The 2019 Cowboys offseason featured several extension candidates. The team ended up paying most of them, giving extensions to Ezekiel Elliott, Dak Prescott, La’el Collins and Jaylon Smith. Dallas eventually re-signed Amari Cooper, though he hit free agency before that deal was finalized. Byron Jones departed for Miami shortly before the Cooper agreement.
Although one of the extensions — Prescott’s — affects where the Cowboys are now, this offseason’s dilemma dwarfs where Dallas stood five years ago. Three players — Prescott, CeeDee Lamb, Micah Parsons — are either in contract years or eligible for an extension. Each member of the trio can make a case to become the highest-paid player at his position. For Lamb and Parsons, that means the highest-paid non-QB. Prescott has unique leverage to force the issue into not only becoming the NFL’s highest-paid player but creating a gap between himself and No. 2 on that list.
The Cowboys are not believed to want to set markets, but they may not have a choice. This qualifies as a good problem, given the talent Parsons and Lamb have displayed on their rookie deals. Prescott has not proven himself to be as good at his position compared to the younger Cowboys stars, but as an upper-echelon quarterback, he would carry significant leverage even if his contract situation veered toward a standard place.
But Dak’s circumstances are far from standard. The former Day 3 sensation bucked the trend by playing out his fourth season, for fourth-round money, and waiting on an extension. This meant a year on the franchise tag. Despite that 2020 season being cut short by an ankle injury that still impacts him today, Prescott secured a four-year, $160MM deal just before the March 2021 deadline to apply franchise tags. Prescott became the outlier Cowboy standout, signing for less than five years, and his leverage-maximization tactics led to a procedural franchise tag and a no-trade clause. Part one of that effort looms large years later.
It is hard to overstate how much leverage the Cowboys have given their ninth-year quarterback. Not only can Prescott not be tagged or traded, an offseason restructure placed a $40.13MM dead money figure in play for 2025. That penalty would hit Dallas’ 2025 cap sheet if Prescott is not re-signed before the start of the 2025 league year. The Vikings are taking this medicine after Kirk Cousins departed in March, though Minnesota’s dead cap hit from that defection is $28.5MM.
Prescott is also tied to what would be a record-setting 2024 cap number ($55.13MM) — Dak, Deshaun Watson and Daniel Jones would each set that record barring changes to their contracts — but the void years on his contract threaten a future penalty. A Zack Martin restructure would also give Dallas a $26.5MM dead cap hit if he is not re-signed before the ’25 league year. Prescott, 30, securing a deal in the $60MM-per-year ballpark should be considered in play based on the ammo he carries.
While the 49ers have seen their Brandon Aiyuk talks impacted by another receiver market boom, the Cowboys are more directly affected by what took place in Minnesota last month. The Vikings gave Justin Jefferson a $35MM-per-year deal that includes record-smashing guarantees ($110MM in total, $88.7MM at signing). The latter figure hovers a staggering $36MM north of the next-closest wideout. Aiyuk has been tied to wanting a guarantee north of $80MM; Lamb — a two-time Pro Bowler and 2023 first-team All-Pro — has proven more and can make a stronger case for Jefferson-level terms.
As they prepare to make a strong Prescott offer, the Cowboys may well have their QB in place as a higher priority compared to their top pass catcher. Lamb can be tagged in 2025, and while the team has used its franchise tag in six of the past seven years, a cap hold near $25MM would be an issue. Though, the Cowboys — albeit without Prescott, Martin and Lamb signed for 2025 — are projected to hold more than $64MM in cap space next year. They would have an easier time tagging Lamb than the 49ers would cuffing Aiyuk. For 2024, a Lamb holdout looms. Martin succeeded down this path last year, but Lamb’s matter is different due to the WR seeking a monster extension instead of more security on an existing contract.
Expecting to become the NFL’s highest-paid non-QB, Parsons has said waiting until 2025 for his payday would be acceptable. Another cap jump and another dominant season would put him on track to command close to $40MM per year, though the Cowboys do not expect next year’s cap spike to match this year’s $30.6MM jump. If the Cowboys do finalize extensions for Prescott and Lamb this year, will three top-market contracts be a workable scenario?
Of the three, Parsons is probably the best overall player. The three-time All-Pro is tied to a 2025 fifth-year option and could be tagged in 2026, separating this matter from the near-future Prescott and Lamb deadlines. But the Cowboys will certainly need to factor in a Parsons payday as they navigate talks for their QB-WR combo.
The team would have saved money by extending Prescott or Lamb last year, but the team checked off other boxes — re-ups for Trevon Diggs and Terence Steele — as these expensive matters lingered. Time is running out for Jerry Jones and Co. to begin enacting solutions before training camp.
How will the team end up resolving this quandary? As costs rise, will trade rumors emerge surrounding one of the standouts? Weigh in with your thoughts on the Cowboys’ situation in PFR’s latest Community Tailgate.
