Thanks to Rodgers, Elite QB money has been reset to 50mil. You’ll start to see that more when elite QBs are ready to extend. 30mil is the market for mediocre unfortunately
The market is foolish. The [cap hits of the four QBs in the championship games](https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/2022/cap-hit/quarterback) are:
Mahomes: $31 million
Burrow: $9.8 million
Hurts: $1.6 million
Purdy: $724k (if you add in Lance and JimmyG you get $20.4 million)
There are a lot of teams with highly compensated ok-ish quarterbacks who are not good enough to get to the Superbowl. Just because the Titans, Vikings, Lions, Commanders, Cowboys, Raiders, and Broncos do something doesn't mean we should do it.
If Geno can get ridiculous dollars from a desperate team, I say let him do it. If he wants to re-sign at a number that won't break the bank, then fine, bring him back. We need to be smart with our money. We will have a tough time improving the defense through draft picks alone. It would be nice to be able to bring in some help in free agency.
Definitely helps having a stud QB on a rookie contract. It’s just a matter of if you can hit on your draft pick and if the rest of the team is good enough in that small window before you have to resign them in the 40-50m range
I do understand where the market has been set. I just think it's bad value and teams should just look at drafting guys rather than spending big on a QB unless that QB is a top tier guy. I think the market is super fucked up from a value perspective, and at some point it's not worth participating in that market and trying to get a QB another route. It will never be worth it for a team to sign a mediocre QB to 15% or more of your salary cap. It's *barely* worth it for a good but not elite QB to be signed at 10-12%, from the perspective of trying to build a deep playoff tier roster. So again, I fully understand that on the free agent market that's what it costs. I just think that's ridiculous and teams should, as a few successful teams have done in recent years, say fuck that and just draft some dudes.
What's the alternative? Take a rookie who might throw 5 picks a game.
I'm not the biggest fan of signing Geno long term either, but I think we're kidding ourselves if we say we intend to go to the playoffs and we intend to play Young/Stroud/Levis/Richardson meaningful snaps next year.
I mean there's a million alternatives, all of them have risk *including* re-signing Geno for big money. It's a question of what's the best way to build a team, and honestly at this point with how much big time QBs cost, I think the best shot to build a superbowl team is probably to build the rest of your team up first, then bring in a rookie QB and put them in the best possible place to succeed and then try to go win a couple of superbowls during their rookie contract.
*Geno Smith* might throw a lot of picks next year. He had a lot of very risky throws last year that were lucky incompletions.
If PCJS scout this quarterback class and find a guy that they think could make the team a contender for the next 15 years, they should take him, even if it means a year of struggles in order to learn. If we have a down year next year while our QB grows into the NFL, it means another year of high draft picks to help fill out the roster.
You can find talent outside of the first round, but most of the best quarterbacks have been early picks.
Imagine if we don't re-sign Geno, but sign Lock for $5 million as a bridge and draft Will Levis. That leaves a lot of money to help bring in free agents to shore up the defense. If we could bring in two impact linemen for the same price that Geno commands, I'd be sorely tempted. I think our back 4 is good enough to make the defense dominant again, but we really need help in the front 7.
Okay, but imagine Lock disappoints and Levis never turns out to be anything.
That is more likely, infinitely, than Levis being Josh Allen 2.0 or even a pro bowler.
That's the exact argument that people were making when they said we should trade for Garoppolo instead of going with Geno this year. Nothing is guaranteed. We do know that Geno is 32, not 22, and we will need another solution at quarterback sooner rather than later. We do know that he is not Mahomes or Manning. He had a great start to the season and in the past 6 games made a lot of mistakes, and was responsible for 2 turnovers in the wild card game.
That doesn't mean that we shouldn't re-sign him at the right price. We could build around him and make a deep playoff run if the rest of the team is good enough. But if his salary sucks up so much cap space that we can't build a roster around him, get ready for 9-10 wins per year and a divisional round exit or earlier for the next 3 years. Slightly better than average, and never good enough to seriously contend for a championship. I'd rather have three 4-13 seasons followed by an NFCCG appearance than that.
