STOP THE INSANITY RANT---THE CASE OF THE OVERPAID POSITION OF QUARTERBACK

[Bretsky]

Anybody on this universe think fricking

Zak Prescott is worth 35-40 Million a year ?

How about Goff for $33 Million a year ?

Kirk Cousins for 33 Million a year ?

How about Tannehill at 29.5 Million a year ?

How about Jimmy G for 27.5 Million a year ?


What Level of Susan Powers insanity will this hit, or will it just NEVER END ?


As the great Vince Lombardi would say, WHAT IN THE HELL IS GOING ON IN HERE ????????




THE RECIIPE FOR WINNING SUPER BOWL'S seems to be find a QB who will give you a deal (I can only think of Tom Brady who did that for a while) , or win a Super Bowl with a rising QB on his first contract

The Rams are dying because they grossly overpaid Goff when they needed to keep their defense

Jerry Jones is in a no win situation knowing he's going to kill his talent by overpaying a slightl above average QB in Prescott over 35MIL/Yr

But what can he do ?

The Vikings and Titans just got done screwing themselves by grossly overpaying average QB's


Unless you have a truly elite QB, is it really worth paying your QB over 25% of the cap on a roster over 50 players ?


As unpopular as it would be, I can see the case for trading Prescott, and even Rodgers with the goal of drafting an elite QB and surrounding him with superior talent for a 4 year run.

OR

Find a way to get Tom Brady to brainwash your QB to take less money so the funds can be used for other talent......P.S. IT ALSO HELPS TO HAVE HOODY GENIUS and HOODY GENIUS JR running the show

[texaspackerbacker]

I agree, those amounts border on insane. NFL owners are making enough, though, that they can afford it. Of that group mentioned, Dak Prescott is the head of the class, but even he isn't worth it.

Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, maybe Stafford, Brees a couple of years ago, that's about all I can think of that I'd pay top money for. Kyler Murray may get there, but not yet.

edit: I forgot to include Mahomes.

[mraynrand]

How many decent starting QBs are even in the league rn? Once you answer this question, you'll realize why teams overpay.

[Joemailman]

The problem is the lack of quality backup QB's on most teams. At other positions, teams let high-priced veterans leave all the time to be replaced by younger, lower paid talent. But if Jerruh doesn't sign Prescott, does he have a chance to win with Cooper Rush? Few teams have a #2 they feel they can win with.

[Bretsky]

How many decent starting QBs are even in the league rn? Once you answer this question, you'll realize why teams overpay.

How many decent QB's win Super Bowls ?

[texaspackerbacker]

There's a consistent whine in here about how close the Packer are to the cap and what a struggle it is. I wonder how the Cowboys are doing it - Dak now, Zeke previously, Cooper, a high price O Line, 2 new fairly recent all pro D Linemen, DeMarcus Lawrence who makes a ton of money, Jaylon Smith, etc. They are subject to the same limits that we are.

[Bretsky]

The problem is the lack of quality backup QB's on most teams. At other positions, teams let high-priced veterans leave all the time to be replaced by younger, lower paid talent. But if Jerruh doesn't sign Prescott, does he have a chance to win with Cooper Rush? Few teams have a #2 they feel they can win with.



Dallas has a pretty decent surrounding cast.

Trade Prescott and draft a top QB and keep the talent

[call_me_ishmael]

Dallas has a pretty decent surrounding cast.

Trade Prescott and draft a top QB and keep the talent

This is 100% what I would do. I think paying QBs is overrated these days given the success of recent high draft picks. No way would I pay mediocre Dak that money.

[QBME]

The mills of the gods grind slowly, but grind finely.
Slowly but surely the owners will come to realize that the big dollars need to be invested in General Managers, Coaching Staff’s, and especially Scouting Staffs. There is no cap on those investments. Find the right combination on that triumvirate and you can win no matter the player salary cap.
Kinda like Billy Beane.
Sure you can have a really, really good player, maybe even great, but what price?? Football is the ultimate team game. As soon as everybody is equal in all aspects, the sooner the team goal is achieved.

