NFL Teams Should Avoid Committing Long-Term to Non-Elite Quarterbacks

Teams with an average QB on a lucrative veteran contract almost never make it deep into the playoffs

Last month, I dove into the market for signing elite Quarterbacks to extensions. What almost all those deals have in common is that they are finalized years before those QBs hit the open market in Free Agency. This leaves teams in need of a QB and lacking the draft capital to either pick one in the early 1^st round or to trade for a talented veteran, needing to turn to Unrestricted Free Agency. QBs that are allowed to hit the open market (or that are re-signed just before hitting Free Agency) and signed to at least compete for a starting role, typically fall within four buckets:

1. Players that either rebounded after years of struggling or that broke out in the season before Free Agency. Quarterbacks in this bucket include Geno Smith (2023), Daniel Jones (2023), and Ryan Tannehill (2020). Baker Mayfield is an example of a 2024 Free Agent in this category.

2. QBs that have been roughly average starters their entire career – such as Derek Carr (2023), Jimmy Garoppolo (2023), and Nick Foles (2019). There are not any such QBs in the 2024 Free Agent class, but the Detroit Lions will soon face a decision on whether or not to re-sign Jared Goff long-term.

3. Career backups and spot starters, including Gardner Minshew (2023), Jacoby Brissett (2022, 23), and Andy Dalton (2021). Minshew and Brissett will both be Free Agents in 2024, and again fit this categorization.

4. Older veterans such as Tom Brady (2020), Drew Brees (2018, 20), and Philip Rivers (2020). Although Kirk Cousins is both younger and has had a less prestigious career than those three when they hit Free Agency (Brees was re-signed before hitting the open market), he is a 2024 Free Agent that falls into this bucket.

I analyzed what kind of contracts players in each bucket tend to receive and evaluated the performance of players signing Free Agent deals in all four categories to see if any of them had better outcomes.

Rebound + Breakout Players

Jones’ contract in 2023 is an outlier in this group, and especially given the results of that deal, is unlikely to serve as a comparable contract moving forward. Garoppolo’s deal was also somewhat of an anomaly, as he was one of the most highly regarded young QBs in the NFL that had been stuck behind Brady until being traded to the San Francisco 49ers when he signed his contract. Thus, Smith, Tannehill, Keenum, and Bridgewater serve as the best comps for what a QB in this bucket can expect to receive in the open market. Keenum’s deal was inked before the QB market exploded in the 2020s, so getting a breakout player at an APY at signing of just 10.2% might now be unrealistic. Tannehill had the best statistical season of the group, so his contract is likely on the upper end of what a comparable QB can expect. Bridgewater had the worst statistical season, so his deal serves as a good lower bound. Smith’s deal represents a good middle ground, and the incentives in his contract give him the opportunity to outearn his base salary in bonuses, while also giving the Seahawks the ability to move on should his performance decline or if they find a better option. Based on historical precedent, a fair market contract for a player in this bucket would be a 2-3 year deal worth somewhere at an APY between 10-15% of the cap at signing, and 40-50% guaranteed. A player would likely need to have a season like Tannehill’s in 2019, where he led the Titans to the AFC Championship Game, to receive a deal on the upper end of the range, so in 2024, a deal for someone like Mayfield would likely be for three-years an APY accounting for about 11-12% of the cap, and around 40-45% of that guaranteed. With a confirmed cap of $255.4M, this would mean an APY of roughly $28-31M and total guarantees somewhere around $38M.

Of these five players, only Tannehill and Garoppolo made the playoffs after receiving their new contracts. Under his new deal, Tannehill’s Titans lost in the Wild Card Round both times they made the playoffs. Garoppolo’s 49ers made the Super Bowl in 2019 and the NFC Championship Game another time in 2021. Both teams were loaded with young players like George Kittle, Nick Bosa, Fred Warner, and Deebo Samuel on rookie deals, or early into their extensions. While Jones and Smith both still have time to make deep playoff runs during their deals, both the Giants and Seahawks are likely to be rebuilding for the next couple years, making that unlikely. Fortunately for the Seahawks, they structured Smith’s deal such that they could easily get out of it if needed. The Giants, on the other hand, will likely be tied to Jones for the next season or two. Although some QBs in this group were more successful than others, the evidence shows that they are unlikely to lead a team on a deep playoff run while on a lucrative contract.

