Parsons traded to Green Bay (2 Viewers)

[dblock05]

Can someone explain how it is a 3 year deal for 141M

I think we can probably look at it as a 3 year contract for $141m.

Cash paid:

3 yrs $124 MM
4 yrs $165 MM

Real terms this deal is barely above $41 MM per. As usual the initial reported $47 MM avg was B.S.

I am pretty good with contracts but this one is throwing me off. Is this a 3 year for 141M or 124/3 like you are saying? From what I can see….it actually is 47M a year.

https://x.com/tompelissero/status/1961509820642775351?s=46&t=XtDJ_TmXvAMWGG5Ul29iKQ

Maybe Pelissero's report was perhaps a bit early. But I guess it depends on which source you trust as there are still some conflicting reports out there.

Spotrac has it at $124,007,000 cash paid after three years, which averages $41.3m per year - https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/player/_/id/72392/micah-parsons/contract/cash - at which time the Packers may have a cheap out. However, there are per game bonuses and escalators that can easily add another million or two if he hits them. The other confusing part is the Contract Note: "$12.9M of 2028 salary fully guarantees in March 2027." This seems to suggest they might have to make a decision before the third year because that much guaranteed $$ makes it hard to cut him after the 27-28 season.

I think the funny thing also is that spotrac has Tom P as their source. It is strange

 

[rockaction]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

 

[MAC_32]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

 

[rockaction]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

 

[MAC_32]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

We're on the same page I tend to gloss over, or at least try to, extreme opinions as they don't represent the majority. They're just framed as if they are.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

... everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons

Can't speak for the reactions of people but he got less for a proven top pass rusher, one of the most highly valued and prized positions in the league for LESS than what the Browns got for trading down 3 spots in this year's draft.
Browns got more for draft day trade than Cowboys did for Micah Parsons
...Using the Fitzgerald-Spielberger NFL Draft trade value chart, the Browns came out with more draft capital for trading the rights to Hunter than the Cowboys did for a proven All-Pro pass rusher in his prime.
Adding up the difference between the second pick and the fifth pick, the value of picks 36 and 104, and then even calculating the Jaguars' 2026 pick as a mid-first rounder, the Browns came out with a value of over 3,800. Even giving the Packers' picks the value of a mid-first rounder, which is the maximum of what that pick could become given the competitive roster of Green Bay, that equals just around 3,200.
Of course, a veteran like Kenny Clark has to be included in the value as well. He is under contract with the Cowboys for the next three years with no guaranteed money. However, Clark is 30 years old and coming off the worst season of his career.
So yeah, the Cowboys got worked over in this one.

 

[rockaction]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

We're on the same page I tend to gloss over, or at least try to, extreme opinions as they don't represent the majority. They're just framed as if they are.

I think I get what you’re saying. Gotcha. If I understand you, you are not concerned with reacting to the vehemence because you pay it no mind, but you don’t want to lose sight of this being something Jerry botched pretty badly.

 

[MAC_32]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

We're on the same page I tend to gloss over, or at least try to, extreme opinions as they don't represent the majority. They're just framed as if they are.

I think I get what you’re saying. Gotcha. If I understand you, you are not concerned with reacting to the vehemence because you pay it no mind, but you don’t want to lose sight of this being something Jerry botched pretty badly.

Whether this works out for Green Bay in the long run, we'll see, as there is some substantial risk, but we already know how this will pan out for Dallas as long as Jerry is still in charge.

 

[cdclopper]

... everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons

Can't speak for the reactions of people but he got less for a proven top pass rusher, one of the most highly valued and prized positions in the league for LESS than what the Browns got for trading down 3 spots in this year's draft.
Browns got more for draft day trade than Cowboys did for Micah Parsons
...Using the Fitzgerald-Spielberger NFL Draft trade value chart, the Browns came out with more draft capital for trading the rights to Hunter than the Cowboys did for a proven All-Pro pass rusher in his prime.
Adding up the difference between the second pick and the fifth pick, the value of picks 36 and 104, and then even calculating the Jaguars' 2026 pick as a mid-first rounder, the Browns came out with a value of over 3,800. Even giving the Packers' picks the value of a mid-first rounder, which is the maximum of what that pick could become given the competitive roster of Green Bay, that equals just around 3,200.
Of course, a veteran like Kenny Clark has to be included in the value as well. He is under contract with the Cowboys for the next three years with no guaranteed money. However, Clark is 30 years old and coming off the worst season of his career.
So yeah, the Cowboys got worked over in this one.

