The Expensive QB Myth

Discussion in 'New York Jets' started by MaximusD163, Jan 22, 2021.

  1. chandler

    chandler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    1,308
    I don’t think the point was the team becomes horrible. I think it was the team then needed to make sacrifices elsewhere and went backward

    also from a perspective of “system reliability” this is like a single point of failure. consider the consequences if he gets hurt either knocked out for a few games or knocked down to mortal status. The team is then playing w essentially a lesser remaining team — 85%: of cap. We saw that to a lesser extent when trumaine sucked or bell or Mosley was out. It’s a big handicap.

    There’s no way to sugarcoat it. It’s a hugely important and expensive decision. And again I’m not against it so much as undecided.
    My conspiracy theory is Texans now have buyers remorse not because of his talent but because of the handicap in building a team. You need to draft exceptionally well and in fact that much better than your SB competiton to compensate for the talent gap that results from less money for the rest of the team
     
  2. MaximusD163

    MaximusD163 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    5,077
    First of all, it’s a projection for the future salary cap years.

    But keep in mind so much of the cap numbers for players fluctuates year to year, and Watson’s cap hits can be changed easily such that it resembles other players. Teams like Denver and New England carried dead money after Manning and Brady left, which lowers their percentage in those winning years.
     
    ColoradoContrails likes this.
  3. Footballgod214

    Footballgod214 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2005
    Messages:
    15,165
    Likes Received:
    6,022
    Gotta go to a mtg in a min so these are not huge point I'm trying to push, just some random thoughts.

    First, Thank you Max for putting this together.

    Second, in '09/'10 WE had a hot team with a QB on a rookie contract, went to b2b AFCCGs, WE were the hot team attracting FAs, and the wheels fell off, even with a rookie QB contract. So simply having a rookie QB with tons of cap space is not necessarily a panacea.

    Third, if we take Watson then OUR remaining cap space (and draft picks) will be similar to playoff teams who have a good foundation, already have a good, talented team. We will be playing major 'catch up' w/o any additional resources over those 'already good team'. It's hard enough just trying to keep up with teams your just as good as, let alone trying to build a team at the same time.

    OK...of to meeting. Peace out for a bit.
     
  4. MaximusD163

    MaximusD163 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    5,077
    The Eagles and Rams are both very small sample sizes. The Rams went 9-7 and then 10-6 and made the playoffs 1/2. Eagles went 9/7 and then 4-11-1 and made the playoffs 1/2. You have to pay some guys, it’s the way the cap rules are, so no matter who you pay big money to, it will be very detrimental if that player significantly declines. You just need to be meticulous in who you pay.
     
  5. Br4d

    Br4d 2018 Weeb Ewbank Award

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    36,670
    Likes Received:
    14,472
    That all of those teams except for the Rams were very good teams when they had their QB on his rookie contract and worse teams afterwards.

    The Jets are a very bad team right now and adding a QB post-rookie contract to the mix isn't going to make them a good team. They won't even get to the playoff-caliber team level, let alone a champion.

    When you pay a QB on a playoff-caliber team you take it down a notch. When you pay a QB on a bad team to bring him in you may bring it up a notch but you aren't going to make it a playoff caliber team.

    That's my point.
     
  6. MoWilkBeast

    MoWilkBeast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,022
    Likes Received:
    3,314
    I would disagree that you can't make it a playoff team or better, but it becomes much harder for sure. In order to so you need to compensate for paying the QB by hitting on genuine quality, low cost contributors through the draft with well above average regularity. And that's going to be very difficult to achieve when you have given up a lot of premium picks for that QB who is taking up a good proportion of your cap.
     