See: Vince Lombardi

[Bretsky]

This is 100% what I would do. I think paying QBs is overrated these days given the success of recent high draft picks. No way would I pay mediocre Dak that money.


Slightly above average QB's should not be paid above the elite's.

But the QB mentality seems to be WHO'S NEXT

Each new constract beats the one before.

I'd have traded Dak ; I think they could find a sucker to give them a 1st.

And trade up for a top QB.

[mraynrand]

How many decent QB's win Super Bowls ?

one each year

[Bretsky]

one each year

Decent QB's are the average yoyo's that are getting all this money.

Lately elite QB's win Super Bowls are very good to great QB's who are cheap and on their first contract

[smuggler]

It's not the sum of money itself that matters. It's all about the economic use of the salary cap. Giant totals are going to happen. But, I gotta say, I would not be putting 18% of my salary cap into Dak Prescott. He's a good player, but the thing that makes Dallas a formidable team is their talented roster, not Dak. That's why they should have cut bait with him north of 15%.

[bobblehead]

How many decent starting QBs are even in the league rn? Once you answer this question, you'll realize why teams overpay.

But his point, and mine for past 18 months or so, is that paying a merely "decent" QB like he is a game changer kills your cap and leaves you unable to retain/obtain talent.

Give me Blake Bortles for practically free. Find me any number of game managers who do the basics. Combine them with a monster run game and defense. Unless you have a young Rodgers or Maholms paying a QB 30M a year is insane.

Edit: Saints went 5-0 without Brees. They found a good game manager they weren't paying much and won.

[mraynrand]

But his point, and mine for past 18 months or so, is that paying a merely "decent" QB like he is a game changer kills your cap and leaves you unable to retain/obtain talent.

Give me Blake Bortles for practically free. Find me any number of game managers who do the basics. Combine them with a monster run game and defense. Unless you have a young Rodgers or Maholms paying a QB 30M a year is insane.

Edit: Saints went 5-0 without Brees. They found a good game manager they weren't paying much and won.

Fair enough, but here's what he got paid:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/teddy-bridgewater-14441/

[red]

i don't understand the thinking behind why every starting player at a position should be making around the same money

the brady's, brees' , mahomes and a-rods of the league are the top players out there, they are the MVPs of the leagues. they should be making the most.

when a-rod gets 30 million a year, that shouldn't mean that the going rate for starting QB's is now 30 million. it means that elite QBs are worth 30 million

same goes for every position. when a guy has a massive year and gets paid, that shouldn't mean the entire pay scale for that position goes up

i just don't understand how the meatheads that run the teams can think that is a-rod is worth 30 million, then kirk cousins is also worth that much because he also plays that position

if team managers were actually smart they would be trading guys like rodgers and brees for tons of picks all the time

[pbmax]

How many decent starting QBs are even in the league rn? Once you answer this question, you'll realize why teams overpay.

You'd think these days people would recognize a market shortage when they see one.

The better question is why do owners keep hiring coaches who insist the only way to win is to find the next Carson Palmer or Peyton Manning in the draft?

You answer that question, the shortage is greatly reduced.

[pbmax]

But his point, and mine for past 18 months or so, is that paying a merely "decent" QB like he is a game changer kills your cap and leaves you unable to retain/obtain talent.

Give me Blake Bortles for practically free. Find me any number of game managers who do the basics. Combine them with a monster run game and defense. Unless you have a young Rodgers or Maholms paying a QB 30M a year is insane.

Edit: Saints went 5-0 without Brees. They found a good game manager they weren't paying much and won.

The current evidence seems to suggest no one agrees with you yet. At least, not with enough certainty to sign and start Bortles as Plan A.