There is a difference between getting a player on his rookie contract for 4 years vs getting a player and then having to make him the highest paid defensive player in the NFL. The Cowboys used up most of the value of drafting Parsons then got 2 firsts at the end of it. Another way to look at it, they weren't going to resign the player anyway, and they got 2 1sts instead of whatever they would get in comp picks.

I'm in agreement with you that the Browns fleeced the Jaguars real bad. The structure of your argument doesn't make sense to me tho. Basically the Cowboys are dumb because the Jaguars were way dumber?

 

[Ghost Rider]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

We're on the same page I tend to gloss over, or at least try to, extreme opinions as they don't represent the majority. They're just framed as if they are.

I think I get what you’re saying. Gotcha. If I understand you, you are not concerned with reacting to the vehemence because you pay it no mind, but you don’t want to lose sight of this being something Jerry botched pretty badly.

Whether this works out for Green Bay in the long run, we'll see, as there is some substantial risk, but we already know how this will pan out for Dallas as long as Jerry is still in charge.

True, but the Cowboys weren't exactly lighting the world on fire with Parsons playing on his rookie contract (1 playoff win in 4 years), and with the report about how his podcast caused issues within the locker room (something I have mentioned numerous times as being something about Parsons that was problematic), I am also in the camp of while this wasn't the best move for Dallas, it's not the all-out disaster most are making it out to be. The Packers just paid an arm and a leg for a player who might put some of his new teammates on blast at any time for views on his podcast. Don't get me wrong, Parsons is a great player, and elite pass rushers like him are very valuable, but I am just saying, there is baggage with him.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

 

[Bracie Smathers]

There is a difference between getting a player on his rookie contract for 4 years vs getting a player and then having to make him the highest paid defensive player in the NFL. The Cowboys used up most of the value of drafting Parsons then got 2 firsts at the end of it. Another way to look at it, they weren't going to resign the player anyway, and they got 2 1sts instead of whatever they would get in comp picks.

I'm in agreement with you that the Browns fleeced the Jaguars real bad. The structure of your argument doesn't make sense to me tho. Basically the Cowboys are dumb because the Jaguars were way dumber?

You're framing the deal as win for Dallas in terms of contract plus draft comp VS. Browns draft day deal.
Both incorrect. Browns deal was newsworthy as everyone is trying to compare the Micah trade.
You can't figure in past performance as value taken from this deal going forward.
Throw out both of those scenarios and focus on what Dallas got VS. given up.
Gave up - multi-Pro Bowl top EDGE pass rusher at highly prized position of value.
Received - Pro Bowl DT age 30 who is a run stuffer and 2 future 1st round draft picks from GB
GB without the DT with Micah is better defensively.
Dallas 'should' improve its run defense and has a stable of pass rushers, but none are playmaking pass rushers of Micah's caliber, they WILL take a pass rush/playmaking hit defensively.
Future 1st round pick value.
Over the past two years without Micah the Pack selected 23rd in 2025 and 25th in 2024. Even if Micah does not move the needle the future picks will land ~ 24th.
We don't know how the picks taken this year will perform and it is still too early for the 24 class so go back 3 and 4 years and look at the players taken with the 24th pick.
I didn't look up anything and have no idea what sort of players were taken in those spots.
In 2023 the Giants took DB Deonte Banks. I honestly do not know if he has played well or not.
In 2022 the Cowboys took OT Tyler Smith. Once again, I honestly do not know if he has played well or not.
Those are the approximate future value.

 

[rockaction]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

That’s cool, but I wasn’t talking about the people here. Right now the entire sports world (and believe me, not everyone is jealous of your team) is taking a metaphorical **** on Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. It’s bad. You might get indignant about it but it’s a national joke for the most part.

Believe me, I’m used to it as a Jets fan, but there’s an extra special hate for a guy that many get the feeling is responsible for a lot of bad **** to do with the NFL. I don’t get on the advanced in age out of sort of principle but I think other people wonder why they should have scruples about destroying Jerry when not only is he pretty much an unprincipled guy but he’s so flamboyantly bad at being a GM who also lies about being one.

It’s just ugly and you’re probably the only team besides Cincinnati I wouldn’t trade owners with. I think that’s where the hate comes from. It’s not jealousy. It’s actual loathing.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

There is a difference between getting a player on his rookie contract for 4 years vs getting a player and then having to make him the highest paid defensive player in the NFL. The Cowboys used up most of the value of drafting Parsons then got 2 firsts at the end of it. Another way to look at it, they weren't going to resign the player anyway, and they got 2 1sts instead of whatever they would get in comp picks.

I'm in agreement with you that the Browns fleeced the Jaguars real bad. The structure of your argument doesn't make sense to me tho. Basically the Cowboys are dumb because the Jaguars were way dumber?

