How Can We Be 20 Million Over the Cap?

[LatinMind]

Originally Posted by Hoofbite

All that money just gets pushed down the line.

I can't believe that Dallas is doing almost what Washington used to do in spending every single cent and annually reworking all those contracts and nobody really seems to have much of a problem with it.

Only real difference is Dallas is overpaying guys on their roster instead of going out and signing Lavernius Coles and a bunch of other guys from other teams.

Well its not like theyre overpaying a ton of guys tho. Most of the big bucks are on guys like Romo, Carr, Ware, Witten. 52 mil of the cap is on these 4 players. Yes theres questionable contracts on players like Free and Ratliff. IMO Austin really isnt a big hit with his production.

But as people have said all teams have these questionable contracts. All teams deal with these problems.

Free, people were actually talking about it was a value type deal. Everybody liked it when it was signed. Now everybody hates it. He's just a guy that got moved around too much IMO. They shouldve just left him at RT. The mistake was moving him to LT where he got LT starter money.

Ratliff, well i hated this deal from the get go. He was still in a contract and got a new one. This is were jerry is too loyal to his players. He knew Ratliff was underpaid so he made it right. But wrong for the cap.

[The Quest for Six]

You can rework and backload contracts but at some point, you're going to have to pay the piper and in 2015-16 and 17, Dallas is going to have some major problems with the cap because it's not scheduled to go up much...

[AbeBeta]

Originally Posted by The Quest for Six

You can rework and backload contracts but at some point, you're going to have to pay the piper and in 2015-16 and 17, Dallas is going to have some major problems with the cap because it's not scheduled to go up much...

But we aren't "reworking and backloading" really -- what we are dealing with is Carr's deal which was FRONTLOADED as I've explained about 10 times in this thread and Romo's deal which is in it's final year.

That isn't reworking/backloading.

[cowboysooner]

Originally Posted by The Quest for Six

You can rework and backload contracts but at some point, you're going to have to pay the piper and in 2015-16 and 17, Dallas is going to have some major problems with the cap because it's not scheduled to go up much...

The cap is expected to be quite a bit higher by then because all of the larger tv money will have kicked in at that point. That is a big part of why the quarterback money is going up so much despite a flat salary cap.

[Wood]

Originally Posted by cowboysooner

The cap is expected to be quite a bit higher by then because all of the larger tv money will have kicked in at that point. That is a big part of why the quarterback money is going up so much despite a flat salary cap.

current cap (2013) will be about 121.5 million. The projected cap for 2015 is about 123 million. In other words the salary cap will be flat for next three years.

Part of this comes from union deal with owners that shifted 7 million from future years into 2012 salary cap because of so many free agents in 2012 and low cap would have shifted all leverage to owners. Add on that teams were rolling over unused cap dollars into 2012 so 'excess' going forward has largely evaporated.

In other words....teams better make smart financial sense or they will be penalized heavily over next few years as there is no expanding salary cap to bail out poor decisions on signing/extending large contracts. Buyer beware.

[xwalker]

Keep in mind that the 2012 cap was about 121M and the Cowboys had 29.77M in dead-money and another 5M penalty.

They have the penalty again in 2013, but the current dead-money is only 2M.

[the_h0wey]

Originally Posted by CaptainMorgan

Not sure why you added maybe next to Romo's name. Name one player on the team better at his position that Romo? Ware possibly if he isnt falling apart physically, other than that he is without a doubt our best player.

Dez...

[Hoofbite]

Originally Posted by AbeBeta

What you are missing is that we are "pushing it down the line" differently than some teams. Instead of a 20 mill signing bonus we might give a 10 mill SB and a 10 mill guaranteed 2nd year of a deal (or sometimes even the third).

No, I'm well aware of how they are doing it. It just doesn't matter to me because the end result is the same. More money committed to later years.

That makes our cap for the 2nd year appear bloated, but what it really does is give us flexibility to convert that big salary year to bonus -- or just leave it that way if we don't need the cap space (or convert part and leave part as salary).

The problem is, Dallas doesn't have that flexibility because they deliberately plan to restructure it so they can operate. I don't think there's any way they could NOT restructure Carr's contract.

It would be nice to be in a situation where the team could decide to restructure or not. A situation in which they had cap room without any restructuring at all, like other teams. But the reality is, Dallas has to restructure just to get even. They immediately eliminate the choice of "leaving as is" for certain contracts and all but eliminate the other choice of "part restructure" as well.

There is no flexibility. At best, it's an illusion of flexibility.

A team that starts out with the big SB doesn't see a bloated 2nd year cap number. But they also don't see the flexibility to use that money in multiple manners.

Every team is "pushing it down the line" - we are doing it in a manner that makes everyone freak out and scream "we are in cap HELL!!!!"

It doesn't have to be one or the other. You don't have to have the bloated 2nd/3rd year base OR a huge signing bonus. There's literally dozens of ways teams could write contracts. Dallas just happens to do so in a manner that I think is poorly thought out.

They're going to restructure Carr's contract and make it so they basically have to keep him on the roster no matter what until after 2015. Regardless of play, his cap hit will increase so much if cut that he will be on the team for another 3 seasons.

Dallas makes restructuring their standard procedure so they can actually sign guys. That's why Carr's cap number was 3M for 2012 and will likely be around 6M for 2013. That's 9M in cap charges for a guy who's regarded as one of the better players at a position that is typically paid very well. That's the tradeoff. You take cap relief now on all these contracts but it puts you in a position where the guy absolutely cannot fail or else you are losing your rear end on the deal. If Carr doesn't play well through 2015, it's a horrid deal.