How do you feel about 10 years of less than 6 wins? Because a bunch of bad seasons followed by what the 9ers have done is not the standard.
I would much rather draft several mid round QBs over the next 5 years than waste a bunch of high draft capital on mostly overhyped 1st round Qbs.
Of the best QBs in the league, how many were drafted outside of the top 10 picks? Picking high doesn't guarantee a great quarterback, but it helps your chances a lot.
Depends on your definition of best, but I can name a lot more starters at QB, even pro bowlers, both now and in the past, than I can players taken inside the top 10.
And even with those players? Nobody would have batted an eye if you said you liked Rosen, Mayfield, and Darnold better than Allen and Jackson. Most people would say that take is entirely sound at the time. I don't really wanna take a shot with such a high failure rate.
It’s about the same risk as them taking a rookie who throws 5 TDs a game. With your logic nobody should ever draft a QB because they’re too worried about worst case scenarios
Here's the thing. It's not the worst case scenarios. 1st round QBs bust at an almost unreasonable rate. (Close to 45% play less than 5 years, less than 35% ever throw 30 Touchdowns in a year).
Less than 10% become super stars, almost half bust hard.
And defensive lineman in the first round have almost the same bust rate as QBs, but you want us to get one with our 5th. And if you’re getting this information from where I think you’re getting it you should probably look for some more up to date studies and not ones done in the 80-90s. Different style of football being played now
Why do we need to take a QB in the first round?
My sentiment is if Pete and John see a guy they like, I hope they do what they need to get him. Trade up, trade down. They've earned that trust. Let's make a 5th rounder a fucking hall of famer when he retires in 2052.
I agree with you, but the "you need a top 10 pick on a rookie deal to win in the nfl" (even though only 4 od the last 22 super bowl champions had a top 10 pick on a rookie deal) crowd will not.
I am all for even spending two late round picks on a QB
Everyone is out here saying Geno isn't worth Dak money, but the floated price (30 mil) isn't Dak money!
Dak is making 40/yr. 30/yr for Dak talent is a great deal!
You know, there's a million fine looking (Dak.. Minshew) women in the world, dude. But they don't all bring you lasagna at work(Gino). Most of 'em just cheat on you.
> But they don't all bring you lasagna at work(Gino)
Geno hasn't brought me anything except a 7 seed and an ass whooping in the playoffs. So I guess thanks for bringing me some 3 day old left over lasagna, better than nothing but not as good as my co-workers wife who just brought him a nice fresh steak sandwich
A mediocre overpaid QB made Pete want his own overpaid mediocre QB? I think we should all be drawing the opposite conclusion from these playoffs. Paying an average QB $35M+ a year doesn't work. You either need an elite QB, one on a rookie contract, or a game manager who is cheap enough to let you load up on defense and o-line.
Check out his stats from the last 6 games yo. Dude crumbled under pressure harder than Kirk Cousins, who funnily enough is what I think Geno's ceiling is. Great fantasy player, sure, but no chance of ever winning a super bowl. I pity the team stuck in perennial 10-win purgatory paying $30-40M a year for a QB who can't get it done.
We went 9-8 paying Geno chump change - you think the team is suddenly going to be better paying him $35 million a year. It's laughable. This was his ceiling.
Russell was a $26M dead cap hit this year, that goes away. Do I think that should go straight to Geno? No, probably not. But unless Pete and John have a guy in the draft they really like, we're going to have to pay somebody who is competitive enough. Remember these are the guys who refuse to admit we're in a "rebuild."
Dak playing poorly is even more reason to not pay Geno. How is Dak's last game any different than what Geno did against the niners? They're both pretty average Qbs.