Same reason why teams are so reluctant to run a non pro style offense are in play for why they don't sign lesser QBs and build around other aspects of the team. The play of the QB in all its myth and hype literally determines what kind of reaction fans have and the coverage you get. Unless you have the 85 Bears defense, its hard to convince anyone you are on the right path. Bortles had the one year and then the wheels came off and the team was dismantled. Even Coughlin couldn't sustain the approach.

That is why GM fear a QB like that as Plan A. If the team doesn't win consistently, people will become convinced that your approach to QBs is boneheaded and you will be appearing from 5-5:15 AM on KDKA explaining to Boner and the Man why that wasn't a prevent defense last Sunday on TV.

Unless you are the Giants. The Giants are determined to find another Eli and win 2 are Super Bowls. They will probably do it too.

[Bretsky]

But his point, and mine for past 18 months or so, is that paying a merely "decent" QB like he is a game changer kills your cap and leaves you unable to retain/obtain talent.

Give me Blake Bortles for practically free. Find me any number of game managers who do the basics. Combine them with a monster run game and defense. Unless you have a young Rodgers or Maholms paying a QB 30M a year is insane.

Edit: Saints went 5-0 without Brees. They found a good game manager they weren't paying much and won.



:bclap::bclap::bclap::bclap::bclap:

[red]

The current evidence seems to suggest no one agrees with you yet. At least, not with enough certainty to sign and start Bortles as Plan A.

Same reason why teams are so reluctant to run a non pro style offense are in play for why they don't sign lesser QBs and build around other aspects of the team. The play of the QB in all its myth and hype literally determines what kind of reaction fans have and the coverage you get. Unless you have the 85 Bears defense, its hard to convince anyone you are on the right path. Bortles had the one year and then the wheels came off and the team was dismantled. Even Coughlin couldn't sustain the approach.

That is why GM fear a QB like that as Plan A. If the team doesn't win consistently, people will become convinced that your approach to QBs is boneheaded and you will be appearing from 5-5:15 AM on KDKA explaining to Boner and the Man why that wasn't a prevent defense last Sunday on TV.

Unless you are the Giants. The Giants are determined to find another Eli and win 2 are Super Bowls. They will probably do it too.

the problem is, if you sign bortles to be a your starting QB, is he gonna then demand 20-25 million a year?

[smuggler]

Does Bottles really want to start? If you're the only team offering him $4 mil a year, and he wants to start, I don't think you really run into trouble.

Not that I'm an advocate of this plan. Just saying.

[mraynrand]

If the team doesn't win consistently, people will become convinced that your approach to QBs is boneheaded and you will be appearing from 5-5:15 AM on KDKA explaining to Boner and the Man why that wasn't a prevent defense last Sunday on TV.

I heard that APB needs a second job.

[bobblehead]

one each year

Except the Ravens model, which refuses to pay a QB a ton has won 2 with Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer. Many avg. to below avg QBs win Owls.

[bobblehead]

Fair enough, but here's what he got paid:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/teddy-bridgewater-14441/

Talk to me when they finish 9-7 next year.

[bobblehead]

The current evidence seems to suggest no one agrees with you yet. At least, not with enough certainty to sign and start Bortles as Plan A.


I didn't read past this point, but it doesn't matter who agrees with me. Many thought TT should bring back Brent and let ARod rot. Many people think a lot of wrong things. Not saying I'm always right, but I think my batting average is pretty good compared to the rest of the league.

[bobblehead]

The current evidence seems to suggest no one agrees with you yet. At least, not with enough certainty to sign and start Bortles as Plan A.

Same reason why teams are so reluctant to run a non pro style offense are in play for why they don't sign lesser QBs and build around other aspects of the team. The play of the QB in all its myth and hype literally determines what kind of reaction fans have and the coverage you get. Unless you have the 85 Bears defense, its hard to convince anyone you are on the right path. Bortles had the one year and then the wheels came off and the team was dismantled. Even Coughlin couldn't sustain the approach.

That is why GM fear a QB like that as Plan A. If the team doesn't win consistently, people will become convinced that your approach to QBs is boneheaded and you will be appearing from 5-5:15 AM on KDKA explaining to Boner and the Man why that wasn't a prevent defense last Sunday on TV.

