How Cowboys get down to $104 million - Norm Hitzges

[chip_gilkey]

Originally Posted by robert70x7

Short answer: They get the money eventually.

I thought restructure means that some of their money this year is turned into a roster bonus or something and thus doesnt count towards the cap. in short, they'd get more of the money from later on down the road now instead of later. Definitely could be wrong though.

[Mr Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Tass

I always hear about 'restructuring' player (insert-name's) contract. Why would a player do that? Why would a player agree to a backloaded deal when the team could then just cut him and avoid paying him? Sounds like the players get hosed on those types of deals.

Please someone educate me if I'm wrong.

They get their money now instead of later. They get their payout as a bonus that will count against the cap in future years.

That said, I can't see a good reason to keep Ratliffe. His production has been declining for the past 3 years, and this past season he suffered numerous injuries and was out most of the season. It's not like he is coming back at 2005 levels, he will be a year older this year, and more declining production for a high contract. Only in Dallas do high priced, aging former stars, have a secure job.

[theogt]

Originally Posted by Tass

I always hear about 'restructuring' player (insert-name's) contract. Why would a player do that? Why would a player agree to a backloaded deal when the team could then just cut him and avoid paying him? Sounds like the players get hosed on those types of deals.

Please someone educate me if I'm wrong.

There is typically no change in cash flow (either in terms of amount or timing) to the player. In fact, it usually means the player gets more guaranteed money.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't think anybody has really said that we can't restructure and create room to sign FAs. I think what has been argued is the wisdom behind such a move. The cap is flat for the next few years. If you extend all of these guys, we are going to be in a bad situation in years out. I don't see how that can be a good thing.

[jimnabby]

Originally Posted by Tass

I always hear about 'restructuring' player (insert-name's) contract. Why would a player do that? Why would a player agree to a backloaded deal when the team could then just cut him and avoid paying him? Sounds like the players get hosed on those types of deals.

Please someone educate me if I'm wrong.

You've got it backwards. Restructuring the contract usually means more guaranteed money and more money up-front (bonus money that gets prorated over the life of the contract for cap purposes). Restructuring is usually a no-brainer for the player.

[ScipioCowboy]

We go through this every off season. We gnash our teeth and rent our clothing over the Cowboys' impending banishment to salary cap hell. But then they always seem to come up with the money to do whatever they want.

[conner01]

players don't mind restructure. they get the money now instead of maybe later.
the problem with june 1st cuts is you don't get the cap savings till june 1st so you have to restructure enough to cover all your free agents and their salaries till june 1st. that is very likely to be done though
not sure you will see free and rat because thats alot of players to replace but i think there will be some changes and some guys will be released

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by robert70x7

They are at $140 million right now, according to him.

Re-work

Ware, Tony, Carr (trigger-clause), Miles, Witten

June 1st Cuts

Doug Free, Jay Ratliff, Dan Connor

Claims we have room to go after 2 primo free agents if we WANT TO (been saying this all along).

What do you think?

ROFL....

Let's cover the basics here.

The re-structures mean we GUARANTEE a massive base salary to Miles Austin for what exactly? IF he is hurt all pre-season again we get the honor of paying him as an elite WR for 2013??

He has enough talent to bring back. But I don't guarantee him another single cent. Ever. Too injury-prone.

Cutting Ratliff, Free and Connor are sound but that means 3 starting spots we open up. I agree Free should not be starting but Ratliff and Connor are probably the best players at their positions currently: 1T and Sam.

Also June 2nd cuts do not up cap cash immediately. I couldn't find any CBA provision for designating someone a June 2nd cut but freeing up cash immediately. PREVIOUSLY this only allowed for 2 players per team. AND you had to carry the cap hit until June 2nd.

The two primo FA thing is a pipe dream. Great for talks how hosts but far form reality. We need lots of bodies. We can't afford to pay for expensive pieces because we'll be back here next year looking at the cap again.

Yes, we signed Carr for 3m. And we'll pay him very well this year for that 2012 cap savings.

There will be cap space. No there won't be lots of it for enough to spend on luxury items.

Fans shop like 15 year old girls.

[Future]

Originally Posted by CowboysFaninDC

with those cuts, it means one of the FAs has to be a DT. as right now we don't have one.