You're framing the deal as win for Dallas in terms of contract plus draft comp VS. Browns draft day deal.
Both incorrect. Browns deal was newsworthy as everyone is trying to compare the Micah trade.
You can't figure in past performance as value taken from this deal going forward.
Throw out both of those scenarios and focus on what Dallas got VS. given up.
Gave up - multi-Pro Bowl top EDGE pass rusher at highly prized position of value.
Received - Pro Bowl DT age 30 who is a run stuffer and 2 future 1st round draft picks from GB
GB without the DT with Micah is better defensively.
Dallas 'should' improve its run defense and has a stable of pass rushers, but none are playmaking pass rushers of Micah's caliber, they WILL take a pass rush/playmaking hit defensively.
Future 1st round pick value.
Over the past two years without Micah the Pack selected 23rd in 2025 and 25th in 2024. Even if Micah does not move the needle the future picks will land ~ 24th.
We don't know how the picks taken this year will perform and it is still too early for the 24 class so go back 3 and 4 years and look at the players taken with the 24th pick.
I didn't look up anything and have no idea what sort of players were taken in those spots.
In 2023 the Giants took DB Deonte Banks. I honestly do not know if he has played well or not.
In 2022 the Cowboys took OT Tyler Smith. Once again, I honestly do not know if he has played well or not.
Those are the approximate future value.

Tyler Smith is the best player on the team not named Lamb.

I am not overly happy with what the Packers picks will likely be but who knows if Love misses time.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

That’s cool, but I wasn’t talking about the people here. Right now the entire sports world (and believe me, not everyone is jealous of your team) is taking a metaphorical **** on Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. It’s bad. You might get indignant about it but it’s a national joke for the most part.

Believe me, I’m used to it as a Jets fan, but there’s an extra special hate for a guy that many get the feeling is responsible for a lot of bad **** to do with the NFL. I don’t get on the advanced in age out of sort of principle but I think other people wonder why they should have scruples about destroying Jerry when not only is he pretty much an unprincipled guy but he’s so flamboyantly bad at being a GM who also lies about being one.

It’s just ugly and you’re probably the only team besides Cincinnati I wouldn’t trade owners with. I think that’s where the hate comes from. It’s not jealousy. It’s actual loathing.

Nobody cares about the Jets. I didn’t take it personal. Me saying people especially hate the cowboys so that will influence their response is hardly a revelation.

Indignant? They are a professional sports team selling a product. I’m not butthurt if people dislike them. Couldn’t care less.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Tyler Smith is the best player on the team not named Lamb.

Yeah, I checked and he's great and already a Pro Bowl OG, the other guy, ehh nah.
OK, move forward 4 years when Micah's deal is up for an extension.
The DT has moved on, the DB is buh bye, so it is basically a Pro Bowl OG VS. a top-flight EDGE on a HOF trajectory.
Value of a Pro Bowl OG. Good, not great. For an offensive play to work nearly ALL players have to perform well 'enough' to hit a big play.
Value of a big-play EDGE pass rusher.
The DC could make a bad read/call, but the EDGE could still make a big play.
The OC could make a PERFECT read/call, but the EDGE could still make a big play.
The number of times a Pro Bowl OG can make a big play on his own is probably less than once a year. He's dependent as part of a group. If one player moves too soon, play over. One player breaks down next to him causing a sack, play over. Etc. et el.
One top-flight game changing EDGE can impact a play all on his own.
It's a win for EDGE over a Pro Bowl OG. The value of the position is based on impact. Teams don't game plan around OGs; they do for Top EDGE players.

 

[MAC_32]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

People that don't want to read opinions that don't align with their bias find any reason they can to discredit those opinions. This is America in the year of our lord 2025. If anything, my being a Browns fan gives me more credibility to speak on such matters for I know what a train wreck looks like

 

[Grahamburn]

I find it genuinely shocking there is any debate about whether this was a good trade for the Packers. This is either extreme coping or commitment to the contrarian view. The hot takes just make people look ignorant or bitter. The goal of every team is to win a championship. Adding a player who has finished in the top 3 of voting for DPOY his first 3 seasons improves that chance. For those saying "look at the money", we've been here before. The salary cap rises. Contracts can be renegotiated. The markets move. I've seen so many Lions fans mention the salary numbers. Guess what, the Lions will be paying Hutchinson even more. Are you advocating to trade him? I understand Cowboys fans and media now trying to justify the trade with the "locker room" problem. This backlash is as old as the media. You can set your watch to it.

I'm also still surprised at the opinions that this wasn't a huge win by Green Bay. As a fan I don't care about picks, or contracts 2 years from now.