Read something about talk of a separate QB salary cap…anyone have any idea how this would work? NFL salary cap isn’t keeping up with the inflating QB costs (not to mention WR’s,CBs, DEs)!
That is the real story here, Swtnes. The cap punishes teams that draft well because they can’t keep everybody. Teams with poor scouting and player development simply wait for teams that drafted well and developed the players they drafted to run out of cap space. The NFL calls this parody. It is supposed to be better for the fans.
It’s a parody of parity…
Thanks for catching my word play!
It’s not that simple. If there were no cap, the other teams never be competitive at all. It’s not about whether you draft well-it’s about whether you can afford to pay them. You can be the Raiders, with the supposed least well off owner in the NFL, and hypothetically draft the best players in the league, and then they’ll leave for New York or Dallas or wherever as soon as their contracts are up.
Good teams won’t retain their talent, rich teams will. Players today by and large don’t care about wins or team culture or any of that; they care about the size of the contract (that’s what happens when agents take over a sport-not that today’s owners are any different). Wins will reflect team wealth, not management skill. For instance, I think you’ll find a lot more players willing to work with Tepper without a cap than with one.
Spoken like a true owner. The salary cap is a collusion agreement between the owners. Spending doesn’t equal winning. Ask the Mets!
So? Owners can’t be right about anything?
If anything, I’d wager certain would rather have a non-capped system. Jones could sign all of Davis’ free agents every year if he wanted to, and probably most of the others. It would make colluding easier, in my opinion. If the top four or five owners who offered the biggest level contracts all got together and said, “We’re not offering Saquon Barkley more than $15 million a year”, then they could do that more easily. After all, the poorer ones couldn’t enter that sphere, so instead of having 32 separate markets, the player only has four or five. If a poorer owner offers the best deal he can afford, all the richer owner has to do is outprice him or her and win the sweepstakes. You’re right in saying that spending doesn’t guarantee a win, but do fans not deserve to see their favored team have a chance to re-sign anybody? Or bring anyone new in?
Teams should get more equivalent chances to sign players. And spending might not guarantee wins, but it definitely helps. You keep bringing up the Mets, which of course is another league entirely, but I will counter with the Dodgers. Have the Dodgers won every pennant? No, obviously not, but they have undeniably been extremely successful due to their signings. Spending doesn’t guarantee championships, but it does correlate with success, and it definitely has in past eras (even in the NFL-like the old Halas Bears, who, despite Halas’ reputation for being a demanding cheapskate, still spent more than most teams and netted a lot of success due in part to it). The Mets being terrible now doesn’t undo that.
4-5 owners saying screw the salary cap is called collusion…wouldn’t pass gravy in a court suit brought by the NFLPA…the Dodgers…wow…no, the Dodgers don’t win every year…but they do spend, buoyed by $1 billion in deferral monies…kinda makes Bobby Bonilla day a bargain!
The Dodgers have the MLB’s highest win percentage for the last ten years. They are second in the MLB for the last twenty, only .002% behind the leading team…which is the Yankees. Needless to say, they also have deep pockets. So, yes, just exactly like I said, word for word, they have not won the pennant every year, but have been undeniably successful due to their signings.
They don’t win the World Series every year, but they do win every year, and their signings are the biggest reason why. I don’t know why baseball is becoming the primary subject, here, but if it is, we can at least recognize the facts.
I understand that the Mets play baseball. They are also a perfect example of how not to spend in professional sports. Free agent spending to supplement scouting and player development will always beat free agent spending instead of scouting and player development. One of the reasons teams who draft and develop well spend a lot, is because they draft and develop players. Then you have to pay them. The Yankees and Dodgers get out their check book, and the Chiefs trade Hill to the Dolphins because they couldn’t keep him and Mahomes. All of this in an effort to suppress player spending by a billionaire that is “richer” than another billionaire. I don’t think it makes the NFL better because the Chiefs aren’t allowed by rule to pay market value for the players they drafted and developed. Just an opinion.
Fair, it is an opinion. I do want to be understood here when I say that spending doesn’t equal success without good management. That hasn’t bern my argument. Acquiring the best free agents does improve teams, and that’s undeniable.
The Mets, to continue this example (an example that I’m not particularly fond of, but you did bring them up), are bad because of their organization, not because signing premier players are good. You still have to manage your team well, and sign good players. But super teams do work, even in the NFL. I’d ask you to consider, for example, the 2020 Buccaneers without a salary cap. How many more players could they have signed? How many could they have traded for? Would any deep money team even bother with draft picks, given that all they have to is let another team develop the player and just make bigger offers when the rookie deal is up? I don’t mean to single out your favored team, but a team like the Rams is well funded and eager to trade its draft picks in any given scenario. What incentive would they have to draft players, when they could skim the best ones from a less well funded team? Would the Bills, owned by the Pegulas who apparently may have financial woes, be able to compete with a Rams or Patriots offer?
