OT: Only 3 Teams Paying Their QB's Are In The Playoffs (cap hit of $30M or more)

[mgteich]

Posters often say that top (top 10 or playoff quality) QB's are worth $40M plus. Only 3 teams paying even $30M against the 2025 cap.

It very difficult to pay your top QB and still be able to afford a playoff team. There are 12 teams with QB's accounting for a cap of at least $30M.

OVER $40M CAP
only Stafford. LA has performed miracles with their drafting.

$30M - $40M
Herbert and Allen
================

CLOSE
Love and Lawrence are being paid and will be paid in the future, just not $30M yet.
===========
Acquiring a $30M+ QB by trade or free agency does NOT seem to be the road to success very often. Again, Stafford is the exception, but that was a trade of expensive QB's.

 

[Urgent]

Denver has an asterisk. They’re paying a quarterback more than $30M. Russell Wilson is on the books for $32M this year. All the more impressive what they’re doing with that constraint.

 

[Brick27]

So are you suggesting not paying Maye when the time comes? How many posters and how often? A top 10 QB isn’t always the same as having a top 10 paid QB.

 

[mgteich]

So are you suggesting not paying Maye when the time comes? How many posters and how often? A top 10 QB isn’t always the same as having a top 10 paid QB.

No. We'll see where we are when decisions need to be paid. I'm simply saying that paying a QB over $30M leads leads to failure at least as often as success. Plugging in Maye with a $60M a year contract as many have done certainly does NOT necessarily lead to success.

 

[Urgent]

Mahomes and the Chiefs have been to five of the past seven Super Bowls.
Tampa won with Brady in that stretch.
Burrows made a recent Super Bowl.

You can make a similar argument in a given year in MLB that high salaries don’t guarantee a World Series winner.
But didn’t hurt Los Angeles…

It might be interesting to look at the last decade and compare how much of the team cap is tied up in the QB for Super Bowl or playoff teams.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Mahomes and the Chiefs have been to five of the past seven Super Bowls.
Tampa won with Brady in that stretch.
Burrows made a recent Super Bowl.

You can make a similar argument in a given year in MLB that high salaries don’t guarantee a World Series winner.
But didn’t hurt Los Angeles…

apples an dprIt might be interesting to look at the last decade and compare how much of the team cap is tied up in the QB for Super Bowl or playoff teams.

Apples and oranges as there is no salary cap in Baseball. You can pay the starting pitcher without having to cut elsewhere....

 

[Toofy]

Simple solution - remove QB from salary cap.

 

[neckroll#14]

The problem with that is that large market teams or super rich owners will just buy the best QBs and parity will be destroyed. Same problem MLB has. The league would never go for that. However, the concept may be on the right track: a separate cap for QBs might work...

 

[Toofy]

Agree. Too much money spent on QB and nothing left puts team in lurch. By removing QB from cap space , teams can get back into relevancy quickly as opposed to having tank years which kills everyone including good players on loser teams.

Keep QB salary separate outside cap space and earmark max of 60 million .

Remaining cap space reduce 20 million from existing cap space.

Now make sure contracted money is never more than 3 years of annual salary for QB or include performance clauses to have an out after 3 years .

Injury riders applicable for 1 cumulative year over 3 year period . If QB gets frequently injured thats reason for annulling contract after 3 years.

This way NFL product quality will improve. QBs also will not slack after getting big contract .

Teams with rookie QB will get additional cap space for first 4 years or till rookie QB takes team to post season - 60 million - rookie QB salary. This will incentivize eams to allow rookies to mature and build around them . Don't want to keep this during entire rookie season lest it becomes hyper competitive advantage to teams that draft superstar rookie QB .

 

[mike_usagisan]

Mahomes is out with injury. Lamar is out with injury. Burrows was out for a good chunk of the season with injury. You could make a case that having an injured quarterback is more of a hindrance than having to pay the QB.

 

[BTTA]

Like the creative thinking. But with extra cap for FA, can you imagine how unbeatable the Brady Pats would have been? KC now?

 

[aluminum seats]

Yet another reason why Brady is the goat. He left tens of millions of dollars on the table in historically team friendly deals

 

[farn]

The top qb is worth it. I was slow to come around, but as pieces fall to injury, Maye is making it happen. I hope his ascent continues and that NE keeps him despite the hefty pay tag.

