The Myth of Josh McCown the "Cheap Starter"

[Chris_Sanders]

I just want to take the time to debunk the myth about all the cap savings we will have with McCown being our starter.

Now assuming that I am wrong and that McCown will be a very good NFL QB. Let's say under Dennis Green he throws for say 3000 yards, 20 TDs and runs for another 300. I don't think I am being outrageous in this projection. This is what a decent QB should do in Dennis Green's system.

McCown is a restricted free agent next year. Even at Max tender of a first and a third, I think that the league is so QB poor right now that a team would give him a pretty hefty contract...one that the Cardinals would be forced to match or be right back at ground zero. Many of these style of contracts include poison pill type addendums where most of the money is front loaded in signing bonuses and includes early outs.

Now this isn't going to lead to the conclusion that the Cardinals should draft a QB this year. It is merely rebutting one of the more common comments I have seen so far.

Eventually we WILL end up paying for a decent QB. Either:

A: McCown's head matches his physical potential and we have to pay him a massive contract next year.

B: The Cardinals draft a QB and pay him.

C: McCown stinks and the Cardinals spend a high pick on a QB next year.


Or the least attractive option

D: We continue to cycle retread and reclamation projects through the organization in hopes of getting a QB on the cheap.

 

[ajcardfan]

Mighty big of you to drop the "McClown" moniker.

I do think you are right. Sooner, or later, you pay for a QB.

 

[Ryanwb]

We busted out for Jake Plummer...and where did that get us?

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Originally posted by ajcardfan
Mighty big of you to drop the "McClown" moniker.

I am sure he will earn the tag again soon enough

Someone gave me a big pool of kool aid so McCown is off the hook for now.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Chris_Sanders
I just want to take the time to debunk the myth about all the cap savings we will have with McCown being our starter.

Now assuming that I am wrong and that McCown will be a very good NFL QB. Let's say under Dennis Green he throws for say 3000 yards, 20 TDs and runs for another 300. I don't think I am being outrageous in this projection. This is what a decent QB should do in Dennis Green's system.

McCown is a restricted free agent next year. Even at Max tender of a first and a third, I think that the league is so QB poor right now that a team would give him a pretty hefty contract...one that the Cardinals would be forced to match or be right back at ground zero. Many of these style of contracts include poison pill type addendums where most of the money is front loaded in signing bonuses and includes early outs.

Now this isn't going to lead to the conclusion that the Cardinals should draft a QB this year. It is merely rebutting one of the more common comments I have seen so far.

Eventually we WILL end up paying for a decent QB. Either:

A: McCown's head matches his physical potential and we have to pay him a massive contract next year.

B: The Cardinals draft a QB and pay him.

C: McCown stinks and the Cardinals spend a high pick on a QB next year.


Or the least attractive option

D: We continue to cycle retread and reclamation projects through the organization in hopes of getting a QB on the cheap.

What has the team done with impending free agents?

Signed them before free agency.

So I would rather doubt that if McCown has a successful year (the numbers you mentioned) that he wouldn't be given a long term extension.

And if he plays well, he'll deserve that money.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Originally posted by Ryanwb
We busted out for Jake Plummer...and where did that get us?

Well the problem with the Plummer contract is we bid ourselves up. Fortunately I believe that those days of mismanagement are in the past.

That being said, if McCown's head does match his physical ability (which I have never refuted), I believe we will be looking at Jake type money.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Re: Re: The Myth of Josh McCown the "Cheap Starter"

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
What has the team done with impending free agents?

Signed them before free agency.

So I would rather doubt that if McCown has a successful year (the numbers you mentioned) that he wouldn't be given a long term extension.

And if he plays well, he'll deserve that money.

Precisely. But again this refutes the notion that McCown is a "cheap" QB. I am not bagging on McCown, I have just seen this said multiple times and it isn't accurate.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by Chris_Sanders
Well the problem with the Plummer contract is we bid ourselves up. Fortunately I believe that those days of mismanagement are in the past.

That being said, if McCown's head does match his physical ability (which I have never refuted), I believe we will be looking at Jake type money.

Which then again puts the Cards back to PAYING for a QB. Something I have said throughout. Your gonan pay for one either through the draft or if your , remarkably, able to pull one from FA. which is unlikely.

 

[Ryanwb]

Originally posted by Chris_Sanders
That being said, if McCown's head does match his physical ability (which I have never refuted), I believe we will be looking at Jake type money.

its a catch 22, if he has a good year next year, is it a fluke? Do you risk NOT extending him and having to pay twice as much if you wait?

I would risk it and tender offer him if he has a good year, this team has been burned badly in the past

 

[KingLouieLouie]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
Which then again puts the Cards back to PAYING for a QB. Something I have said throughout. Your gonan pay for one either through the draft or if your , remarkably, able to pull one from FA. which is unlikely.

But the difference is paying for an "unproven" QB coming out of the draft or acquiring someone who has NFL experience....Thats the biggest factor......