Well, Hatcher, Spears, Lissemore, and Crawford would all be DTs in a 4-3. We might not have a good one, but we have bodies there

Releasing Ratliff in order to get to that 104 almost certainly means a play at Melton.

[erod]

Originally Posted by Tass

I always hear about 'restructuring' player (insert-name's) contract. Why would a player do that? Why would a player agree to a backloaded deal when the team could then just cut him and avoid paying him? Sounds like the players get hosed on those types of deals.

Please someone educate me if I'm wrong.

Players generally love it because it gives them a quick big signing bonus, which can then be spread out over the contract to reduce the immediate cap hit.

That means guaranteed money, versus future money that could be avoided by cutting the player.

[the_h0wey]

Originally Posted by robert70x7

If Ratliff stays on this team, I will strongly consider not watching next season.

Right.

[MichaelWinicki]

Originally Posted by jterrell

ROFL....

Let's cover the basics here.

The re-structures mean we GUARANTEE a massive base salary to Miles Austin for what exactly? IF he is hurt all pre-season again we get the honor of paying him as an elite WR for 2013??

He has enough talent to bring back. But I don't guarantee him another single cent. Ever. Too injury-prone.

Cutting Ratliff, Free and Connor are sound but that means 3 starting spots we open up. I agree Free should not be starting but Ratliff and Connor are probably the best players at their positions currently: 1T and Sam.

Also June 2nd cuts do not up cap cash immediately. I couldn't find any CBA provision for designating someone a June 2nd cut but freeing up cash immediately. PREVIOUSLY this only allowed for 2 players per team. AND you had to carry the cap hit until June 2nd.

[View Full Quote]The two primo FA thing is a pipe dream. Great for talks how hosts but far form reality. We need lots of bodies. We can't afford to pay for expensive pieces because we'll be back here next year looking at the cap again.

Yes, we signed Carr for 3m. And we'll pay him very well this year for that 2012 cap savings.

There will be cap space. No there won't be lots of it for enough to spend on luxury items.

Fans shop like 15 year old girls.

I think you've made some very good points JT.

The only thing I would disagree with is the view on Connor.

I don't see the guy being a starter on this defense. I don't think he has the footspeed nor the quickness to be a starter at any of the three linebacker positions. I would list Simms over him (as starter) at this point... And I'm not big on Simms.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by chip_gilkey

I thought restructure means that some of their money this year is turned into a roster bonus or something and thus doesnt count towards the cap. in short, they'd get more of the money from later on down the road now instead of later. Definitely could be wrong though.

almost all restructures are to turn base salary into a bonus that counts NOW and going forward. he money is divided into how ever many years are left on your deal.

lots of times a team may add a year.

let's take dan connor.

we owe him 3m for 2013. he is a solid LB and we could use him in the 4-3.
so we could hand him 2m and add a year to his current deal. That would lower his cap hit by 1m for 2012.

obviously for a guy with a massive base salary like carr or romo the savings can be very large.

BUT you have to be careful because you don't want to stack up 15-20m in unpaid cap hits. Guys you know you need ot eventually eat.

Teams really only do that for elite QBs. Because if you lose an elite QB you tank for at least one year. See the Colts.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by MichaelWinicki

I think you've made some very good points JT.

The only thing I would disagree with is the view on Connor.

I don't see the guy being a starter on this defense. I don't think he has the footspeed nor the quickness to be a starter at any of the three linebacker positions. I would list Simms over him (as starter) at this point... And I'm not big on Simms.

Connor is interesting because I 'think' he is our best 4-3 Sam right now.

He can tackle well. His coverage would be VERY limited but is playing in that short area between carr and carter. He shouldn't need to cover much ground.

I wouldn't pay him 3m; but I'd seriously consider a restructure that brought him down to 2m.

Simms is also interesting because I felt much like you. But his metrics were terrible apparently. Even worse than Connor. Just too many missed tackles.

It would be nice if we had a better Sam but I don't think it is a luxury position at all.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by Future

Well, Hatcher, Spears, Lissemore, and Crawford would all be DTs in a 4-3. We might not have a good one, but we have bodies there

Releasing Ratliff in order to get to that 104 almost certainly means a play at Melton.

Right now either Hatcher or Crawford start at the SDE. Unless we pay Spencer which ends this thread entirely.