Nate Livings' contract details

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The five-year contract signed by Nate Livings last week does not void and the newly signed guard will count $1.7 million against the 2012 salary cap.

Livings’ five-year deal totals $18.75 million and included a $3.5 million signing bonus. The guaranteed money is $6.2 million.

Livngs, who turned 30 last Friday and started 32 straight games the last two years in Cincinnati, will receive base salaries of $1 million (2012), $1.7 million (2013), $3.4 million (2013), $4.4 million (2014) and $4.75 million (2015).

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4691013/nate-livings-contract-details

They guaranteed the first two years at 6.2m. This is a 2-3 year deal.

If we cut him after 2 years hes a savings of $1.3m off the cap but we eat $2.1m.

After the third year, we'd save $3m in cap room.

People still think this a progress stopper that locks us into starting him?

[wittenacious]

Good breakdown and comments, FL. I agree w/ ya. This is a 2-3 year deal to look him over and see if he steps up, into Cally's scheme. He's proven to be reliable -- health-wise -- as a starter. Needs to prove to be a consistent upgrade for us at OG. We shall see.

I'm resisting the urge to dog his signing until we see what he becomes. Fingers crossed.

[Prossman]

kind of scratching my head on this one. cap friendly contract and the guy has experience. I really dont see him keeping us from drafting decastro or any other guard for that matter.

[Zaxor]

kind of scratching my head on this one. cap friendly contract and the guy has experience. I really dont see him keeping us from drafting decastro or any other guard for that matter.
it doesn't... he is added competition and roster security

[Shinywalrus]

People still think this a progress stopper that locks us into starting him?

I don't agree with those who think that it locks us into starting him, but it's still rich and I suspect more than we had to pay.

[bsheeern]

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4691013/nate-livings-contract-details

They guaranteed the first two years at 6.2m. This is a 2-3 year deal.

If we cut him after 2 years hes a savings of $1.3m off the cap but we eat $2.1m.

After the third year, we'd save $3m in cap room.

People still think this a progress stopper that locks us into starting him?

Factual information is always important to those who form intelligent opinions.

Thank you Fuzz

[Sam I Am]

I've gotta say. The signing of these two guards who's skill was questionable by their former teams to multi-year deals makes you still well aware the Cowboys have trouble drafting offensive lineman. (maybe signing them too!)

You just don't sign two guard to multi-year deals after you drafted three others in the last two years unless you seriously question their ability to play in this league.

If this is the case, the Cowboys SERIOUSLY need to look into hiring someone who has experience drafting offensive lineman that actually end up with the ability to play.

It's like this team has a disease that prevents them from properly judging talent for offensive lineman. Sure they got Smith, but the entire world knew he was a no brainer. (well except for those few fans here that didn't think he was going to be a great player :muttley: )

[CCBoy]

it doesn't... he is added competition and roster security

Right now, the projection is Mackenzy Bernadeau and Nate Livings...and the die is cast. They were acquired as journeymen and low contract costs.

Right now, the back ups projected are Bill Nagy and Kevin Kowalski...and that is cast as well.

Going by projections, the team is looking towards center upgrade.

But I would say, that the strongest pass rusher is in their crosshairs for the top of the upcoming draft...and center one of the firing points already on the map overlay.

[Eskimo]

I don't agree with those who think that it locks us into starting him, but it's still rich and I suspect more than we had to pay.

I think your take is correct here.

The main problem I had with Livings is that we should have sought to bring in one mid-tier vet FA who is an above average player to add to the interior. This would help a great deal at improving the overall play. Instead we brought in two guys who are in the below average camp although Bernadeau has age and projectability on his side so I'm okay with that move. I kind of viewed that move as saving us a draft pick next year.

I was really hoping we'd take a run at a better player and would have been happy with Grubbs or Mathis with the money they got.

[Cowboys22]

So it's a 2-3 year deal for essentialy what an above average veteran backup OG would cost. If he proves to be a worthy starter, years 4 and 5 are bargains for even an average starter. If he doesn't develop into a guy you want to keep after 2-3 years, he will be cut and won't hurt the cap at all.

[supercowboy8]

this is a 2 year deal where we can have our young OL develop. We needed a starter until the young guys are ready.

[DFWJC]

Right now, the projection is Mackenzy Bernadeau and Nate Livings...and the die is cast. They were acquired as journeymen and low contract costs.

Right now, the back ups projected are Bill Nagy and Kevin Kowalski...and that is cast as well.

Going by projections, the team is looking towards center upgrade.

But I would say, that the strongest pass rusher is in their crosshairs for the top of the upcoming draft...and center one of the firing points already on the map overlay.
I'd be shocked if we did not draft an QG with the expectation that he would walk in and start or seriously battle for a starting spot.