Unless you are the Giants. The Giants are determined to find another Eli and win 2 are Super Bowls. They will probably do it too.

Now reading the entire post I ask you. If the Titans got Blake on a 3 year deal at $1 million a year with an $8 million signing bonus and a clause saying its forfeit if he ever holds out but still isn't released from contract...would that be better than Ryan Tannehill at 31 years old and 29.5 million a year. Tell me honestly, which way would you rather go?

[mraynrand]

Except the Ravens model, which refuses to pay a QB a ton has won 2 with Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer. Many avg. to below avg QBs win Owls.

Yeah, not buying it. Even most so called ‘bad’ QBs played pretty damn well the year they won Superbowls or at least down the stretch. Sure it helps if you can target your great QB and get the SBs in during a rookie contract. But targeting that way sometimes requires luck (Seattle) or long term planning (KC). No NFL team in the past several decades is really thinking hey we can win with a crappy QB. Except maybe Chicago. And you can’t win with an average playing QB through 3 and often 4 playoff games unless you have a pretty dominant defense. Even then it’s not certain.

[bobblehead]

the problem is, if you sign bortles to be a your starting QB, is he gonna then demand 20-25 million a year?

See above post. You structure it to lock him down for a bit.

[bobblehead]

Yeah, not buying it. Even most so called ‘bad’ QBs played pretty damn well the year they won Superbowls or at least down the stretch. Sure it helps if you can target your great QB and get the SBs in during a rookie contract. But targeting that way sometimes requires luck (Seattle) or long term planning (KC). No NFL team in the past several decades is really thinking hey we can win with a crappy QB. Except maybe Chicago. And you can’t win with an average playing QB through 3 and often 4 playoff games unless you have a pretty dominant defense. Even then it’s not certain.

Ryan Tannehill got run out of Miami on the midnight rail. He just got paid 62 million fully guaranteed. That is simply insane. Jimmy G. is an average to below average QB WHO GOT PAID and they still were a whisper from winning an Owl...and he didn't play well down the stretch. Brady has won several Owls based on the strength of their defense. Eli completed a mountain of miracle throws and is the luckiest human to ever win 2 Owls...he is not a great QB...I would call him an average starter.

[pbmax]

Except the Ravens model, which refuses to pay a QB a ton has won 2 with Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer. Many avg. to below avg QBs win Owls.

Well, do you remember how much of a hurry they were in to dump Dilfer? To pay Elvis Grbac? To draft Kyle Boller in the first?

They actually paid Flacco elite money at the time after his Owl.

So yes, they went the modest QB route once unwillingly (Dilfer was only functional option), once by overestimating the peak (Flacco) and once by choice and design (Jackson).

Give the Ravens (and Ozzie) credit though. They did embrace Dilfer for a time. They worked hard to adjust the offense for Flacco's strengths and limitations and they never stopped trying to improve through means other than rebuilding. They are ahead of the curve in many respects.

But even they have taken the obvious path just once by design.

[pbmax]

Now reading the entire post I ask you. If the Titans got Blake on a 3 year deal at $1 million a year with an $8 million signing bonus and a clause saying its forfeit if he ever holds out but still isn't released from contract...would that be better than Ryan Tannehill at 31 years old and 29.5 million a year. Tell me honestly, which way would you rather go?

Fair question. But I am not sure I know Tannehill's upside. I still remember the injured guy in Miami and I did not watch him in Tenn. I suspect he and Blake are close but Tannelhill did not play that way last year in relief. He seems like he was lights out.

[bobblehead]

Ryan Tannehill best season:

2015 16 364 587 62.0 4210 7.17 24 12 88.8

Bortles:

2015 16 355 606 58.6 4428 7.31 35 18 88.2

bortles is only 27. Tannehill re surged with a team that was much smarter than Miami and had a great run game. Put Bortles in same scenario and I bet you get a similar result.

