The idea the Dallas Cowboys can’t both sign Dak Prescott to an enormous deal and win the Super Bowl at the same time, is flawed…horribly, horribly flawed.
There’s a popular narrative that’s been running around the NFL regarding the poor track record of teams who pay their signal caller top-of-the-market prices. This topic is especially relevant to Dallas Cowboys fans because Dallas is on the cusp of making their signal-caller, Dak Prescott, just that: a top-of-the-market quarterback.
Citing recent “analytics”, some are making the claim that if the Dallas Cowboys indeed make Dak Prescott one of the highest paid QBs in the NFL, their chances of winning the Super Bowl evaporate. As if playing without a franchise QB somehow makes them a better team <insert condescending stare>. So let’s take a minute to address this argument and show why paying a QB enormous sums of money does not equal certain death for a franchise.
Why the Dallas Cowboys Shouldn’t Pay Dak – The Argument
The argument is, if a team like the Dallas Cowboys devotes too much of their salary cap to their starting quarterback, they won’t have enough money available to invest elsewhere. That means other positions are destined for sub-par play and instead of a well-rounded roster, the team will have a top heavy roster. This all inevitably exposes a team’s weakness and makes success all but impossible.
Sound about right?
This flawed logic is then backed up by some first-grade-level “historical facts” and viola – paying QBs market-level money is a death knell for an NFL franchise.