The Chiefs aren’t stopped, by the way, by any rule preventing them from paying “market value” for any player. They’d have to choose to sacrifice other players to do so, or accept the ones who take the leftover space. But they’re not forced by any rule to offer what they want…as the Browns so emphatically demonstrated. The intentions of this effort are quite clear: some owners simply can’t afford what others can, and they want a chance to sign their top people. It gives the team a chance to get a premier player. Isn’t that a better outcome for the fans as well? Watching every superstar sign with the same top five or so teams has got to be frustrating. Players already tend to go in certain areas. It’s the cap that mitigates the volume. Without it, there’s not much to stop them. The cap isn’t as nefarious and conspiratorial as it’s been made to seem. If you think that owners are demanding now, wait until the richest six or seven get even more isolated in their power than before.
How is Trey Lance going to look in camp and preseason? If he looks solid, could Cowboys sign Lance to a market deal extension for a backup QB for multiple years? It doesn’t solve the problem of eating Dak’s huge cap hit for the final year, but that gives the Cowboys options for the future beyond this season if they want to let Dak walk or trade him (if he waives his no trade clause). He’s not a top shelf quarterback IMO and doesn’t deserve to be paid like one.
Gotta hope lance shows something. Then Let Dak walk, eat the dead cap money. Go with Lance and draft a QB is need be.
He doesn’t have the power he thinks he does.
“He doesn’t have the power he thinks he does.”
Your comment just laid exactly why Dak has so much power
Trey Lance is going to look great in camp, everyone does. It’s putting the pads on in live action against an actual opponent that will be the problem; and he hasn’t had much of that since high school.
I don’t know how many times Prescott has to lead the league in offensive or passing stats of some kind for people to accept that he’s a good quarterback.
Not that I think his “get as much as possible” approach is going to help win any Superbowls, mind you, but I don’t get that.
If only Dallas had a GM with vision…
Ditch the GM who is still coasting off his one good hire from 35 years ago.
Oh, right. The owner won’t fire him.
Jerrah will end up caving and signing all three and creating cap hell for the Cowboys.
Dak will leave and sign with Vegas for a huge money deal, Ceedee and Parsons will sign top of market extensions and stay, Deion will compel teams to skip the dramatics with Shedeur and he will fall to Dallas at 25 in the first and be their QB in 25/26
This guy sees the future. I think this is quite close to what is actually going to happen.
Even Jerry Jones isn’t dumb enough to wish to endure Neon Dion 2.0 by drafting and signing his kid….beside Sheduer isn’t going in the first round anyway most probably…..actual talent questions and too much of a headache with Neon.
No offense to the person who wrote this article, but NO, Ceedee Lamb does not have a case to become the highest paid player at his position….!? How could he possibly get paid more than Justin Jefferson in the same offseason!?!? Like just no
For some reason beyond my understanding, whatever the guy before you got paid the next makes more. Case in point, Trevor Lawrence, Jared Goff Amon ra st brown etc. apparently it doesn’t matter how well you perform. All that matters is when your contract is up and who just got recently paid.
I agree with how you view the two, but baseball_is_boring is right. This business is built for agents, the players are merely commodities. Or so it seems.
A community tailgate without BBQ and beer? Now I understand why PFR is seeking part time help.
Speak for yourself…I have them both right here.
wait where’d they go
I’m not saying this is by any means the path I think they should take, but I think Jerry pays Dak. Consequently, I believe they’ll eventually lose Parsons. Jerry will say they’re all-in, and the Cowboys will not win a playoff game for however long the Dak contract runs.
Jerry will pay Parsons too because it would kill him to see him skip town and end up an Eagle.
The Eagles would have to cut half the team to sign this guy…..he’s more of a LA Rams or San Fran 49’ers type of signing anyway…..
Maybe so, but Howie keeps on pulling one financial wonder after the next. Seems like only yesterday he opened the vault to give Wentz a huge extension only to watch them quickly pivot to Hurts.
I’m sorry but if you can’t win in the playoffs then you shouldn’t be the top paid QB. He has had one meaningful game in the playoffs and that was back in 2016. Last year was mostly trash stats. Tampa was a terrible default playoff team in 2022 so you can’t use that as a measuring stick either. Everything else on Dak’s part has been meh.
Jerry Signs CeeDee first”Deadlines make Deals”…
Then Dak gets his…
Then the Shocker…Dallas trades Parsons to Vegas for TWO 1st rd picks and TWO 2nd rd picks(2025-2026 respectively)…
The Dak contract is only 3 years but can opt out after 2…Soo Dallas positions themselves either next year or 2026 too move up into top 3 for a QB of the Future….
In the meantime the Cowboys stay competitive in the Dak years hoping he can finally break that playoff wall down and get us to a SB…
If not we have our QB of the future all lined up to take his place…
And I’m sure we can find a DE that will give us more than 1 tackle in 3 playoff games…in fact he’s probably on the roster now in Kneeland…
Thank You Mr.Parsons!!!!