[bobblehead]

GMs worry too much what the fan base says. Could you imagine if Carolina had signed bortles to a modest contract and stated "he is our guy". Yet the media hype is around Teddy so he gets the gig and the fans are placated. BTW, Sean Peyton has said Taysom Hill is his QB of the future.

[Bretsky]

Ryan Tannehill best season:

2015 16 364 587 62.0 4210 7.17 24 12 88.8

Bortles:

2015 16 355 606 58.6 4428 7.31 35 18 88.2

bortles is only 27. Tannehill re surged with a team that was much smarter than Miami and had a great run game. Put Bortles in same scenario and I bet you get a similar result.



Tannehill's upside may be Kirk Cousins; are those guys 30 Million Dollars a year QB's ? I don't think so

[call_me_ishmael]

Except the Ravens model, which refuses to pay a QB a ton has won 2 with Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer. Many avg. to below avg QBs win Owls.

Ravens made Joe Flacco highest paid player in the NFL though after the super bowl.

[Bretsky]

Ravens made Joe Flacco highest paid player in the NFL though after the super bowl.

Yup, and they definitely regretted that move.

It will be interesting to see how many of these teams win a SB in the next ten years who have QB's who have ruined their cap.

It'll be harder for KC if Mahommes is getting paid 40 MIL as opposed to his rookie deal.

[pbmax]

GMs worry too much what the fan base says. Could you imagine if Carolina had signed bortles to a modest contract and stated "he is our guy". Yet the media hype is around Teddy so he gets the gig and the fans are placated. BTW, Sean Peyton has said Taysom Hill is his QB of the future.

GMs don't worry directly about fans. Owners do.

[pbmax]

Ryan Tannehill best season:

2015 16 364 587 62.0 4210 7.17 24 12 88.8

Bortles:

2015 16 355 606 58.6 4428 7.31 35 18 88.2

bortles is only 27. Tannehill re surged with a team that was much smarter than Miami and had a great run game. Put Bortles in same scenario and I bet you get a similar result.

Let's stipulate that Tannehill's best season is 2015 (I'd say 2014 but nevermind). His passer rating in 2015 was 88.8. His QBR was 46.3. With dumb Miami, he has surpassed that PR three times (2014, 2016, 2018). He has surpassed that 2015 QBR four times (2012, 13, 14, 16)

Bortles has surpassed his PR and QBR from 2015 once (QBR in 2017).

If we have judged their timeline correctly, looks like Tannehill's ceiling is better and that is ignoring last year's results.

I don't think you can judge Bortles the more valuable QB based on passing results. He is younger, bigger and did not miss a year with a bad injury. If you sign him, its because of cost, age and injury.

But here is where Tannehill earned his monster deal: 2019 relief appearances



Year G GS Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Y/A Rate
2019* 12 10 201 286 70.3 2742 22 6 9.6 117.5


Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com (https://www.sports-reference.com/sharing.html?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool): View Original Table (https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TannRy00.htm?sr&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool#passing)
Generated 3/29/2020.

Jake Jortles has never come close to that. Maybe it was a smarter Tennessee. But Tannehill did it. Bortles did not.

[bobblehead]

Ravens made Joe Flacco highest paid player in the NFL though after the super bowl.

and then the roster suffered, and then they moved on. Will be very interesting to see what happens with Jackson down the line.

[bobblehead]

Yup, and they definitely regretted that move.

It will be interesting to see how many of these teams win a SB in the next ten years who have QB's who have ruined their cap.

It'll be harder for KC if Mahommes is getting paid 40 MIL as opposed to his rookie deal.

They just had to franchise Chris Jones. If they lose him its a huge step back for that defense.

[bobblehead]

I don't think you can judge Bortles the more valuable QB based on passing results. He is younger, bigger and did not miss a year with a bad injury. If you sign him, its because of cost, age and injury.
.