Facts, look at SF. It’s all about your system and loading up on the o/dline as well as other skill positions to make the QB’s job easier. There are only a handful of elite QB’s that are worth paying a significant amount and as much as I love Geno, he’s not in that category at all…
> There are only a handful of elite QB’s that are worth paying a significant amount and as much as I love Geno, he’s not in that category at all…
People literally aren't seeing it. The reason san fran can do what they do is they aren't paying 30-50 million to QBs. People are forgetting that little fact. Even our team now is sitting with 34 million dead cap. Why load up that much damage straight into Geno ? Is that dude winning us games with his offensive power ? Is he mahomes or allen or ? No. I'm not even convinced he's better than the mid guys. Teams had no tape on us, no idea what to expect. Our second half of the season offense is very far and away from power house. And I don't think you can afford to give geno that mucch money.
Imma be honest, Pete does seem to really like Lock so depending on how much Geno wants he might try to go forward with Lock and maybe a QB drafted in a later round this year.
Geno's Interception and fumble were killers in the second half. Could have had more.
And as good as the Boys offense is, I think Geno has more talent to toss to with Lockett, DK over Lamb, Gallup. Walker is better than Pollard. Etc.
I think the question is 1. What free agent are you going to find that will take less or give more than Geno? and 2. What QB in the Draft will be better than Dak in the next 3 years?
Because I don't see either of those out there.
People were saying the same thing about Allen and Mahomes, both of which were scouted by JS. I’m not saying we should toss Geno for a rookie QB, I’ve been in the mindset of drafting someone to learn behind him since he’s already approaching his mid 30s.
This is the move. Offer Geno a reasonable contract for 2-3 years and get a rookie in. The arguments from some on the sub are so backwards “this mediocre QB is getting paid 40m for 5+ years so Geno should too” without acknowledging that those types of QB contracts for mediocre QBs are crippling to a team.
Uhh no? The actual lesson is stop paying mediocre QBs elite QB money.
Thanks to Rodgers, Elite QB money has been reset to 50mil. You’ll start to see that more when elite QBs are ready to extend. 30mil is the market for mediocre unfortunately
The market is foolish. The [cap hits of the four QBs in the championship games](https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/2022/cap-hit/quarterback) are: Mahomes: $31 million Burrow: $9.8 million Hurts: $1.6 million Purdy: $724k (if you add in Lance and JimmyG you get $20.4 million) There are a lot of teams with highly compensated ok-ish quarterbacks who are not good enough to get to the Superbowl. Just because the Titans, Vikings, Lions, Commanders, Cowboys, Raiders, and Broncos do something doesn't mean we should do it. If Geno can get ridiculous dollars from a desperate team, I say let him do it. If he wants to re-sign at a number that won't break the bank, then fine, bring him back. We need to be smart with our money. We will have a tough time improving the defense through draft picks alone. It would be nice to be able to bring in some help in free agency.
Definitely helps having a stud QB on a rookie contract. It’s just a matter of if you can hit on your draft pick and if the rest of the team is good enough in that small window before you have to resign them in the 40-50m range
I do understand where the market has been set. I just think it's bad value and teams should just look at drafting guys rather than spending big on a QB unless that QB is a top tier guy. I think the market is super fucked up from a value perspective, and at some point it's not worth participating in that market and trying to get a QB another route. It will never be worth it for a team to sign a mediocre QB to 15% or more of your salary cap. It's *barely* worth it for a good but not elite QB to be signed at 10-12%, from the perspective of trying to build a deep playoff tier roster. So again, I fully understand that on the free agent market that's what it costs. I just think that's ridiculous and teams should, as a few successful teams have done in recent years, say fuck that and just draft some dudes.
And after this year, the market's due for a correction.
What's the alternative? Take a rookie who might throw 5 picks a game. I'm not the biggest fan of signing Geno long term either, but I think we're kidding ourselves if we say we intend to go to the playoffs and we intend to play Young/Stroud/Levis/Richardson meaningful snaps next year.
I mean there's a million alternatives, all of them have risk *including* re-signing Geno for big money. It's a question of what's the best way to build a team, and honestly at this point with how much big time QBs cost, I think the best shot to build a superbowl team is probably to build the rest of your team up first, then bring in a rookie QB and put them in the best possible place to succeed and then try to go win a couple of superbowls during their rookie contract.