Average Starters

This group of QBs tend to have contracts that look a lot like those of the Rebound + Breakout players. Cousins was an outlier in this group receiving a 100% guaranteed deal, but Carr’s deal with the New Orleans Saints last offseason might have set the market for what average QBs can expect on the open market. Garoppolo’s injury issues and Foles’ not being a full-time starter in the years prior to hitting the open market likely depleted what they got when compared to Cousins and Carr. Using Carr’s contract as a framework, a QB like Goff can likely expect to receive a four-year deal at somewhere around $42M/yr, which would represent 16.5% of the cap at signing. Applying Carr’s 40% guarantee to this hypothetical deal, someone like Goff can expect to receive $67M in guarantees.

Of these four QBs, only Cousins led his team to the playoffs. And while Carr still has time, the Saints seem poised for a rebuild in the coming years given the team’s Salary Cap issues. The Jaguars moved on from Foles after just one season and the Raiders are poised to do the same with Garoppolo – both incurring significant dead cap hits in the process. Cousins managed to elevate the quality of his play while in Minnesota and is now one of the better QBs in the NFL. Still, he has only won one playoff game in his Vikings career. The key takeaway here is that a team paying significant money to an average QB is unlikely to achieve much playoff success.

Career Backups and Spot Starters

Contracts for the career backups and spot starters tend to be the hardest to predict, but they largely follow the same structure. All the deals tend to be one-year deals, mostly guaranteed, and for about 3-6% of the Salary Cap. Players like Brissett in 2022, Jameis Winston in 2022, and Andy Dalton that had a lot of playing time the season before hitting Free Agency tended to get towards the upper end of that range. This tells us that in 2024, the going rate for players like Brissett and Minshew is likely a one-year deal at $10-12M, mostly guaranteed or a two-year deal at that APY with ~50% guaranteed. Incentives are likely to be a major component of these deals that could give these players upside beyond the base value of their contracts – much like Minshew received in his deal last off-season.

None of these players led their teams to the playoffs, but Minshew, Mariota, Brissett in 2022, and Winston in 2021 all put up above average seasons statistically, as measured by QBR. Had Winston not gotten injured mid-season, it is likely he would have led the Saints to the playoffs that season – the year right after Drew Brees retired. Although it is unlikely that a team will even make the playoffs with a journeyman QB at the helm, they still offer teams the chance to turn in a respectable record, especially with a good team around them. Had the Colts had a healthy Jonathan Taylor, for example, it is possible the Minshew-led Colts could have made the playoffs in 2023 as a Wild Card team. Also, should a team find a better option, like the New England Patriots thought they did in 2021 with Mac Jones, they can cut or trade the incumbent without taking on a major dead cap hit, providing invaluable flexibility in roster construction.

Older Veterans

Of these four contracts, only two of them were via the open market – Brady and Philip Rivers’ deals in 2020. Both received nearly identical deals in terms of APY and structure, with Brady receiving an extra year. Age clearly diminished these players’ value, and it is not without merit. Teams have seen the play of Hall of Famers like Peyton Manning rapidly decline in their late-30s. Furthermore, such players are also picky about their destinations. Brees likely never seriously entertained leaving New Orleans, and Brady and Rivers were not going to go to a team they thought were in rebuilding mode. As a result of these two factors, older QBs tend to earn less than their performance would suggest. Kirk Cousins will be 36 at the start of the 2024 season, so he is younger than all the QBs in this group, an argument for him to get more money than them. At the same time, he is coming off a season-ending injury and is not a future Hall of Famer like Brees, Brady, and Rivers – an argument for him to make less than them. These offsetting factors indicate that his deal should look a lot like what those three QBs received in Free Agency. Using the two-year term and 54% percent guarantee from Brees’ 2018 deal, and the 12.6% APY as a percent of the cap that Brees, Brady, and Rivers received in 2020 would give Cousins somewhere around a 2-year $64M deal, with about $35M guaranteed. Cousins did make $35M last year, so it is possible that he’d seek to match or slightly beat that AAV in his next deal, especially with the rising cap, which could boost the value of the contract up to $70-75M with around $40M in guarantees.