Two years ago this team won a road playoff game against a hot Dallas team and just barely lost on the road to the 9ers who made the super bowl. Last year they went 11-6 in possibly the toughest division in football losing to the eventual super bowl champs in the playoffs. Not to shabby for the youngest team in the league.

How anyone thinks this move doesn't make sense and isn't a massive win I can't understand. These are the types of moves that win championships. It's not apples to apples, but Reggie White and Charles Woodson came to town with young upstart QBs and a quality roster, the rest is history.

Has anyone said it wasn’t a good move for GB?

I was defending it from Dallas’ perspective but that doesn’t mean I don’t also think GB made their team better.

It can be both.

 

[ghostguy123]

I find it genuinely shocking there is any debate about whether this was a good trade for the Packers. This is either extreme coping or commitment to the contrarian view. The hot takes just make people look ignorant or bitter. The goal of every team is to win a championship. Adding a player who has finished in the top 3 of voting for DPOY his first 3 seasons improves that chance. For those saying "look at the money", we've been here before. The salary cap rises. Contracts can be renegotiated. The markets move. I've seen so many Lions fans mention the salary numbers. Guess what, the Lions will be paying Hutchinson even more. Are you advocating to trade him? I understand Cowboys fans and media now trying to justify the trade with the "locker room" problem. This backlash is as old as the media. You can set your watch to it.

I'm also still surprised at the opinions that this wasn't a huge win by Green Bay. As a fan I don't care about picks, or contracts 2 years from now.

Two years ago this team won a road playoff game against a hot Dallas team and just barely lost on the road to the 9ers who made the super bowl. Last year they went 11-6 in possibly the toughest division in football losing to the eventual super bowl champs in the playoffs. Not to shabby for the youngest team in the league.

How anyone thinks this move doesn't make sense and isn't a massive win I can't understand. These are the types of moves that win championships. It's not apples to apples, but Reggie White and Charles Woodson came to town with young upstart QBs and a quality roster, the rest is history.

Has anyone said it wasn’t a good move for GB?

I was defending it from Dallas’ perspective but that doesn’t mean I don’t also think GB made their team better.

It can be both.

It's a good move for GB for the next couple years. They will feel it after that though.
I'm sure they realize this.

 

[Grahamburn]

I find it genuinely shocking there is any debate about whether this was a good trade for the Packers. This is either extreme coping or commitment to the contrarian view. The hot takes just make people look ignorant or bitter. The goal of every team is to win a championship. Adding a player who has finished in the top 3 of voting for DPOY his first 3 seasons improves that chance. For those saying "look at the money", we've been here before. The salary cap rises. Contracts can be renegotiated. The markets move. I've seen so many Lions fans mention the salary numbers. Guess what, the Lions will be paying Hutchinson even more. Are you advocating to trade him? I understand Cowboys fans and media now trying to justify the trade with the "locker room" problem. This backlash is as old as the media. You can set your watch to it.

I'm also still surprised at the opinions that this wasn't a huge win by Green Bay. As a fan I don't care about picks, or contracts 2 years from now.

Two years ago this team won a road playoff game against a hot Dallas team and just barely lost on the road to the 9ers who made the super bowl. Last year they went 11-6 in possibly the toughest division in football losing to the eventual super bowl champs in the playoffs. Not to shabby for the youngest team in the league.

How anyone thinks this move doesn't make sense and isn't a massive win I can't understand. These are the types of moves that win championships. It's not apples to apples, but Reggie White and Charles Woodson came to town with young upstart QBs and a quality roster, the rest is history.

Has anyone said it wasn’t a good move for GB?

I was defending it from Dallas’ perspective but that doesn’t mean I don’t also think GB made their team better.

It can be both.

It's a good move for GB for the next couple years. They will feel it after that though.
I'm sure they realize this.

Cap going up every year it seems like, and if he’s performing up to expectations they’ll extend/restructure.

It’s a great move for them.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

People that don't want to read opinions that don't align with their bias find any reason they can to discredit those opinions. This is America in the year of our lord 2025. If anything, my being a Browns fan gives me more credibility to speak on such matters for I know what a train wreck looks like

Im not discrediting anyone's opinion, just stating that no where is bias more prevalent than in the sports realm.

The Cowboys didnt trade away Babe Ruth. They traded away a guy who was UNDER CONTRACT and acting a fool. A guy who openly not only talks about his employer and teamates candidly, also opposing teams and players....during the season.