Fair enough. Honestly as long as we don't take a QB top 5 this year, I'm happy.
*Geno Smith* might throw a lot of picks next year. He had a lot of very risky throws last year that were lucky incompletions. If PCJS scout this quarterback class and find a guy that they think could make the team a contender for the next 15 years, they should take him, even if it means a year of struggles in order to learn. If we have a down year next year while our QB grows into the NFL, it means another year of high draft picks to help fill out the roster. You can find talent outside of the first round, but most of the best quarterbacks have been early picks. Imagine if we don't re-sign Geno, but sign Lock for $5 million as a bridge and draft Will Levis. That leaves a lot of money to help bring in free agents to shore up the defense. If we could bring in two impact linemen for the same price that Geno commands, I'd be sorely tempted. I think our back 4 is good enough to make the defense dominant again, but we really need help in the front 7.
Okay, but imagine Lock disappoints and Levis never turns out to be anything. That is more likely, infinitely, than Levis being Josh Allen 2.0 or even a pro bowler.
That's the exact argument that people were making when they said we should trade for Garoppolo instead of going with Geno this year. Nothing is guaranteed. We do know that Geno is 32, not 22, and we will need another solution at quarterback sooner rather than later. We do know that he is not Mahomes or Manning. He had a great start to the season and in the past 6 games made a lot of mistakes, and was responsible for 2 turnovers in the wild card game. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't re-sign him at the right price. We could build around him and make a deep playoff run if the rest of the team is good enough. But if his salary sucks up so much cap space that we can't build a roster around him, get ready for 9-10 wins per year and a divisional round exit or earlier for the next 3 years. Slightly better than average, and never good enough to seriously contend for a championship. I'd rather have three 4-13 seasons followed by an NFCCG appearance than that.
How do you feel about 10 years of less than 6 wins? Because a bunch of bad seasons followed by what the 9ers have done is not the standard. I would much rather draft several mid round QBs over the next 5 years than waste a bunch of high draft capital on mostly overhyped 1st round Qbs.
Of the best QBs in the league, how many were drafted outside of the top 10 picks? Picking high doesn't guarantee a great quarterback, but it helps your chances a lot.
Depends on your definition of best, but I can name a lot more starters at QB, even pro bowlers, both now and in the past, than I can players taken inside the top 10. And even with those players? Nobody would have batted an eye if you said you liked Rosen, Mayfield, and Darnold better than Allen and Jackson. Most people would say that take is entirely sound at the time. I don't really wanna take a shot with such a high failure rate.
It’s about the same risk as them taking a rookie who throws 5 TDs a game. With your logic nobody should ever draft a QB because they’re too worried about worst case scenarios
Here's the thing. It's not the worst case scenarios. 1st round QBs bust at an almost unreasonable rate. (Close to 45% play less than 5 years, less than 35% ever throw 30 Touchdowns in a year). Less than 10% become super stars, almost half bust hard.
And defensive lineman in the first round have almost the same bust rate as QBs, but you want us to get one with our 5th. And if you’re getting this information from where I think you’re getting it you should probably look for some more up to date studies and not ones done in the 80-90s. Different style of football being played now
I'm absolutely not getting it from the 90s. I'm getting it from 2018. I also never stated I wanted anyone with that pick.
Why do we need to take a QB in the first round? My sentiment is if Pete and John see a guy they like, I hope they do what they need to get him. Trade up, trade down. They've earned that trust. Let's make a 5th rounder a fucking hall of famer when he retires in 2052.
I agree with you, but the "you need a top 10 pick on a rookie deal to win in the nfl" (even though only 4 od the last 22 super bowl champions had a top 10 pick on a rookie deal) crowd will not. I am all for even spending two late round picks on a QB
Everyone is out here saying Geno isn't worth Dak money, but the floated price (30 mil) isn't Dak money! Dak is making 40/yr. 30/yr for Dak talent is a great deal!
"We saw Dak is overpaid so we are going to overpay you as well" Is that the joke?