    Jets79 and Footballgod214 like this.
  7. GasedAndConfused

    GasedAndConfused Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2015
    Messages:
    14,203
    Likes Received:
    10,165
    Very good work but the probable cap numbers seem off. It won't balloon up that high. If it was to balloon up to 231 mil by 2023 watson would be attainable but I don't see it going up that much and no indications have been shown it will. it's all very uncertain with covid. it caused the 1st cap decrease and a large one for 2021 which is an issue now for some teams.

    by your analysis only 2 QBs with 12.5% or higher have made it to the superbowl and both lost because the other teams were overall better and not too invested in 1 position. watson even with your higher cap accounts for much more then that from 2022 to 2024
     
  8. GasedAndConfused

    GasedAndConfused Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2015
    Messages:
    14,203
    Likes Received:
    10,165
    this^

    lots of the Qbs that won on rookie or cheap deals never won after a big payday becuase the team was weaker overall. brady is the only one who won it a lot and as you see he purposely took less money to do so. If brady is smart enough and willing to sacrifice millions of dollars to try and win Sbs because he knew taking too much money would hurt his chances and then successfully wins 6 superbowls, do we really think we on forums know how to win superbowls better then a 6 time SB winning QB?
     
  9. GasedAndConfused

    GasedAndConfused Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2015
    Messages:
    14,203
    Likes Received:
    10,165
    Brady won 6 by taking less money
     
  10. ouchy

    ouchy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,114
    Likes Received:
    6,112
    The myth of this thread is that great QBs win the superbowl.

    Great teams win the superbowl. Teams that are complete in all phases and have few positional weakness' to exploit. The quality of the offensive line is a far bigger factor on SB teams then QB.

    But having a great QB does help. Having an expensive great QB can effect having a great team.

    Superbowls aren't won by one player.
     
    chandler, Br4d and GasedAndConfused like this.
  11. GasedAndConfused

    GasedAndConfused Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2015
    Messages:
    14,203
    Likes Received:
    10,165
    except they don't have dak signed and they need to sign their rookies. they also only have 9.4 mil which is just about enough to sign rookies. so basically they have no room and need to sign or franchise their QB which will cost 30+ mil in cap room
     
  12. GasedAndConfused

    GasedAndConfused Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2015
    Messages:
    14,203
    Likes Received:
    10,165
    they traded for a franchise LT 2 1st round picks to make a SB run it failed. the following year they traded the top WR in the NFL for nothing pretty much because they couldn't afford him among other things. then they went 4-12 and now have no cap room and no 1st rounder but hey they have a QB which clearly worked for them huh?
     
  13. chandler

    chandler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    1,308
    totally agree. but one of the points i was making was risking that much money in one player. Again intrigued by the player but the numbers are risky. If you spread the same money around for breadth and depth there is more resilience. eagles won with a backup QB

    it leads me to think that going after a watson may make financial success if you're a QB away from superbowl -- other pieces are largely in place

    but if you're a stinky team adding watson may turn you into something that resembles the Texans. You have a great QB but are too financially handicapped to make that big leap

    and your point about dead money is well taken but again i think proves the opposite point. WHen Brady took that team friendly deal it gave Pats flexibility to spend that money in those SB years on other important things. My theory of the football universe is: SB winners and contenders are more influenced by being a stacked team than QB. Sometime both coexist eg Pats. Youre more likely to see a stacked team w Dilfer or Flacco or Brad Johnson at QB than you are to see Matthew Stafford and Megatron win in Detroit
     
  14. Br4d

    Br4d 2018 Weeb Ewbank Award

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    36,670
    Likes Received:
    14,472
    The bright side for all of us is that Watson's year where he won't effect the cap much is this season. The Jets aren't going to be able to market him well in a season where covid is likely to keep attendance figures low.

    By next season the shine will be off the apple and no amount of marketing will draw people in to see Deshaun and the Jets go 4-12.
     
  15. chandler

    chandler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    1,308
    i hate to compliment the Pats or Brady but i think one has to admit that BB getting Brady to buy in and accept lower money to win was instrumental. they did it with other guys too.

    cap limits money to spread around. if you want a bigger slice of that pie there is less to spend on complementary pieces. it's truly that simple

    if you want to win you have to pay players less than worth (e.g.,rookie contract), find diamonds in the rough, or get vets on sweet deals
     
    GasedAndConfused and Br4d like this.
  16. Br4d

    Br4d 2018 Weeb Ewbank Award

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    36,670
    Likes Received:
    14,472
    How do we know that Brady didn't get Belichik to buy into the no monster contracts idea?

