Cowboys' moves create $23 million in space - Dallas Cowboys Forum

cowboysooner · 03-01-2013

http://http://espn.go.com/blog/dalla...llion-in-space

If the Cowboys are creating space by going to Ware, Carr, Witten and especially Austin, Livings, Bernie and possibly Scandrick and Ratliff it seems that we are 1) committing to those players for 2013 and possibly 2014 2) we may create enough room that if we release Free we could tag Spencer 3) it is creating some leverage in the Romo negotiation.

First, I hope we tag Spencer. He has played at an elite level the past 2-3 years regardless of pure sack numbers. A good percentage of his rushes result in pressures and he is in on a very good number of turnover plays. He has been an elite run stopper. The one weakness is actual sacks (not pressures) against tackles. He would get about 9-10mm multiyear on the open market so to pay him $10.6 is not a bad deal for 1 year. It also gives us the ability to trade him for a pick possibly to the Browns who need 2 edge rushers and have a gob of cap space.

Future · 03-01-2013

I don't think you're off base. In fact, I think tagging Spencer is a large part of the reason why the Cowboys made all these moves.

While some might not say he is worth it, tagging Spencer means that there is one less hole they need to fill via the draft and FA. Tagging Spencer and hitting on OL, DT, and S this year - which should not be too difficult (though I might be giving Jerry and Co. too much credit) - means DE will be the main priority next year. Then you can let Spencer walk and go out and get the guy you need in the draft.

If the space is there, it does not make sense to do anything else imo.

conner01 · 03-01-2013

i could see the logic in tagging him then going de next year in the draft. allows you to get a guard, dt and safety this year and still have an answer at de. bt i think they would rather sign him so he costs alot less next year. the free money will cover draft picks and we can free a bit more when we sign tony so if we signed spencer rather than tagging him would alloow for another signing

JohnsKey19 · 03-01-2013

I cant imagine a sensible scenario where Free is kept at a 10 mil cap hit.

Erik_H · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowboysooner

http://http://espn.go.com/blog/dalla...llion-in-space

If the Cowboys are creating space by going to Ware, Carr, Witten and especially Austin, Livings, Bernie and possibly Scandrick and Ratliff it seems that we are 1) committing to those players for 2013 and possibly 2014 2) we may create enough room that if we release Free we could tag Spencer 3) it is creating some leverage in the Romo negotiation.

[View Full Quote]

I think you make a lot of sense here for the most part. I agree that there's a difference between the Ware, Carr, Witten restructures and the Austin, Livings, Bernadeau (plus Ratliff, Scan). The first group, IMO, were contracts that we all knew were going to be re-structured to create space. It was a given from day one. It was also pretty much a given that we'd re-structure/extend Romo, but having Flacco earn a SB ring also drag his feet on a new contract changed things. I think these other moves were made as contingencies to being able to re-do Romo's deal in time. Now that we are under the cap, it will be ok if we don't have Romo done by the 12th. This gives the Cowboys and Romo some breathing room to work something out and see where the Flacco and Ryan's contracts end up first.

As far as Spencer is concerned, I'm not huge fan of franchising him again. While I'm not against keeping him, I think another franchise tag is something Spencer will HATE having. You can say "tough, deal with it" but a one year deal...even for that kind of money is a risky thing. I think it's kinda unfair to the player. If it happens, then so be it. It's certainly more of a possibility than it was a week ago. The franchise then trade would be great if we could get a high pick or more than one pick.

I really would be ok if we did sign him to a long term deal, but hope it would be a 9-10M deal rather than the 11-12M he might command on the open market.

Spencer has been a really good player for us for more than just one year, and he has gotten better each year. I think the move to DE would only increase his value... but that is a risk. It might be a safe bet, but it's still a bet and even safe bets lose sometimes. It will be interesting to see what happens.

cowboysooner · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnsKey19

I cant imagine a sensible scenario where Free is kept at a 10 mil cap hit.

Agreed. Free has to go.