On it being super cool to bash Jerry - in a results based industry, its fair to critizize Jerry but hes hardyl the trainwreck its made out to be. Playoff sucess or not - The Cowboys have had the talent to win. The lights are bright in Dallas and you get everyone's A game every single game. Everybody wants to beat the pretty boy Dallas Cowboys. Its a tougher hill to climb in Dallas and other than about 6 years in the 90s and a handful of years in the 70s - almost every other version of the Cowboys have been front running, fold in the moment teams. Thats ligterally their identity. Jerry gets in the way and the culture is a mess but they arent criminally mismanaged.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

If Parsons ain't worth two 1s, then no one is.

Cowboys fan in my league loved the deal for Dallas. They sucked against the run, and Parsons was a zero there.

He also made a good point that GB is gonna be paying $100M a year for 2 players (Love & Parsons).

Anyway, I fully expected him to hate the deal but it was the opposite.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Tyler Smith is the best player on the team not named Lamb.

Yeah, I checked and he's great and already a Pro Bowl OG, the other guy, ehh nah.
OK, move forward 4 years when Micah's deal is up for an extension.
The DT has moved on, the DB is buh bye, so it is basically a Pro Bowl OG VS. a top-flight EDGE on a HOF trajectory.
Value of a Pro Bowl OG. Good, not great. For an offensive play to work nearly ALL players have to perform well 'enough' to hit a big play.
Value of a big-play EDGE pass rusher.
The DC could make a bad read/call, but the EDGE could still make a big play.
The OC could make a PERFECT read/call, but the EDGE could still make a big play.
The number of times a Pro Bowl OG can make a big play on his own is probably less than once a year. He's dependent as part of a group. If one player moves too soon, play over. One player breaks down next to him causing a sack, play over. Etc. et el.
One top-flight game changing EDGE can impact a play all on his own.
It's a win for EDGE over a Pro Bowl OG. The value of the position is based on impact. Teams don't game plan around OGs; they do for Top EDGE players.

You said you didn't know about Smith. I said he was good. I was never suggesting a OG was =/> than a Edge player.

Since you stated it, and again, this isnt my argument, but the comparison isnt Edge Vs OG, its VERY Good DT+potentially two more high potential players.


The Cowboys drafted Micah by trading back with the Giants, got arguably Micah's best years in the league, underpaid him and then got 3 more players from him. They did fairly well handling this dispite what the mob says.

 

[miqws]

What drags Dallas down is late decision making. Dallas received less than what they could have got in March, and continues to lose value with their negotiating tactics. This article written prior to the Parsons trade sums it up pretty well:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...rescott-ceedee-lamb-cost-jerry-jones-millions

Green Bay paid a premium to acquire a force multiplier that they lacked. You can spend premium when you think you have a roster at good value. Fantasy wise I think it is a signal that they like Golden a lot.

Sadly it gives ESPN’s talking heads plenty of material for the foreseeable future.

 

[massraider]

He also made a good point that GB is gonna be paying $100M a year for 2 players (Love & Parsons).

In 2028.

Until then, they are both reasonable salary cap hits. That's after three seasons from now. It's forever away.

 

[FarFromHome]

He also made a good point that GB is gonna be paying $100M a year for 2 players (Love & Parsons).

In 2028.

Until then, they are both reasonable salary cap hits. That's after three seasons from now. It's forever away.

Odds they are paying 2 players 100 million on the salary cap in 2028? Zero percent?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

He also made a good point that GB is gonna be paying $100M a year for 2 players (Love & Parsons).

In 2028.

Until then, they are both reasonable salary cap hits. That's after three seasons from now. It's forever away.

Odds they are paying 2 players 100 million on the salary cap in 2028? Zero percent?

I never said the cowboys fan in my home league was smart. I’m just sayin he said it.

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

I find it genuinely shocking there is any debate about whether this was a good trade for the Packers. This is either extreme coping or commitment to the contrarian view. The hot takes just make people look ignorant or bitter. The goal of every team is to win a championship. Adding a player who has finished in the top 3 of voting for DPOY his first 3 seasons improves that chance. For those saying "look at the money", we've been here before. The salary cap rises. Contracts can be renegotiated. The markets move. I've seen so many Lions fans mention the salary numbers. Guess what, the Lions will be paying Hutchinson even more. Are you advocating to trade him? I understand Cowboys fans and media now trying to justify the trade with the "locker room" problem. This backlash is as old as the media. You can set your watch to it.

I'm also still surprised at the opinions that this wasn't a huge win by Green Bay. As a fan I don't care about picks, or contracts 2 years from now.

Two years ago this team won a road playoff game against a hot Dallas team and just barely lost on the road to the 9ers who made the super bowl. Last year they went 11-6 in possibly the toughest division in football losing to the eventual super bowl champs in the playoffs. Not to shabby for the youngest team in the league.