    Belichik gave Drew Bledsoe a record-breaking contract in 2001. He paid Brady like a star on his 2nd contract. Then right after that he traded Richard Seymour instead of paying him. Then Brady's deals started looking much more like the average QB deal instead of a star QB.

    Brady married a woman making 5x what he made. It's quite possible that after that happened he went to Belichik and said "look I'm all set, let's just keep the cap in line with everybody else and we'll have a strong team from top to bottom and win every year."
     
    chandler likes this.
  17. MaximusD163

    MaximusD163 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    5,077
    Did you read the whole thing? Who are these “lots of rookies who won?”

    I think something that is going by the wayside here is that you don’t need the best roster in the league to win the championship. You need to get to the playoffs and get hot. A lot of teams have shown us that. 2010 Packers. 2011 Giants. 2012 Ravens. 2017 Eagles. The best opportunity to win a Super Bowl is to get to the playoffs every year. The best chance to get to the playoffs every year is to have an elite QB. Only 1 team wins the Super Bowl every year, and the difference in playoff rosters is not that big.

    Tell me right now what team out of this final 4 is going to win the Super Bowl. Then explain to me how their roster is obviously superior to the other teams.

    At best you’d be guessing. The same would have been true for any of the last 10 Super Bowls. Looking back at these rosters with a storyline in your mind is easy, but it’s inaccurate to the actual parity that these playoff teams actually present.
     
    HomeoftheJets likes this.
  18. GasedAndConfused

    GasedAndConfused Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2015
    Messages:
    14,203
    Likes Received:
    10,165
    exactly. i said it earlier in this thread. the 1 elite QB who won 6 SBs did it by taking less money to have a better team around him. they also have the best coach in football. It shows if you want to build a dynasty you need players to outperform their contracts and good coaches
     
  19. MaximusD163

    MaximusD163 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    5,077
    Brady is the best player to have ever put on NFL pads. Also, he took a discount but it’s not as much as people made it out to be. You really mean to tell me that the one $6 million dollar Linebacker that or the one $5 million dollar TE Brady made space for in any given year made the difference in 3 Super Bowl Championships?
     
    HomeoftheJets likes this.
  20. ColoradoContrails

    ColoradoContrails Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2016
    Messages:
    14,409
    Likes Received:
    21,485
    First Max, thanks for the effort in putting this together. I agree with what you concluded, but I also think that the points Br4d and G&C and others made have some merit. You do need a great supporting cast no matter how great your QB is, and paying so much of your money for that one guy makes building up the talent around him harder.

    That said, it's not impossible, or even really hard - for the right GM and organization. If we still have Idzik or Macc and Bowles and Gase, I'd say forget it. There's no way to accomplish building a good team while paying so much to Watson (but frankly, Watson probably would never come here if those guys were in charge).But I do think Douglas is a good GM and that Saleh will be a damn good HC, and I think there's more talent on this team than their record showed. Of course they DO have to add a lot of pieces, but even giving up some prime picks for Watson, they'd still have a lot of draft and cap capital.

    And this is a completely unique situation in the NFL. It has almost never happened before - in fact I think it really has never happened before. Under the draconian, league-favored "free agency" rules, a guy like Watson being available at his age, with only 4 years wear and tear is a "unicorn" - sure maybe you'd have to pay more than anyone else has ever paid for an attraction like that, but the opportunity to capitalize is so much beyond your outlay it's worth the risk.

    And finally, as I pointed out in another thread, consider that it's been half a century since the Jets had a SB-caliber QB - i.e. one who has the potential every year to take you to the SB. I don't think some here grasp the depth of that drought, and I'm doubtful that Douglas does, which is why he probably won't depart from his plan. But I'm really hoping that he does. Look what that did for KC who also hadn't been to a SB in half a century.
     

Share This Page