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by KingLouieLouie
But the difference is paying for an "unproven" QB coming out of the draft or acquiring someone who has NFL experience....Thats the biggest factor......

McCown has no experience!

3 games? thats experience? And not nearly the upside that Manning has either.

Acquiring a great NFL QB via FA isnt easy. Most teams dont jsut let them walk!

 

[KingLouieLouie]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
McCown has no experience!

3 games? thats experience? And not nearly the upside that Manning has either.

Acquiring a great NFL QB via FA isnt easy. Most teams dont jsut let them walk!

I wasn't referring to McCown whatsoever in my last post.... This comparing that it's a more of a risk to invest money on a QB w/out NFL experience than one who has proven himself in the league in general.....

What I was getting at on the other thread is that McCown never got the fair opportunity to prove himself under the previous staff, but this year will have an opportunity....If he does fail, then bring in someone else in......

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by KingLouieLouie
I wasn't referring to McCown whatsoever in my last post.... This comparing that it's a more of a risk to invest money on a QB w/out NFL experience than one who has proven himself in the league in general.....

What I was getting at on the other thread is that McCown never got the fair opportunity to prove himself under the previous staff, but this year will have an opportunity....If he does fail, then bring in someone else in......

I agree having a proven QB to 'bring in' as a FA would be much less of a risk. However that is not reality. Teams dont let proven QB's just walk! Your gonna have to draft someone.

If your OK with bringing in a QB next year after MCown plays this year why wouldnt you want to do it now? It would be cheaper and frankly the 3rd best QB in this years draft is probably better then the #1 QB projected in next years class (i know its early things change) but come one if it were a money issue why not get the better, cheaper QB now? I dont understand the reasoning?

 

[spanky1]

Chris,

Very weak argument.......yes, if McCown "approaches" his potential this coming year, he'll require a new contract (well he will anyway).....but he can be signed to a long extention without too much trouble at this stage of his career. It's not as though he'll be expecting a Peyton Manning type agreement. Brady as an example (two MVP SB trophies in 3 years) and he is really affordable for another two years.

It all is determined when you renegotiate.....if McCown is having a rip snorter of a year, you renegotiate around game #10....but you don't give him the "Plummer handshake"......nor would he expect it.

Where it becomes critical is in the third contract negotiation.

 

[JeffGollin]

I presume where you're going with this are the arguments pro and con for drafting a blue chip QB at #3.

One thing that may have been overlooked as a factor is that all a higher pick in the draft gives you is the opportunity to pick a player who has a greater likelihood of being better. There's no guarantee, however that he'll actually BE better.

But at the same time - all things being equal, the chance of the dude you pick in the 1st round being a better player is more favorable than it would be for a dude you'd pick later in the draft (with the same caveat that there are no guarantees).

Obviously, when you're drawing distinctions between 1st round talent and later round talent - return on investment becomes an important consideration.

But if you're trying to improve your football team through the draft, I think it's axiomatic that - all other things being equal - you're more likely to get a better player with a higher draft pick than you will with a later one.

(Otherwise, why not just trade all your picks in the first six rounds for a whole bunch of 7th rounders).

It kind of reminds me of the election politics of the past 25 years that somehow turned everything topsy-turvy so that "knowing more" than someone else was somehow considered to be a negative.

Bottom Line: Higher Pick = Good. Later Pick = Not as Good

 

[spanky1]

Now here we are talking about contract extentions for McCown, when it is far too early to even think of going there,.......

but has any QB other than Peyton Manning hit paydirt like Jake has?

Talk about the luck of the Irish.......he pulled the wool so far over our heads (and now Denvers) that even if he is out of football in one more year, he's made so much money it's incredible........all the power to him.

As Donald Trump likes to say.......the art is the deal!

 

[KingLouieLouie]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
I agree having a proven QB to 'bring in' as a FA would be much less of a risk. However that is not reality. Teams dont let proven QB's just walk! Your gonna have to draft someone.

If your OK with bringing in a QB next year after MCown plays this year why wouldnt you want to do it now? It would be cheaper and frankly the 3rd best QB in this years draft is probably better then the #1 QB projected in next years class (i know its early things change) but come one if it were a money issue why not get the better, cheaper QB now? I dont understand the reasoning?

"The times they are a changing" (sorry to quote Robert Zimmerman) in N.F.L. in which players you'd never expect to switch teams have done so this past off-season, so it wouldnt stun me if a top-notch QB goes on the market for whatever reason...Nothing ceases me anymore with personnel movement in the NFL....

You don't understand the reasoning? My logic is that if the QB talent pool is deeper in '05 (which we honestly dont know at this time since most players emerge later on, especially getting the hype from the media that it seems everyone clings onto), then the Cardinals could draft someone at around #10-#15 in next years draft they may turn out to be better than or equal to Eli and Ben and not cost the Cardinals the lucrative contract that the 3rd over-all pick merits.....