How anyone thinks this move doesn't make sense and isn't a massive win I can't understand. These are the types of moves that win championships. It's not apples to apples, but Reggie White and Charles Woodson came to town with young upstart QBs and a quality roster, the rest is history.

Has anyone said it wasn’t a good move for GB?

I was defending it from Dallas’ perspective but that doesn’t mean I don’t also think GB made their team better.

It can be both.

Yes. There's been some. I don't really want to dig through and point fingers at any particular posts, but not everyone sees it as a great move (or even good) on Green Bay's part. I didn't mean posts from anyone defending the Cowboys.

Personally I haven't looked at much from the Dallas point of view. They got a good player and two firsts, will that be the foundation for their future I have no idea, it'll be a few years to know. Green Bay will see success or not pretty immediately though. Everyone can probably agree with that.

 

[dutch]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

People that don't want to read opinions that don't align with their bias find any reason they can to discredit those opinions. This is America in the year of our lord 2025. If anything, my being a Browns fan gives me more credibility to speak on such matters for I know what a train wreck looks like

Im not discrediting anyone's opinion, just stating that no where is bias more prevalent than in the sports realm.

The Cowboys didnt trade away Babe Ruth. They traded away a guy who was UNDER CONTRACT and acting a fool. A guy who openly not only talks about his employer and teamates candidly, also opposing teams and players....during the season.

On it being super cool to bash Jerry - in a results based industry, its fair to critizize Jerry but hes hardyl the trainwreck its made out to be. Playoff sucess or not - The Cowboys have had the talent to win. The lights are bright in Dallas and you get everyone's A game every single game. Everybody wants to beat the pretty boy Dallas Cowboys. Its a tougher hill to climb in Dallas and other than about 6 years in the 90s and a handful of years in the 70s - almost every other version of the Cowboys have been front running, fold in the moment teams. Thats ligterally their identity. Jerry gets in the way and the culture is a mess but they arent criminally mismanaged.

But, they are the Only NFC team to not make it past the divisional rd in the last 25 seasons and all but two of the others have been to at least 2 championship games. We aren't talking about the recent 49ers who've been to 3 sb's and four other championship games since 2000, we're talking about a franchise that can't get out of it's own way or get over the hump to compete with the best in the conference when it matters most. The Cowboys continually fall limp once playoff time rolls around. That's the sign of a criminally mismanaged team, imo. Any other organization would have fired a gm with the same results at least ten years ago much like Jerry fired McCarthy. Th Cowboys are a hot mess and will remain so while Jones is still playing GM for them. This trade does nothing to mitigate that fact.

 

[Gatorade]

Tyler Smith is the best player on the team not named Lamb.

Yeah, I checked and he's great and already a Pro Bowl OG, the other guy, ehh nah.
OK, move forward 4 years when Micah's deal is up for an extension.
The DT has moved on, the DB is buh bye, so it is basically a Pro Bowl OG VS. a top-flight EDGE on a HOF trajectory.
Value of a Pro Bowl OG. Good, not great. For an offensive play to work nearly ALL players have to perform well 'enough' to hit a big play.
Value of a big-play EDGE pass rusher.
The DC could make a bad read/call, but the EDGE could still make a big play.
The OC could make a PERFECT read/call, but the EDGE could still make a big play.
The number of times a Pro Bowl OG can make a big play on his own is probably less than once a year. He's dependent as part of a group. If one player moves too soon, play over. One player breaks down next to him causing a sack, play over. Etc. et el.
One top-flight game changing EDGE can impact a play all on his own.
It's a win for EDGE over a Pro Bowl OG. The value of the position is based on impact. Teams don't game plan around OGs; they do for Top EDGE players.

Or maybe it becomes 2 pro bowl OL vs. one elite edge. You never know. I would take Tyron Smith and Zack Martin together over Micah.

 

[rockaction]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

That’s cool, but I wasn’t talking about the people here. Right now the entire sports world (and believe me, not everyone is jealous of your team) is taking a metaphorical **** on Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. It’s bad. You might get indignant about it but it’s a national joke for the most part.

Believe me, I’m used to it as a Jets fan, but there’s an extra special hate for a guy that many get the feeling is responsible for a lot of bad **** to do with the NFL. I don’t get on the advanced in age out of sort of principle but I think other people wonder why they should have scruples about destroying Jerry when not only is he pretty much an unprincipled guy but he’s so flamboyantly bad at being a GM who also lies about being one.

It’s just ugly and you’re probably the only team besides Cincinnati I wouldn’t trade owners with. I think that’s where the hate comes from. It’s not jealousy. It’s actual loathing.

Nobody cares about the Jets. I didn’t take it personal. Me saying people especially hate the cowboys so that will influence their response is hardly a revelation.