The notable moves to me are going to get money from Austin, the guards, Scandrick and Ratliff. It seems to me that they are planning on doing something.

I think it is notable that Sensabaugh is not being contacted.

Future · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnsKey19

I cant imagine a sensible scenario where Free is kept.

fify....

erod · 03-01-2013

This is a little misleading.

Dallas didn't create $23 million in cap space. They had to do all this just to get under the cap. I think they only have abut $4 million in cap room under the cap now. If they extend Romo, then can create another $10 million, and then they could franchise Spencer.

erod · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik_H

I think you make a lot of sense here for the most part. I agree that there's a difference between the Ware, Carr, Witten restructures and the Austin, Livings, Bernadeau (plus Ratliff, Scan). The first group, IMO, were contracts that we all knew were going to be re-structured to create space. It was a given from day one. It was also pretty much a given that we'd re-structure/extend Romo, but having Flacco earn a SB ring also drag his feet on a new contract changed things. I think these other moves were made as contingencies to being able to re-do Romo's deal in time. Now that we are under the cap, it will be ok if we don't have Romo done by the 12th. This gives the Cowboys and Romo some breathing room to work something out and see where the Flacco and Ryan's contracts end up first.

[View Full Quote]

I would absolutely franchise Spencer. He has a history of dogging it. Do not give him long-term security because he'll check out on you in a heartbeat.

cowboysooner · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by erod

This is a little misleading.

Dallas didn't create $23 million in cap space. They had to do all this just to get under the cap. I think they only have abut $4 million in cap room under the cap now. If they extend Romo, then can create another $10 million, and then they could franchise Spencer.

Free has not been cut yet either. Conner is sitting at a $3mm number that we know won't be on the books.

JohnsKey19 · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Future

fify....

So are they waiting to do this later in the offseason? Assuming he is cut, how much would that add to our cap space?

The only positive thing the Jones' could say about Free is that he played his best when being part of a rotation with Parnell. Not exactly a ringing endorsement, especially for a guy who has a very high cap #.

erod · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowboysooner

Free has not been cut yet either. Conner is sitting at a $3mm number that we know won't be on the books.

Cutting free will ADD a ton of money on our cap number in a bad way. It's better to keep him in terms of the cap.

Future · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnsKey19

So are they waiting to do this later in the offseason? Assuming he is cut, how much would that add to our cap space?

The only positive thing the Jones' could say about Free is that he played his best when being part of a rotation with Parnell. Not exactly a ringing endorsement, especially for a guy who has a very high cap #.

I've said it once before...I will lose faith in this entire regime if he is kept. The guy has been awful. Keeping him sends the message that its ok to be awful. If we can get the same production from Parnell, at about a tenth of the cost, what is the purpose of keeping Free on the roster? Get a backup in the draft or via FA, but there is 0 benefit to keeping him.

I don't know what Jerry is waiting for, but I would have designated Free a June 1 cut on the first day that I could have, and kicked that bum out the door.

erod · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Future

I've said it once before...I will lose faith in this entire regime if he is kept. The guy has been awful. Keeping him sends the message that its ok to be awful. If we can get the same production from Parnell, at about a tenth of the cost, what is the purpose of keeping Free on the roster? Get a backup in the draft or via FA, but there is 0 benefit to keeping him.

I don't know what Jerry is waiting for, but I would have designated Free a June 1 cut on the first day that I could have, and kicked that bum out the door.

But if you cut him, it'll hurt the cap bigtime. I'm fine with it, too, but you gotta create more cap space or we're back over the cap again.

It's cheaper to keep him, unfortunately. And that's what Jerry will probably do.

Future · 03-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by erod

But if you cut him, it'll hurt the cap bigtime. I'm fine with it, too, but you gotta create more cap space or we're back over the cap again.

It's cheaper to keep him, unfortunately. And that's what Jerry will probably do.

I'm pretty sure that cutting him saves money. Like 99% sure