[Zaxor]

Right now, the projection is Mackenzy Bernadeau and Nate Livings...and the die is cast. They were acquired as journeymen and low contract costs.

Right now, the back ups projected are Bill Nagy and Kevin Kowalski...and that is cast as well.

Going by projections, the team is looking towards center upgrade.

But I would say, that the strongest pass rusher is in their crosshairs for the top of the upcoming draft...and center one of the firing points already on the map overlay.

I agree that pass rusher is probably the priority... but my contention was that regardless of what the Cowboys have done so far it still doesn't prevent the Cowboys from drafting a DeCastro.... even though I am hoping they do not

[SMCowboy]

I don't agree with those who think that it locks us into starting him, but it's still rich and I suspect more than we had to pay.

The money that they are paying Livings the first two years especially is what you pay for backups you are high on.... His cap hit is just over twice what Ogletree got. And atleast Livings has started 30+ games in the league.

[boysfanindc]

I am wondering if Decastro will even be there, seeing a lot of mocks lately that has KC taking him.

[jterrell]

2 year 6.2 mil deal.
Counts 1.7m this year and 2.4m next.

CHEAP by starting standards to be sure.
IF he is a hit we'd keep him for year 3 at a reasonable 4m cap number but he'd have to be a plus starter to see that money.

We needed a stopgap starter and he got stop gap starter money.

[Doomsday101]

2 year 6.2 mil deal.
Counts 1.7m this year and 2.4m next.

CHEAP by starting standards to be sure.
IF he is a hit we'd keep him for year 3 at a reasonable 4m cap number but he'd have to be a plus starter to see that money.

We needed a stopgap starter and he got stop gap starter money.

I agree and do not think it will deter the Cowboys in any way come draft time. If anything it gives us the ability to stay true to the draft board

[Galian Beast]

Contract is really well written. It's all backloaded, it's basically incentive laden. Play well, and we'll keep you. The upfront signing bonus money doesn't hurt us, he can at worst be depth, and if we release him in year 3, it costs us little to nothing. What about the other guard we got.

[Galian Beast]

Mackenzy Bernadeau

4 years 11 million dollars, 3.25 million in signing bonus

Year - Cap Hit - (Cost to release him)
Year 1 - 1.8 million (3.25 million to release him)
Year 2 - 2.562 million (2.4375 million to release him)
Year 3 - 3.062 million (1.625 million to release him)
Year 4 - 3.5625 million (812.5k to release him)

Honestly as of year 2, its a wash.

[BaybeeJay]

How does Livings contract compare to Travelle Wharton's?

[JIGGYFLY]

I think your take is correct here.

The main problem I had with Livings is that we should have sought to bring in one mid-tier vet FA who is an above average player to add to the interior. This would help a great deal at improving the overall play. Instead we brought in two guys who are in the below average camp although Bernadeau has age and projectability on his side so I'm okay with that move. I kind of viewed that move as saving us a draft pick next year.

I was really hoping we'd take a run at a better player and would have been happy with Grubbs or Mathis with the money they got.

Those 2 things don't make sense if he is a above average player he is not mid-tier.

A above average guard is Ben Grubbs do you consider him mid-tier?

[Risen Star]

kind of scratching my head on this one. cap friendly contract and the guy has experience. I really dont see him keeping us from drafting decastro or any other guard for that matter.

I also don't see a reason to sign him at all. Unless you really don't think much of the two interior linemen you just drafted.

I suppose if they do plan on playing Bernadeau at C, then this can make some sense. In that scenario, you wouldn't want to count on both Arkin and Nagy for this year. So you add a mid-level (I'm being kind) G and hope to add more in the draft.

[Risen Star]

How does Livings contract compare to Travelle Wharton's?

I don't know the specifics but I'm pretty sure Wharton got the bigger contract.

[Eskimo]

Those 2 things don't make sense if he is a above average player he is not mid-tier.

A above average guard is Ben Grubbs do you consider him mid-tier?

Ben Grubbs is above mid-tier - you are right. However, I would have been okay with that player for that deal.

I basically wanted an above average starter to anchor the interior for quality starter money but not superstar money (i.e. Nicks). Grubbs would definitely have been at the upper range of the pay scale I would consider for an OG but given the need and performance from last year I would have been okay with that move coupled with one OG in the 2nd or 3rd round in this draft plus the competition from the incumbents (Nagy, Kowalski, Arkin, Costa) to determine the 3 starters. Ideally I'd have preferred a guy in the $5M/yr range like what Mathis got in Philadelphia.

In the end, I really think we dished out money on two guys who probably aren't any better than Kowalski but who will cost more and prevent him from getting into the lineup. There is a strong tendency to play vets in this franchise unless they are high draft picks. That same money could have been used the procure one player of a higher talent grade who would make a more meaningful difference to the team. It is just bad use of cap and salary cap space.