If Your Super Bowl Window Closes When You Pay Your Superstar QB Big Bucks, Why Do You Pay Your Superstar QB Big Bucks?

[Ya Digg?]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I think someone ought to tell Reid and Mahomes their Superbowl Window is closed, because they both appear to have their heads stuck out the window as they drive along, with their ears flapping, enjoying the breeze.

 

The Saints hired Brees in for the big bucks and won a superbowl, and have been a very successful team for a long time though they never went back.  I thought they were "gone" in 2014-2016, which brings up a point - it wasn't just Brees at that point, they had spent the big bucks on a bunch of players who didn't deliver as promised (Jairus who?).

 

So I think when a team's window closes, it's not just on the QB's contract, it's the rest of the roster.

I was coming on here just to say this-why is Buffalo’s window already closed but KC’s isn’t? Look at all of the contracts they have, but that doesn’t seem to matter to some people. The Bills will be in the mix for ad long as they have Allen. They might not always be the favorite every year, but they will be in the mix 

[Nitro]

It takes a good GM to get the most out of the draft and rotate older vets out and replace them with lower priced FA.   Over paying a QB will hamper the long term sucess of an organization.   Get creative in financing the contract.  KC and Buffalo windows are still wide open.   

[JustHewIt]

QB is what matters.  There's a reason why most almost all of the last 22 Super Bowls have featured one of Brady, Manning, Big Ben and Mahomes.  If you want to try and luck into one of the once-every-ten-years Super Bowls that don't follow this trend (Flacco vs. Kaep!  Johnson vs. Gannon!) then don't pay your top 5 QB.  Otherwise, pay your top 5 QB.

[Thrivefourfive]

Because owners like money. And a big name franchise quarterback is their ticket. If the team wins, so be it. 

26 minutes ago, Ya Digg? said:

I was coming on here just to say this-why is Buffalo’s window already closed but KC’s isn’t? Look at all of the contracts they have, but that doesn’t seem to matter to some people. The Bills will be in the mix for ad long as they have Allen. They might not always be the favorite every year, but they will be in the mix 

Because the Chiefs get a discount on criminals. So they get more talent than the market value. 

[billsfan714]

Well one thing about sports contracts is somebody is going to beat them in the very near future.   Personally glad we have Josh locked up for 6 years.  It's what fascinates me about being a GM.   Balancing who is worth the money, when its time to let someone go, who to replace with a rookie.  Looking years into the future, long term outlook.

[Big Turk]

It doesn't. /Thread

[prissythecat]

2 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said:

The problem is that of the 5 QBs you mention, only Wilson is worth the money.  Goff & Wentz are grossly overpaid & the teams that signed them to the deals were glad to get rid of them & put the rest of the contract on another team's payroll.  Cousins has always looked better on a stat sheet than on the field, he's just an average QB if you watch him instead of looking at a piece of paper, Ryan is overpaid based on past accomplishments and is too old & worn down to be a top 10 salaried player.  

 

The big problem is teams are paying non-superstars superstar money.  Of the current group of young QBs, Mahomes, Allen, Burrow & possibly Herbert are worth paying.  Anyone else will be overpaid.  Just look at Baltimore & Cleveland who enter this offseason with young QBs on their 5th year option.  Cleveland has no idea what to do with Baker Mayfield who so far has had an up & down career.  If 2022 is up, they have to pay him.  If 2022 is down they have a giant hole at QB if they decide to move on.  Baltimore is in an even worse spot.  Lamar Jackson is good enough that they have to pay him eventually.  The problem is he has regressed since his outstanding sophomore season. Because he is so popular among certain media & fans, it would be a PR nightmare not to pay him big bucks.  He's worth it if you get the 2019 version of Lamar.  If you get the injured & sick 2021 version you're throwing big bucks down the drain while killing your salary cap at the same time.  

 

I totally agree with opening up the checkbook for the elite QB.   I was trying to point out that many teams are unfortunately paying way too much for the QB position relative to the talent level and as a result cannot field a truly competitive team.  I would argue that Russell Wilson has fallen into the Joe Flacco category as Seattle has overinvested in the QB position and unfortunately Wilson is not good enough to get his team back to the promised land without a legion of Boom or the threat of Marshawn Lynch running over everyone. 

Edited January 29, 2022 by prissythecat
sentence edit

[bigK14094]

5 hours ago, st pete gogolak said:

This is a semi-serious thread BUT so many posters in numerous threads have lamented the fact that the Bills' Super Bowl window will close rapidly once Allen's new contact kicks in, it had me wondering if there is any analytics behind that assumption.  I know NE was successful for a long time because Brady was willing to be grossly underpaid.  Seattle hasn't done all that much after paying Wilson.  On the other hand, GB has posted great regular season records (but have choked in the playoffs) with Rogers being paid a ton.  

 

When a QB plays like Mahones or Allen, you really don't have an option other than to pay them, do you?  Can you imagine KC or BUFF putting Mahones or Allen on the trade block?  Inconceivable.  

 

In the AFC, in a couple of years, KC, BUFF, LA, CIN and maybe BALT will ALL be operating with QB's making big bucks.  Does that mean some team without those QB's will be in the Super Bowl?

 

Just curious what people think about the topic.

