(03-19-2023, 10:51 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(03-19-2023, 10:11 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: Yea but it wouldn’t interfere with building a roster.

You won’t have to choose between signing your QB and potentially losing other players.

Doesn't serve parity 

Never enough good QBs 

You wanna keep one - you gotta pay and deal with cap consequence 

I wouldn't change that -it would allow QB driven dynasties to dominate

Exactly.

The key to winning long term is to have a great QB and to draft every other position well.

The other way to win is in spurts by not overpaying for a QB and keeping a core group of elite players together.

What screws it up for most teams is they overpay for a borderline QB instead of recognizing that they can't win with that guy anyway so they should trade them for more picks. Guys like Jackson and Cousins and Tanneyhill are good examples of it. The Jaguars fell into this trap hard in 2018 and 19.

The Ravens should have traded Jackson years ago instead of playing his contract games, the Vikings should have never given cousins so much guaranteed money, and the titans shouldn't have given Tanneyhill such a large contact.

---