Indignant? They are a professional sports team selling a product. I’m not butthurt if people dislike them. Couldn’t care less.

You take this more personally than anybody on the board. I gave you and your decrepit owner an out and you insult every person on the board you can.

Don’t care that you think nobody cares about the Jets. You’re not just butthurt you’re factually incorrect.

I am usually pretty fair and objective. You post about football like an exposed nerve.

It’s gushing. Still like you. It’s okay. You’ll be aight when he moves on.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

got arguably Micah's best years in the league, underpaid him

Again, you can't judge this deal going forward by things in the past not associated with this deal.

Since you stated it, and again, this isnt my argument, but the comparison isnt Edge Vs OG, its VERY Good DT+potentially two more high potential players.

The DT is 30 and coming off his worst season. I stated he'd help improve the run defense, didn't take anything away from him.
I can't know for certain where GB will select after adding Micah, but they've consistently been picking right around pick #24 and I didn't use any bias and simply went back a few years to see what sort of value.
Getting a Pro Bowl OG is great value for pick #24 and then missing on a DB is near the miss rate of a fifty-fifty offing.
Could Dallas clean up where the DT plays another five years at Pro Bowl level? Unlikely but it is possible.
Could both picks turn into HOF players? Sure, but again it is unlikely.
The only way we'll know how this turns out is time and that is why I moved forward 4 years when Micah will still only be 30 and quite capable of making plays and on the other side... I don't think the value will be there.
One thing I will say for Jerra is he has drafted over the past two years like he's been planning to dish Parsons as he's taken two DEs in the 2nd round over the past two years. Teams with a topflight EDGE don't tend to do that without reason. So, he's been positioning himself in a reasonable manner and I do like the kid they got this year, but I don't think he'll be another Micah.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I have to re-post this from the Philly thread because I've spent the day footballing and I came across this stuff. Check it out.

I said this about Green Bay and the trade:

It seems like they are a team with the perfect roster and situation to take that contract on and give up two late firsts. I don't think Dallas got a great deal but they're not the laughingstock everybody is making them out to be because I don't think they're winning anything with Parsons at $45M and the Dak and Lamb salaries. It might not have been their original justification and they might have gotten there because Jerry is plum awful at this now, but they weren't winning with him.

I get the criticism of Jerry. He locks him up six months ago and you're talking $10M or so less annually and it might be doable. But I also question the people insisting they've quantified Parsons' value. I just think it's overstated. I don't have the number crunching ability but I'm hearing some really dogmatic criticisms from supposedly analytical guys who seem to be making cavalier statements like Parsons is worth four ones or that he's actually invaluable and I'm pausing.

The tweet that got me was the grandaddy of all the analytics guys in the form of Aaron Schatz. This is a really illuminating post because he actually posits something all the other analytics guys who are hot for Parsons don't even stop to consider. He implies that previous work done on the matter would point to NO defensive player being worth two firsts and then breaks the rule for Parsons with an ad hoc adjustment. Well, your model works or it doesn't. Bizarre groupthink today.

https://x.com/ASchatzNFL/status/1961179112833519995

You're getting at why this was a stupid move though. If Jerry is not an awful GM then he saves $tens of millions on all of Dak, Lambskin, and Parsons (he's then not traded) and has already built stronger support around them. This was the outcome of years of incompetent leadership, and no hindsight is needed.

You’re missing my point. I’m not absolving Jerry at all. I don’t think I’ve defended Jerry ever. I sort of loathe the guy. What I’m saying is that everyone is slightly overvaluing Parsons and the vehemence of the criticism should be tempered.

We can say Jerry blew it. He did something pretty stupid at dinner. But he didn’t **** in his hand and throw it at the person eating his steak. There’s a hysteria to the reaction that doesn’t match the actual magnitude of what happened.

You have to factor in all the hatred and jealousy that people have towards the Cowboys for example, the dude you’re talking to is a Browns fan. Do you think he hates the Cowboys? I’m pretty sure he does..

Massraider, I’m not even sure what team he roots for but anytime there’s bad news about the Cowboys, he’s all over it.

Terpsdude has been leading an Iraqi Prime Minister like campaign, telling anyone who will listen how bad this deal is.

Very good player. He’s also a malcontent and ginormous baby.

Cowboys weren’t gonna pay him 40+ million dollars a year and they got two pics and a run stuffing DT out of the deal. Good luck to Parsons.

I’m not suggesting it’s a good deal or bad deal yet what I’m suggesting is most people are gonna say it’s a bad deal because it fits what they want to happen

That’s cool, but I wasn’t talking about the people here. Right now the entire sports world (and believe me, not everyone is jealous of your team) is taking a metaphorical **** on Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. It’s bad. You might get indignant about it but it’s a national joke for the most part.