And I am not judging him as more valuable. Maybe not even AS valuable. Simply saying if I were a GM and I could pay bortles the $1 million he got last year, or I could pay Tannehill the 29.5 million with $62 million fully guaranteed...well, its not even a choice. Offer Blake that 3 year deal with team protections against a holdout and sign 2 marquee defensive studs, or OL with the change. Hell, keep Conklin.

[bobblehead]

Jake Jortles has never come close to that. Maybe it was a smarter Tennessee. But Tannehill did it. Bortles did not.

And again, he was in a way superior position. You want to take a 10 game starters sample vs. an 8 year career and pay $62 million fully guaranteed. I don't.

[pbmax]

And again, he was in a way superior position. You want to take a 10 game starters sample vs. an 8 year career and pay $62 million fully guaranteed. I don't.

I am inclined to agree with you about the approach. Unless you are convinced he is also a game changer.

Frankly, if I am Tennessee, I am more worried about his injuries than the cost. According to OTC, after two years they can get away almost scott free.

[run pMc]

I don't think of Bortles or Tannehill as guys who can carry a team, so $30M is too rich IMO. TEN didn't appear to have many other good options so if they keep Tannehill and Henry and can get out of those contracts in 2 years that will be good. I think Henry will wear down and Tannehill will wear out his welcome in TEN.

If I was an owner, I'd be very reluctant to exceed $25M annually for a QB that was basically a game manager/caretaker type; once you get to $30M you expect that player to be good enough to carry a team like Rodgers, Brees, et al. have in past seasons.

[pbmax]

I don't think of Bortles or Tannehill as guys who can carry a team, so $30M is too rich IMO. TEN didn't appear to have many other good options so if they keep Tannehill and Henry and can get out of those contracts in 2 years that will be good. I think Henry will wear down and Tannehill will wear out his welcome in TEN.

If I was an owner, I'd be very reluctant to exceed $25M annually for a QB that was basically a game manager/caretaker type; once you get to $30M you expect that player to be good enough to carry a team like Rodgers, Brees, et al. have in past seasons.

It sounds insane, but a good long test drive of a QB you know works in the system for $60 mil is probably not nuts.

The yearly seems high even if you fob off some of the bonus/guarantees into the third year of the cap hit, but its not gong to cause them to have to rebuild if it doesn't work out. Part of the reason his guarantee is so high is because its a two year starting gig only.

Stafford's deal was more of a handicap because of the length.

The only irony is that the Jags, who had Bortles, and Tennessee, who could have had him, are two franchises that were building offenses that could have worked with modest QBs.

[bobblehead]

I don't think of Bortles or Tannehill as guys who can carry a team,

you are very much missing my point...or maybe just making your own point that is sort of off the rez a touch. I 1000% agree neither of these guys can carry a team. Neither can 28 of the 32 starters in this league.

The thread, and the point is about not paying one of the other 28 starters and putting yourself in cap hell and "hoping" Dak Prescott can carry a team. No way do I make Dak highest paid QB in the game. I would be looking to trade him ASAP.

right now, as a GM I pay Maholmes, and Brees top deals. Watson, Jackson, Wilson and Rodgers right behind them. Watson and Jackson need to show it for a year or 2 more. Watson desperately needs to escape O'Brien. Rodgers may be off the list this season if year 2 under Flower doesn't improve. I was hoping to sign one offensive weapon for him though as getting instant upgrade from the draft is tough at WR or TE.

[Bretsky]

you are very much missing my point...or maybe just making your own point that is sort of off the rez a touch. I 1000% agree neither of these guys can carry a team. Neither can 28 of the 32 starters in this league.

The thread, and the point is about not paying one of the other 28 starters and putting yourself in cap hell and "hoping" Dak Prescott can carry a team. No way do I make Dak highest paid QB in the game. I would be looking to trade him ASAP.

right now, as a GM I pay Maholmes, and Brees top deals. Watson, Jackson, Wilson and Rodgers right behind them. Watson and Jackson need to show it for a year or 2 more. Watson desperately needs to escape O'Brien. Rodgers may be off the list this season if year 2 under Flower doesn't improve. I was hoping to sign one offensive weapon for him though as getting instant upgrade from the draft is tough at WR or TE.


