by Dallas Cowboys Mailbag, David Helman & Jonny Auping
It seems to me that every time I hear everyone talking about Dak signing the talk is, what is Dallas doing? Why haven't they signed him yet? Understood, but I'm pretty sure Dallas made two offers, both declined by Dak. Shouldn't some of the blame go to Dak as well? - ARLEIGH DUFF / CROMWELL, CT
David: I guess that probably depends on what you think Dak's priorities should be. The Cowboys' priority is to keep their quarterback under contract and give themselves the best chance to win, which is also the priority of most of their fans. Dak Prescott assuredly wants to win football games, but he also wants to be properly compensated - especially after he played for an absolutely absurd discount for most of his career. There are going to be people who call him selfish. I call it knowing your worth.
Jonny: Well, sure but "blame" implies that he has the same metric for what a successful deal looks like. He knows what he believes he's worth and I don't think he's failing to be transparent with the team. There's definitely a way to get Dak signed tomorrow. That's why the burden is on the team right now.
The free agent pool for free safety seems deep. What are the odds the Cowboys spend money on the position - maybe not the top tier but maybe a mid-tier? Maybe a Malik Hooker or Anthony Harris? - KYLE LEINEN / DES MOINES, IA
David: I would love to say the odds are good, but history suggests otherwise. Simply put, it's not a position the Cowboys have shown an interest in addressing in more than a decade. They signed HaHa Clinton-Dix last spring - but that was a big signing in name only, as the deal only amounted to about $3 million. If you want me to offer optimism that this year might be different, maybe it's Dan Quinn. The Cowboys' new defensive coordinator had strong safety play during his stints in Seattle and Atlanta, so maybe he can convince someone that it's a position worth investing in.
Jonny: I would say the chances are pretty low. They haven't paid the price for the position in the recent past and I'm not sure what's changed. The HaHa Clinton-Dix move was a way to try to solve the problem cheaply. It didn't work, but I could see them thinking they can be creative around the problem.