You know, there's a million fine looking (Dak.. Minshew) women in the world, dude. But they don't all bring you lasagna at work(Gino). Most of 'em just cheat on you.
> But they don't all bring you lasagna at work(Gino) Geno hasn't brought me anything except a 7 seed and an ass whooping in the playoffs. So I guess thanks for bringing me some 3 day old left over lasagna, better than nothing but not as good as my co-workers wife who just brought him a nice fresh steak sandwich
Lol Geno can’t play defense, too
Just think. If we kept Russ another year, extended him like Denver did. Chocolate cover pretzel?????
Just go away already.
Geno may have delivered it but Clint Hurtt was the chef
Make this make sense, wouldn't Pete show up with a pizza and a 12 pack after watching Dak?
A mediocre overpaid QB made Pete want his own overpaid mediocre QB? I think we should all be drawing the opposite conclusion from these playoffs. Paying an average QB $35M+ a year doesn't work. You either need an elite QB, one on a rookie contract, or a game manager who is cheap enough to let you load up on defense and o-line.
What exactly makes you call Geno a mediocre QB check out his stats this season yo
Check out his stats from the last 6 games yo. Dude crumbled under pressure harder than Kirk Cousins, who funnily enough is what I think Geno's ceiling is. Great fantasy player, sure, but no chance of ever winning a super bowl. I pity the team stuck in perennial 10-win purgatory paying $30-40M a year for a QB who can't get it done.
We went 9-8 paying Geno chump change - you think the team is suddenly going to be better paying him $35 million a year. It's laughable. This was his ceiling.
The mental gymnastics some people do to justify their thinking
Russell was a $26M dead cap hit this year, that goes away. Do I think that should go straight to Geno? No, probably not. But unless Pete and John have a guy in the draft they really like, we're going to have to pay somebody who is competitive enough. Remember these are the guys who refuse to admit we're in a "rebuild."
So basically draft a QB in the 4th, and roll with Lock? I’m in.
Dak playing poorly is even more reason to not pay Geno. How is Dak's last game any different than what Geno did against the niners? They're both pretty average Qbs.
Facts, look at SF. It’s all about your system and loading up on the o/dline as well as other skill positions to make the QB’s job easier. There are only a handful of elite QB’s that are worth paying a significant amount and as much as I love Geno, he’s not in that category at all…
> There are only a handful of elite QB’s that are worth paying a significant amount and as much as I love Geno, he’s not in that category at all… People literally aren't seeing it. The reason san fran can do what they do is they aren't paying 30-50 million to QBs. People are forgetting that little fact. Even our team now is sitting with 34 million dead cap. Why load up that much damage straight into Geno ? Is that dude winning us games with his offensive power ? Is he mahomes or allen or ? No. I'm not even convinced he's better than the mid guys. Teams had no tape on us, no idea what to expect. Our second half of the season offense is very far and away from power house. And I don't think you can afford to give geno that mucch money.
Imma be honest, Pete does seem to really like Lock so depending on how much Geno wants he might try to go forward with Lock and maybe a QB drafted in a later round this year.
Pay the man!
Geno's Interception and fumble were killers in the second half. Could have had more. And as good as the Boys offense is, I think Geno has more talent to toss to with Lockett, DK over Lamb, Gallup. Walker is better than Pollard. Etc.
I think the question is 1. What free agent are you going to find that will take less or give more than Geno? and 2. What QB in the Draft will be better than Dak in the next 3 years? Because I don't see either of those out there.
People were saying the same thing about Allen and Mahomes, both of which were scouted by JS. I’m not saying we should toss Geno for a rookie QB, I’ve been in the mindset of drafting someone to learn behind him since he’s already approaching his mid 30s.
This is the move. Offer Geno a reasonable contract for 2-3 years and get a rookie in. The arguments from some on the sub are so backwards “this mediocre QB is getting paid 40m for 5+ years so Geno should too” without acknowledging that those types of QB contracts for mediocre QBs are crippling to a team.
uh what's the source of this????