You get my exact point. What is this madness with giving Elite Money to Non Elite QB's ???????????/

[run pMc]

you are very much missing my point...or maybe just making your own point that is sort of off the rez a touch.

More or less. I just don't see paying elite money for a QB who can't carry your team or lift your offense. I see Bortles and Tannehill more as game managers than game changers.

Thing with participating in FA is you will overpay for production. FA is where (with few exceptions) you pay elite money for average production.

[pbmax]

More or less. I just don't see paying elite money for a QB who can't carry your team or lift your offense. I see Bortles and Tannehill more as game managers than game changers.

Thing with participating in FA is you will overpay for production. FA is where (with few exceptions) you pay elite money for average production.

But carry your offense is a broad and not well defined category. Its like saying you should draft difference makers. OK Cleft Crusty.

Bobble's distinction isn't better. So there are 4 qualifying QBs out of 28 or so regular staters. So how so you break down the rest? They aren't all going to play for the veteran minimum. Mike "Freaking" Glennon got $16 million.

Do you think Bortles improves, diminishes or keeps the Titans the same offense?

What they are really paying for is the marginal difference between Bortles and Tannehill. How much that is will determine whether this investment makes sense. Overall, I have my doubts. But he looked lights out last year. I get it.

[Cleft Crusty]

But carry your offense is a broad and not well defined category. Its like saying you should draft difference makers. OK Cleft Crusty.

Someone mentioned my name. But that's not my view. It may however be the view of my doppelgänger from JSO, GBG and now the Packers' 'historian'

Please remember that it is very difficult for me to counter any lies told about me at this time - I am residing in a triple-layered, plastic-coated room with negative air pressure to guard against the coronavirus. My doctor has told me that I have enough co-morbidities to kill at least 8 old people.

[pbmax]

Someone mentioned my name. But that's not my view. It may however be the view of my doppelgänger from JSO, GBG and now the Packers' 'historian'

Please remember that it is very difficult for me to counter any lies told about me at this time - I am residing in a triple-layered, plastic-coated room with negative air pressure to guard against the coronavirus. My doctor has told me that I have enough co-morbidities to kill at least 8 old people.

Apologies Cleft. Perhaps it was Cliff that used to prattle on about red and blue players.

[texaspackerbacker]

you are very much missing my point...or maybe just making your own point that is sort of off the rez a touch. I 1000% agree neither of these guys can carry a team. Neither can 28 of the 32 starters in this league.

The thread, and the point is about not paying one of the other 28 starters and putting yourself in cap hell and "hoping" Dak Prescott can carry a team. No way do I make Dak highest paid QB in the game. I would be looking to trade him ASAP.

right now, as a GM I pay Maholmes, and Brees top deals. Watson, Jackson, Wilson and Rodgers right behind them. Watson and Jackson need to show it for a year or 2 more. Watson desperately needs to escape O'Brien. Rodgers may be off the list this season if year 2 under Flower doesn't improve. I was hoping to sign one offensive weapon for him though as getting instant upgrade from the draft is tough at WR or TE.

Arguably, the insanity is paying athletes in general ridiculous amounts of money.

It's supply and demand, though, and that pretty much includes QBs. These guys get paid more than RBs in large part because they last longer.

Dak Prescott, as I see it, is head and shoulders above the bad examples cited earlier - Tannehill, Cousins, etc. He does not deserve to be at the very top, though. I agree with what you said about those top guys with one exception: Brees at this point is fading a bit, and his whole career, he has never been as good as Aaron Rodgers. When I said Rodgers, Wilson, and Mahomes earlier, I forgot about Jackson and Watson, although Jackson in particular may be one serious injury away from a major drop-off. I'd be more sure of greatness for Rodgers 3-5 years from now than for one of those young running QBs. And Brees will be long gone by then.