliot has a 13.7 million cap hit.   So those 2 players alone could take up  50.7 million of the 185 mill cap hit.  Amari Cooper's cap hit is 22 million.  So, their "triplets"   would take up  72.7  million of their cap number...or  39.3%  of their total salary.  That leaves  112.3 million to be divided between  50 players...or  an average of 2.246 mill per player.  

I don't know.....can a team pay  3 of its players nearly 40% of their entire budget....and still be a good team?

Pay him that and see what his team's record would be in the future.   He would be lucky to achieve the reverse of that record. 

I say it would doom them to a future of  3-6 wins per season for the foreseeable future. 

[SdBacker80]

14 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Most accomplished during first season.... on a rookie deal with a great OL and defense.  

Now they are shite.....and now  he wants to be paid  20% of his team's salary cap.

Notes, just for reference:  On a 53 man roster with a  185 million salary cap,  the average salary...i.e if each and every player got 1/53 of the team's salary cap, that would be 3.5 million per player.   But if one guy gets  37 million, that means that  means the other  52 players must share 148 million....or  2.84 million.    Zeke Elliot has a 13.7 million cap hit.   So those 2 players alone could take up  50.7 million of the 185 mill cap hit.  Amari Cooper's cap hit is 22 million.  So, their "triplets"   would take up  72.7  million of their cap number...or  39.3%  of their total salary.  That leaves  112.3 million to be divided between  50 players...or  an average of 2.246 mill per player.  

I don't know.....can a team pay  3 of its players nearly 40% of their entire budget....and still be a good team?

Pay him that and see what his team's record would be in the future.   He would be lucky to achieve the reverse of that record. 

I say it would doom them to a future of  3-6 wins per season for the foreseeable future. 

Welcome To this era of football.  We are Browns fans we haven’t been here before...I get it. But I think we are here.

Browns will be Baker and Myles and hopefully some wise draft selections under rookie contracts and vets taking discounts. 
 

Lots of cap talk on the forum these days and too many us think we are re-signing guys like Bitonio, Landry, etc- see my vets taking discounts comment if they want to stay.  The beauty of our situation - WE don’t have bad contracts.  Myles is bad if he flops.  You can make a slight case for Hooper.  That’s all!!! The FO right now is measuring Baker figuring out that number is the first domino - the Cowboys didn’t do that but they will fit Dak’s contract in- my guess- my prediction.
 

In regard to Dak, Jerry screwed it up...but what is the alternative?  Your suggestions while an option don’t provide the right answer to the question What Would Jerry Do?
 

And what is exactly wrong with Dak?  You think this is a middle of the road QB...I don’t.