How much does this raise the bar for Wilson next year? He's gonna cost even more.
RiverDog wrote:After the Niners made a backup quarterback that has never started in even a half a season the richest player in the NFL, it should be no surprise to anyone that the best QB on the FA market, himself a relatively unaccomplished, garden variety starter, would stumble into such a huge payday.
curmudgeon wrote:There is only one Tom Brady. Unfortunately, when the time comes Seattle will have to break the bank for Wilson or trade him......
NorthHawk wrote:Wow. Cousins gets more than $80MM guaranteed.
Combine that with his 2 Franchise tenders in Washington and he will have made over $120MM.
I wonder if this signing is the first step towards guaranteed contracts for QB's or maybe players at large.
At some point, the issue of a Franchise QB and Cap hits will have to be looked at. Something will have to happen at some point.
c_hawkbob wrote:I got a lot of disagreement in here when I said fully guaranteed contract, at least for premium players, were inevitably coming ...
idhawkman wrote:Paying the QB top 5 money just ensures no SB will come to your team.
I hope we don't break the bank for RW. I'd rather have a average QB on a first contract than a super star QB that breaks the bank and drains the talent from the rest of the "TEAM". It's not just Belicheat that makes the Pats perenial contenders, it is also TB's $17M/yr cap hit. That leaves money on the table to build a team around TB. He can also make up the difference in just a couple endorsements per year which come to him by the buckets full because they are perenial contenders.
Clem7 wrote:Isn't Rodgers and Ryan next up to get paid before RW? Up, Up, and Away.
Aseahawkfan wrote:
Why would you post this? It's wrong on so many levels. Yes, having a franchise QB is what makes you a perennial contender. Regardless of Brady's generosity, it is him that makes the entire team work. Just like it is Rodgers in Green Bay, and Ryan in Atlanta, Peyton in Indy, Ben R. in Pittsburgh, and the list could go on. Having a franchise QB is literally the requirement for being a perennial contender. What team without a franchise QB has been a perennial contender in the modern era? Even in the older eras having a great QB relative to the time was extremely important to contending.
And they are not easy to find at all, which is why Kirk Cousins was just paid a huge amount of money. Why do you post statements that are so easily proven wrong.
RiverDog wrote:After the Niners made a backup quarterback that has never started in even a half a season the richest player in the NFL, it should be no surprise to anyone that the best QB on the FA market, himself a relatively unaccomplished, garden variety starter, would stumble into such a huge payday.
Futureite wrote:And what if JG turns out to be one of the best QBs in the league next year, or Cousins leads the Vikings to the SB? Worth the contracts? Or, still not worth the contract because another QB had produced in prior years for less money.
The value of most things is much more fluid than the scale you're using. When I'm hungry, I'll pay $12 for a hamburger at a game. Still the same hamburger meat and bun (well, maybe worse), but the value is much higher based upon the circumstances. Same thing here.
I don't mind being a perennial contender but I'd rather have a SB. Think about the SB winners over the last few years, none of them have be Franchise QBs except for Brady.
I don't mind being a perennial contender but I'd rather have a SB. Think about the SB winners over the last few years, none of them have be Franchise QBs except for Brady.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest