If this trend continues, it might change the way certain quarterbacks approach opportunities to start in the NFL. It might not be worth the risk.

The amount paid to the unproven QBs is massive. Houston in 2016 gave Brock Osweiler, who had started just seven NFL games, one of the worst modern quarterback contracts when it signed him to a deal worth $18 million per season. This year the Bears signed Mike Glennon, who started 13 games in 2013 and ‘14 before he was benched, to a $15 million-per-year contract.

Neither QB was considered a can’t-miss prospect in the draft — Osweiler was selected in the second round in 2012, and Glennon in the third round in 2013 — and neither has played enough to change those pre-draft opinions. Osweiler sat behind Peyton Manning until (and after) the starter was injured. Glennon was replaced by Josh McCown and, eventually, Jameis Winston.

IYER: Glennon a bigger trap than Osweiler

We all know the NFL is desperate for quarterbacks and is willing to pay for them, as those deals illustrate.

It’s the flip side of the equation that makes little sense.

EJ Manuel recently signed a one-year contract worth $800,000 with no money guaranteed. Geno Smith signed a contract worth $1.2 million with an additional $800,000 in potential incentives. He received just $300,000 in guaranteed salary. Colin Kaepernick remains unemployed.

Manuel and Smith generally were higher-regarded prospects than Glennon and Osweiler. Manuel was drafted in the first round in 2013, and Smith in the same class was given a first-round grade but dropped to the second round. Both started as rookies and for a portion of their second seasons.

Then they were relegated to the bench. Kaepernick, who already cashed in with a contract once and for a brief period was considered one of the more exciting prospects in the NFL, also was benched.

Nothing indicates that Osweiler, Glennon or any other questionable quarterback is worth $14 million to $16 million more a season than a player like Manuel or Smith. The difference: The quarterbacks not making money once were expected to turn around bad football teams. Those who are now getting good deals never really had the opportunity to fail.

Manuel’s Bills haven’t been to the playoffs in the 2000s. They’ve had an ownership change and multiple coaches. Yet Manuel was somewhat of a scapegoat. Smith saw both his general manager and head coach fired in his first two years in the NFL and was looked at as a failure. Kaepernick went through multiple coaches and was viewed as part of the reason why the team went from Super Bowl contender to the second pick in the draft.

By actually playing, all three became damaged goods and now are picking up the table scraps in free agency.

If you were Smith or Manuel and you could get a re-do, wouldn’t you sit on the bench for three or four years? How different would their careers and financial futures look? Would Kaepernick’s situation be different had he refused to waive his guarantees and just sat on the bench last season?

Smith’s desire to start for the Jets — and his ability to actually win a starting job in 2013 and ‘14 — likely cost him somewhere between $12 million and $14 million. Had he been a success, how much more would he have made?

If you are Jimmy Garoppolo, AJ McCarron, Paxton Lynch, Christian Hackenberg or any late first- to mid-round draft pick who has some name value, why would you jeopardize your financial future? Look good enough in the preseason or a few snaps in mop-up duty to get some interest, but not good enough to unseat the starter.

MORE: Where will Kaepernick land?

In general, the salary disparity comes off as unfair and should make players in the future think about the benefits of playing when things around them are bad.

This might not be a problem in the NFL today, but if the divide in contract valuation between the Glennons and the Manuels of the league continues to exist, it will have an impact in the future.