Believe me, I’m used to it as a Jets fan, but there’s an extra special hate for a guy that many get the feeling is responsible for a lot of bad **** to do with the NFL. I don’t get on the advanced in age out of sort of principle but I think other people wonder why they should have scruples about destroying Jerry when not only is he pretty much an unprincipled guy but he’s so flamboyantly bad at being a GM who also lies about being one.

It’s just ugly and you’re probably the only team besides Cincinnati I wouldn’t trade owners with. I think that’s where the hate comes from. It’s not jealousy. It’s actual loathing.

Nobody cares about the Jets. I didn’t take it personal. Me saying people especially hate the cowboys so that will influence their response is hardly a revelation.

Indignant? They are a professional sports team selling a product. I’m not butthurt if people dislike them. Couldn’t care less.

You take this more personally than anybody on the board. I gave you and your decrepit owner an out and you insult every person on the board you can.

Don’t care that you think nobody cares about the Jets. You’re not just butthurt you’re factually incorrect.

I am usually pretty fair and objective. You post about football like an exposed nerve.

It’s gushing. Still like you. It’s okay. You’ll be aight when he moves on.

I didnt insult anyone.

Nobody cares about the Jets.

 

[Buckna]

He also made a good point that GB is gonna be paying $100M a year for 2 players (Love & Parsons).

In 2028.

Until then, they are both reasonable salary cap hits. That's after three seasons from now. It's forever away.

Not to mention Dak + Lamb combined are over $112MM of Dallas' cap in 2026.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

One top-flight game changing EDGE can impact a play all on his own.

Just saw this.
With Parsons Dallas D - Ranked #1
Without Parsons Dallas D - Ranked 31st
--------------------------------------------------------
Cowboys news: Micah Parsons’ exit leaves a void in the defense
... His impact isn’t just reflected in his own stat sheet, but stats across the defense.
The Cowboys’ defense has been overwhelmingly better with Parsons on the field because of the gravity he pulls. According to Bill Barnwell, the Cowboys are the top ranked defense in the NFL, by EPA standards, when Parsons is on the field. When he’s on the sideline, Dallas is the second worst.
...Vic Fangio 2-high scheme. Teams have found packing the secondary with coverage and placing shells over the top has been far more fruitful than filling all the gaps and crowding the line of scrimmage.
This coverage focused direction means fewer players rush the passer. That’s especially true for Matt Eberflus, Dallas’ new defensive coordinator. Eberflus doesn’t blitz often and when he does it’s only with one additional pass rusher. Like most of today’s coverage-focused defenses, he relies on the individual play of the four upfront to provide most of the pressure.
Schemes such as this make elite players extra valuable since they are reliant on winning individual battles. That’s why trading Parsons is such a head scratcher. Parsons was a player who demanded double-teams and still won. Without him those double-teams will fall onto the shoulders of players who struggled to just win their one-on-ones.

 

[fatness]

Mike Clay is pretty down on the Cowboys' defense now.
Projected defenses to allow the most points

1. Dallas Cowboys, 439 points

The Cowboys allowed the second-most points last season, and that was with Micah Parsons for 13 games. Parsons was traded to Green Bay on Thursday for defensive tackle Kenny Clark and two first-round picks. Linebacker Eric Kendricks, nickel corner Jourdan Lewis and edge rusher Chauncey Golston are also gone. Sprinkle in a few lingering injuries (including top linebacker DeMarvion Overshown), and the Cowboys have the shakiest defense in the league. Facing the Eagles and Commanders twice will only boost their points allowed.

 

[cdclopper]

I'm watching that America's Team series on Netflix, and man ppl were really busting Jerry's balls over the Herschel Walker trade too.

 

[JAK Straw]

Is Parsons expected to have a full workload for week 1?

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

Is Parsons expected to have a full workload for week 1?

I think most expect a limited workload. He hasn't been in camp all summer and just showed up in Green Bay. I have seen videos of him at practice, so that north woods air must have miraculously healed up that tight back.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Is Parsons expected to have a full workload for week 1?

I don’t expect him to have a full workload until week 6 (after the week 5 bye).

 

[steelwind]

"Micah Parsons's back concerns may not be over as he prepares to make his Packers debut on Sunday. The linebacker is dealing with a L4/L5 facet joint sprain in his back, ESPN's Adam Schefter reported on Monday.
Parsons may have an epidural injection done before Sunday's matchup vs. the Lions."

Adam Schefter Provides Update on Micah Parsons's Week 1 Status, Back Injury

The new Packers linebacker has been dealing with a back issue for close to a month now.

www.si.com