Stafford has only 22 left on his c ontract.  The Rams will have to make a big decision.

[Buffarukus]

not sure how the nfl can.  stop the billionaire owners from simply saying hey sign for less and heres a few checks for the rest from some of my "friends". alot of players want big city teams for the endorsement possibilities. 

 

whats the difference really and whos watching the books that close cause thats what i think kraft was doing with brady "taking less".

[Doc Brown]

You can do it both ways but neither way is easy.  You can afford more of a supporting cast for a young QB on his rookie contract but that QB is going to experience some growing pains that you're going to have to live with.  Once you give your franchise QB a huge second contract then you better draft and develop well, make sure you have top notch coaching, and make tough free agency decisions.  The sample size really isn't big enough to see which way is harder to win a Super Bowl with because of the Pats cheating ways in paying Brady under the table.  We should know a lot more in ten years.

 

The biggest mistakes are giving who you think is a franchise qb that big second (or third) contract.  Goff, Wentz, Flacco, and Ryan come to mind.  Then you have teams that overpaid for a QB who always comes up small in the clutch (Tannehill, Cousins).  

Edited January 29, 2022 by Doc Brown

[Hebert19]

6 hours ago, Slack_in_MA said:

Doesn't it come down to the QB's willingness to restructure to free up $ for the rest of the roster, a la what Brady did multiple times (I think)?

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-brady-contract-discounts-patriots-bargain-2018-7

This.   And this is also why they only signed him to 6 years to start.  We will restructure and extend after next season.  There are ways around it for smart organizations 

[John from Riverside]

5 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

there is not question you pay a top3 QB whatever it takes on his second contract.

 

If Josh goes, this team is done.  He IS the team.  The only irreplaceable player.  If he was gone....another team would have paid him the same money or more.

 

Acknowledging this obvious truth, the OP still asks the question. 

 

Why even ask? There is no logical alternative.

 

 

I realize it’s a big number is a huge number but we did get in on the ground floor of Josh Allen one thing here that I haven’t seen in a way talk about this contract can be reworked as needed in order to free up Space as we go along along with the Going up so why the concern

[Mr. WEO]

15 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

I realize it’s a big number is a huge number but we did get in on the ground floor of Josh Allen one thing here that I haven’t seen in a way talk about this contract can be reworked as needed in order to free up Space as we go along along with the Going up so why the concern

 

yeah this thread makes no sense at all.

[st pete gogolak]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

yeah this thread makes no sense at all.

I started the thread in response to many, many posters whining about our window closing because of Josh's contract.  I was curious what people thought about big second contracts to QB's in general, not specific to Josh.  I agree.  If you have a top 5 (top 10?) QB, you pay him and it is up to the GM to draft well and look for bargain FA's.  

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, st pete gogolak said:

I started the thread in response to many, many posters whining about our window closing because of Josh's contract.  I was curious what people thought about big second contracts to QB's in general, not specific to Josh.  I agree.  If you have a top 5 (top 10?) QB, you pay him and it is up to the GM to draft well and look for bargain FA's.  

 

 

I missed the many many posters who whined about Josh's contract.

 

4 years and maybe a SB or 2 and the new cap limit will make his contract a massive bargain.  with plenty of monies to pay everyone worth paying/keeping.

 

It's how this works. 

[Big Blitz]

Too small a sample size since there are so few future hall of Fame QBs that make that kind of money - and since that team probably recently won a SB maybe management just doesn't want to break bank - goal was already accomplished.

 

Everyone got fat drunk and lazy and relied on the QB

 

I'm just done with this argument 

 

25 teams would take Allen and his contract right now over what they have.  

[Real McClappy]

6 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

We saw what it's like when you don't have a QB who commands big bucks.   We called it "the drought."   

 

There is no choice.  When you have Josh Allen, you pay him and you manage the rest of your roster as well as you can.  

 

QB is the only position that matters.  You spend whatever it takes to get and keep a star QB.   It's a fool's game to save money on a QB so that you can spend it on positions that, relatively speaking, don't matter. 

Agreed, and a good GM that drafts impact players on rookie contract deals is absolutely huge once the big QB $ kicks in.

[Bing Bong]

7 hours ago, TBBills said:

 It's lie started by people that don't know how to manipulate the cap properly. 

If I was you I would stop worrying about what idiots like that say. Beane already had said when Josh signed the contract was more team friendly then most would see.

Rams have been in "cap hell" for 4 straight years.

 

I don't even bother to keep up with a cap situation, if a GM/ or whoever's paying attention knows what they're doing I figure they can wheel and deal a competitive team. 

 

Besides Pat Mahomes' or Dak Prescott's teams don't look too much different before and after

[Scott7975]

It doesnt close if your team drafts well.  If you dont pay them big bucks it closes for sure because the QB would leave.

6 minutes ago, FormerlyPT5P said:

Rams have been in "cap hell" for 4 straight years.

 

I don't even bother to keep up with a cap situation, if a GM/ or whoever's paying attention knows what they're doing I figure they can wheel and deal a competitive team. 

 

Besides Pat Mahomes' or Dak Prescott's teams don't look too much different before and after

 

Mahomes contract hasnt hit them yet.

[buffaloboyinATL]

Because without a superstar QB, there is no window in the first place.