Here's a little tweet about Ozzie Newsome's restructure policy.

@RavensInsider: Ozzie newsome said only time team considers restructures is if a player has great value or player has good chance of reaching end of deal

I'd like to point out the great value aspect. If you sign a middle tier player and he becomes a stud, what you are getting from him is above and beyond expected compared to what you have paid for him and what the cap is charging you for him.

Restructuring the deal gives you cap space now but it also brings his future cap charge up to a level that you would expect from his production. It makes sense and you aren't losing out on the deal.

Great value represents the short-term look in that for a given year your cap charge would be what you would expect it to be for a player who is giving you "X" amount of production.

This is where Dallas is failing.

Dallas has paid Carr for top quality play. Restructuring gives you cap relief now but it puts his cap charge so high in the future that he better be a top 5 CB for those 3 seasons or else the team is losing out on the deal.

It doesn't make sense. You're forcing yourself into a situation where the player has to perform at a level that is unlikely or else you're paying too much. That's what you get when you force "great value" by taking ridiculously low charges upfront in exchange for ridiculously high charges on the backend. Dallas is doing that, regardless of whether it comes from the initial negotiation or after a planned restructure.

Reaching the end of the deal is the longterm look in that over the span of "X" years the player's cumulative cap charge doesn't change. This perspective however hinges on the player actually playing well enough to reach the end of the deal based solely on merit and not on cap ramifications if cut.

Brandon Carr might pay well enough to justify those later cap charges. "Might". One this is for sure, he won't be cut until way down the road because of those cap charges. There's a large difference between having a cap charge deter you from cutting a guy and having a cap charge prevent you from cutting a guy.

Which brings it all back to flexibility and pretending that Dallas has some in the first place. Any flexibility they exercise now results in less flexibility in the future. If they didn't exercise flexibility now they'd own like 6M in cap charges if they cut Carr after this season. Exercising flexibility now takes that 6M and ups it to like 15M.

So here's a question.

Is it better to have flexibility now when the player is in the prime of his career and is more likely to perform at a high level and justify an appropriate cap charge, or is it better to have flexibility in the future when a player has accumulated wear and tear along with age and is less likely to play at a high level and justify a ridiculously high cap charge?



As for the idea of "Cap Hell", I think it's overblown by those who both claim it to be true and those who are adamantly opposed. I can't think of any time where a team was punished for not being cap compliant. I want to say that I have heard of it once but I can't recall who and it may have been speculation that was all for nothing as the team got under the limit before the deadline.

In that regard, there is no such thing as "Cap Hell" because no team is ever punished because being compliant isn't difficult so long as you are willing to borrow against the future.

But, given the cap status of others around the league Dallas sure isn't in the prettiest of positions.

[fairviewfarmer]

Doug Free and Miles Austin could be considered the biggest "thieves" on that list.....

[jnday]

Originally Posted by AbeBeta

We are cap healthy. There is no cap "situation" - xwalker pretty much explains this in every single post

For every post XWalker explains this, I can find 25 that disagrees. That is not a shot at Xwalker by the way. You are just picking the source that supports your position. There is a good chance that the Cowboys will lose Spencer due to the cap. If they do resign him, there will be very little money left to sign anybody else. Romo has to have his deal extended. If not, about 16.5 million will hit the cap that the team can't afford. Carr's deal has to be reworked as well, has to.

DALLAS IS NOT MANAGING THE CAP, THE CAP IS MANAGING DALLAS.

The cap is putting Dallas in a position that forces them to make decisions that are not in for team's benefit. What is wrong with the "pay as you go" method? Before you bring up how other teams manage the cap, let me say that it doesn't matter. Other teams are getting more wins with less money and they are not borrowing from the future. Is their anything wrong with good common sense when it comes to spending money?

[Frozen700]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

Drugs are a terrible thing

then lay off

[Frozen700]

Originally Posted by Nation

Ware is the player on that list whose contract you take issue with??

Just trying to fit in with the whine fest around here....don't mind me

[speedkilz88]

Originally Posted by jnday

For every post XWalker explains this, I can find 25 that disagrees. That is not a shot at Xwalker by the way. You are just picking the source that supports your position. There is a good chance that the Cowboys will lose Spencer due to the cap. If they do resign him, there will be very little money left to sign anybody else. Romo has to have his deal extended. If not, about 16.5 million will hit the cap that the team can't afford. Carr's deal has to be reworked as well, has to.

DALLAS IS NOT MANAGING THE CAP, THE CAP IS MANAGING DALLAS.

[View Full Quote]The cap is putting Dallas in a position that forces them to make decisions that are not in for team's benefit. What is wrong with the "pay as you go" method? Before you bring up how other teams manage the cap, let me say that it doesn't matter. Other teams are getting more wins with less money and they are not borrowing from the future. Is their anything wrong with good common sense when it comes to spending money?

The other 25 are guys who have no understanding of the cap and how the nfl teams manage it.

[jnday]

Originally Posted by speedkilz88

The other 25 are guys who have no understanding of the cap and how the nfl teams manage it.

Only Xwalker has salary cap numbers? LOL Again, Xwalker does good work, but so does many media outlets and other sources that has cap numbers that differ from his. No two articles or sources agree in any way.

[speedkilz88]

Originally Posted by jnday

Only Xwalker has salary cap numbers? LOL Again, Xwalker does good work, but so does many media outlets and other sources that has cap numbers that differ from his. No two articles or sources agree in any way.

I'm talking understanding it. I have no idea how accurate his numbers are (but they are probably close just maybe not exact), AdamJT13 is the only one who's numbers I would stand by.