And if McCown does prove himself in '04 (and again the point Ive said many times on this that the Cardinals waste a pick and money on a position that isnt a complete need compared to other areas that must be addressed), he'll probably be still an economical player compared to someone who everyone is just basing his college accolades and thinks it translates into guaranteed success in the NFL.....

We all just must wait-and-see on this....It's all pure speculation... I think it's safe to say, let's see McCown play one year under
Green/Kruczek before we judge McCown.....

I think if there was to be a "franchise" label in football would be a "franchise coach" and they now finally have that in Denny Green...

 

[pinnacle]

if josh has a very good 1st half of the season....I would be shocked if the cardinals did not redo his contract for a decent number (i.e. reasonable)... I think josh would agree to a new contract...unless he is talked out of it by his agent...

 

[spanky1]

Russ,

You of course mean Bob Dylan

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by KingLouieLouie
"The times they are a changing" (sorry to quote Robert Zimmerman) in N.F.L. in which players you'd never expect to switch teams have done so this past off-season, so it wouldnt stun me if a top-notch QB goes on the market for whatever reason...Nothing ceases me anymore with personnel movement in the NFL....

You don't understand the reasoning? My logic is that if the QB talent pool is deeper in '05 (which we honestly dont know at this time since most players emerge later on, especially getting the hype from the media that it seems everyone clings onto), then the Cardinals could draft someone at around #10-#15 in next years draft they may turn out to be better than or equal to Eli and Ben and not cost the Cardinals the lucrative contract that the 3rd over-all pick merits.....

And if McCown does prove himself in '04 (and again the point Ive said many times on this that the Cardinals waste a pick and money on a position that isnt a complete need compared to other areas that must be addressed), he'll probably be still an economical player compared to someone who everyone is just basing his college accolades and thinks it translates into guaranteed success in the NFL.....

We all just must wait-and-see on this....It's all pure speculation... I think it's safe to say, let's see McCown play one year under
Green/Kruczek before we judge McCown.....

I think if there was to be a "franchise" label in football would be a "franchise coach" and they now finally have that in Denny Green...

Lots of 'IF's in your post, but hey OK, we will see as it doesnt really look like this team will pick a QB with the #3 anyway!

I just dont agree with it is all. I will give Green the benefit of the doubt however and hope he makes MCown into a world beater.

But for safety's sake I wont be holding my breath!

 

[KingLouieLouie]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
Lots of 'IF's in your post, but hey OK, we will see as it doesnt really look like this team will pick a QB with the #3 anyway!

I just dont agree with it is all. I will give Green the benefit of the doubt however and hope he makes MCown into a world beater.

But for safety's sake I wont be holding my breath!

Isn't there a lot of IF's in everything we've been addressing on this!

Seriously, I guess we're all learn "agree to disagree" on this.... That there really isn't a right or wrong on the issue...Only time can dictate how everything actually will materialize....

Isnt speculation fun?

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Well several of you seem to be operating under the notion that if Josh is having a good season, that he and his agent will be overly amicable to a mid season renegotiation.

Unfortunately QBs seldom work out like that. QB is the "money" position to any agent and he will try to get the best possible offer for his client. This will mean listening to the tendered offers.

As to pros and cons for drafting a QB...I am deliberating leaving that out of this thread. My whole purpose here is to debunk the notion that McCown will be an affordable QB.

Now to Spanky's comment. The reason that Plummer got "Plummer money" from Denver is because he was regarded as the best QB on the market. This year the best QB on the market is Jeff Garcia who signed a 4 year 25 million dollar contract.

Definitely Jake level money.

Any QB that hits free agency that is even competent will make big bucks.

Unless McCown fails as our QB, he is due to be paid at least on the level of some 34 year old QB that has drinking issues.

 

[Skkorpion]

But if you're trying to improve your football team through the draft, I think it's axiomatic that - all other things being equal - you're more likely to get a better player with a higher draft pick than you will with a later one.

Jeff, a couple of years ago, some writer for ESPN did the research and determined there were more 2nd round picks in the NFL Hall Of Fame than 1st round picks. I'm going to try to dig up the article.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by spanky1
Chris,



It all is determined when you renegotiate.....if McCown is having a rip snorter of a year, you renegotiate around game #10....but you don't give him the "Plummer handshake"......nor would he expect it.

Where it becomes critical is in the third contract negotiation.

Disagree, look at Blake as an example. He beat out Redman in Baltimore and wanted starter money, they wanted him to start but be "cheap" and they lost him.

Josh has an agent, if he plays well this year his agent will be saying the same thing any other agent of a starting NFL QB would, I'm the starter, pay me. Bulger did it, so will Josh.

i've been saying this for awhile myself, Josh is only cheap now, if he's as good as Green thinks he is, he's going to wind up costing like a starting NFL QB.

 

[ajcardfan]

Yeah, if McCown is lighting it up, there's no way he signs a "cheap" deal in midseason. Much like Shelton, you'd have to offer enough of a bonus to where the fear of injury, and losing it, is enough to make them grab the pen.