I had grown used to thinking 3&15 was doable. Since the pandemic, even 3&4 seemed like a stretch. I love this feeling of “it can still happen / we can move the chains”.

 

[gobesmug]

The problem with that is that large market teams or super rich owners will just buy the best QBs and parity will be destroyed. Same problem MLB has. The league would never go for that. However, the concept may be on the right track: a separate cap for QBs might work...

The NFL isn't MLB though, the Bengals are the cheapest franchise with a value of 5 billion.

Also it would be only 1 position as opposed to every position.

The owners could definitely do it and afford it. But it won't happen because the owners are greedy and want to keep a much money in their pockets. The players know it and that's why they negotiated that each had a minimum cap space needed to pay.

 

[neckroll#14]

I hear what you're saying, but the value of a franchise as an asset does not necessarily translate to its ability to manage a cash flow. The Bungles might have that $5M asset on their books, but ownership might not have the income from tix sales, concessions, TV revenue, stadium rent, etc to outbid a team in a major market like LA or NYC for a top QB. For that matter, would the fan-owned Packers agree to a billion dollar comp package (not so far-fetched at $100M/yr for 10 years) for the theoretical best QB out there?

 

[Toofy]

Like the creative thinking. But with extra cap for FA, can you imagine how unbeatable the Brady Pats would have been? KC now?

I thought about that and that's why wanted to give extra cap space for teams that start a rookie QB. Rookie QB will net you extra cap space ( 30 million ) for subsequent years that will be applicable for 3 years of the rookie . Rookie plays first year - cap space gets added in second year, same goes for 3rd year and so forth depending upon play time . We can cap that to max of 2 years or 3 years.

This way teams with rookie QB can have more cap space to add game changing veterans or playmakers. This might make the play even field with teams with established QBs .

 

[Toofy]

I hear what you're saying, but the value of a franchise as an asset does not necessarily translate to its ability to manage a cash flow. The Bungles might have that $5M asset on their books, but ownership might not have the income from tix sales, concessions, TV revenue, stadium rent, etc to outbid a team in a major market like LA or NYC for a top QB. For that matter, would the fan-owned Packers agree to a billion dollar comp package (not so far-fetched at $100M/yr for 10 years) for the theoretical best QB out there?

Cap QB salary at 60 million and will start at 30 million on first non rookie year and every year subsequent to that will add another 10 million and will get capped at 60 . The contract can be nullified after 2 years i.e if say tua has reached 60 million this calendar year 2025 , fins can pay tua 60 million and cut his contract. So the max hit on team cap space on poor performing contracts will be 60 million.

No more nonsensical tua or watson kinda contracts . If QB gets injured, the years get reset by 1. Two successive injured years no more reset. Team can get out on the 3rd year.

 

[ScottishPatriots]

All of this is just salary cap management, you can pay your QB top of the market and keep the salary cap number manageable by just making contract adjustments, converting bonuses and kicking the can down the road.

Josh Allen earned 58m in real cash this year and had a cap hit of 36m, right now his 2029 cap number is 86m and they'll just do it again and push more money into the future lowering the cap when he's playing and eating a big number at the end of his career.

Basically it just means at the end of his career you're gonna be eating a season or two of bad cap but you're gonna be drafting a rookie and in a rebuild anyway.

All of this to say you can still pay the QB and keep his salary cap number manageable if you're operating beyond the "cash to cap" model and are willing to spend.

 

[everlong]

Josh Allen earned 58m in real cash this year and had a cap hit of 36m, right now his 2029 cap number is 86m and they'll just do it again and push more money into the future lowering the cap when he's playing and eating a big number at the end of his career.

Jalen Hurts as well with an average contract value of 51M but only a 21M cap hit this year and he's been to two SBs and has one ring.

 

[everlong]

After the 2026 season (April 2027) they can extend him or at a minimum trigger the 5th year. With 2027 and 2028 seasons still within their control I hope they just extend him there to a deal which gives him the long term financial stability and is somewhat team friendly.

The highest paid QBs are all in the 55-60 range. In two years that's probably 65-70. If you can get him early to something like a 10/600 I think you do it.

I don't want to argue hypathetical numbers with anyone. I'm just saying if he's still playing like this at the end of next year I don't see how you don't pay him the franchise QB money. This isn't overpaying Tua or Flacco who were never more than average. IMO if you makes him play out the 5 years it will cost you more in the long term.