The deals all worked out well for the teams that signed them. Brees, Brady, and Rivers led their teams to the playoffs every year that they were under contract and put up good numbers even though they were all in the twilight of their careers. Players the caliber of Brady and Rivers do not hit the open market every year, but their success is evidence that teams should be willing to roll the dice on older but still talented QBs, as it is their best shot at getting high-level Quarterback play at a below-market price. It is likely, however, that having a playoff-caliber team in place outside of QB is a prerequisite to landing a player in this bucket.

Conclusions

A look at the Quarterbacks playing in the Super Bowl since 2013 and their cap hits shows that there is a ceiling for how teams with average QBs on expensive contracts can perform:

Nearly all the QBs on this list were either elite QBs or accounted for less than 10% of the cap (and often both were true) – which is well below what most average starters receive on the open market these days. The lone exception was an injury-riddled Peyton Manning leading the 2015 Broncos to a Super Bowl Championship. This tells us that a QB like Derek Carr or Daniel Jones is highly unlikely to lead his team to the Super Bowl, unless on a rookie deal, or at least an affordable veteran contract like Foles (a backup to start that season) in 2017.

In looking at the total win percentage for each of the groups (total wins for all the QBs in the group while under contract/total starts while under contract for all the QBs in the group), the data shows that upgrading from a Backup/Spot Starter to someone in the Average Starter or Rebound + Breakout bucket does not tend to materially improve a team’s record. Furthermore, over the length of the contract, players in all three buckets tend to perform similarly. However, players in the Average Starter and Rebound + Breakout buckets account for roughly 10% more of the Salary Cap as compared to the Backups/Spot Starters. Especially when considering the difficulty of moving on from QBs signed to long-term deals, such as Carr and Jones, the cost does not seem worth the benefit of a slightly better QB. As such, teams lacking an elite QB should treat the position as a year-to-year problem, avoiding making long-term commitments with lots of guarantees to anyone but the top QBs in the league. For teams truly just a QB away from being a legit contender, signing an older but still talented veteran might be the right move.

There are a couple instances, however, where it might make sense for a team to pay for a non-journeyman QB. First, is if a team has a young core of players on rookie contracts or affordable extensions. The 2023 Lions are a good example of this phenomenon. With players like Amon-Ra St. Brown, Jahmyr Gibbs, Penei Sewell, Aidan Hutchinson, and Sam LaPorta, among others on rookie contracts, the team could easily absorb Goff’s ~$31M cap hit. Goff’s play was elevated by the players around him, but it is unlikely that a journeyman QB like Brissett would have been able to bring the Lions so close to a Super Bowl appearance. In the coming years, however, the Lions will need to extend guys like St. Brown and Sewell which might make it more difficult to build the caliber of team around Goff to allow him to succeed as he did last year.

Chemistry matters in football, so another instance where it might make sense to pay for a non-elite QB is in instances where he has a good rapport with the coaching staff and Wide Receivers. This is why Mayfield is likely more valuable to the Buccaneers than he would be to another team, as he has seemingly great relationships with his coaches and talented receiving core. Much like Goff, however, Mayfield’s play was elevated by those around him. His affordable contract in 2023 allowed Tampa Bay to retain several key players despite a challenging cap situation following Brady’s retirement. Should Mayfield get paid market value, and the Buccaneers need to trade or cut talented players to keep him in the fold, it is possible that he will not be able to replicate his performance from 2023.

Overall, teams should be careful about committing long-term to non-elite Quarterbacks and should instead approach those deals like the Seahawks did with Geno Smith, while continuing to look for a Franchise QB in the Draft. That is, after all, how the Chiefs approached their QB situation – holding onto Alex Smith on a deal with limited guarantees until they traded up for and drafted Mahomes, and then moving on from Smith with a very low dead cap hit once Mahomes was ready to be the starter. Needless to say, that strategy has worked out well for Kansas City.