Stunning cuts in Atlanta; meanwhile, at Valley Ranch

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by BAT

Agreed. Worst football? That didn't happen until he went to the putrid Cardinals. And only after he broke his shoulder, at that.

Emmitt was still putting up a grand a season, behind an even worse O line than the one the Cowboys' fans are crying about today.

we could not afford the cap costs of keeping Emmitt. Just that simple.

[texbumthelife]

So, showing loyalty to a player(s) that more than once took a pay cut to help you out is foolish?

Do you think if Jerry did business as you suggest any of these players would be restructuring their contracts? Jerry is a "players owner" and it shows up every time people start to and moan about our cap situation. He isn't shrewd because he doesn't have to be and furthermore he realizes that in the long run it is a bad business decision.

I am not saying every over-the-hill player should break the bank, but to suggest Emmitt didn't earn every bit of his last paycheck is absurd and downright disrespectful. There may be tough decisions to be made but there is still an ethical code to this business. I shudder to think of how bad our team would be if we followed such near sighted advice.

[GimmeTheBall!]

Originally Posted by joseephuss

Those cuts in Atlanta are not that stunning. Michael Turner(31) is clearly on the downside of his career and is old for a running back. John Abraham is 35 years old, which is far older than any of the players you listed from Dallas. Robinson has been a major disappointment for the Falcons and will turn 31 in a month. Those 3 guys cost Atlanta a lot of money and a lot of cap space. I would hardly consider it stunning that they were cut.

Well played but .... My point is cap relief we dont get because we keep some guys way too long. All i axs is cut the cord, dont overdo the expiration date and stuff.
Stunning in big overpriced player, stunning in cap relief, stunning in its businesslike apporch.
damn i' good.

[Vintage]

These weren't stunning cuts unless you knew nothing about the Falcons...

[Oh_Canada]

Originally Posted by joseephuss

Those cuts in Atlanta are not that stunning. Michael Turner(31) is clearly on the downside of his career and is old for a running back. John Abraham is 35 years old, which is far older than any of the players you listed from Dallas. Robinson has been a major disappointment for the Falcons and will turn 31 in a month. Those 3 guys cost Atlanta a lot of money and a lot of cap space. I would hardly consider it stunning that they were cut.

Bingo. The only slight surprise is Abraham, but the guy is ancient in NFL terms for the position he plays and who knows they may also have some inside info you or I know nothing about.

Turner is pretty much done. He ran for three and half yards per carry....didn't the Boys cut Marion Barber a few years ago who was younger and almost as productive his final year?

[Beast_from_East]

Originally Posted by GimmeTheBall!

. . . we agonize over keeping or not keeping marginal players such as Spencer, Ratliff, Hatcher, Felix, Sensebaugh, Miles Austin and lord knows why, Free.

Why is it that we, Cowboys fans and the front office, seem to be so sentimental about players who half worn out their welcome, are over the hill etc? Huh? Huh?

It seems to me that some teams just cut players without that much emotional upheavel. I remember Emmitt Smith playing his worst football (even Aikman) and over the hill and yet staying on. Clinging, even.

When we learn to properly evaluate players and their skill levels when they are in their 30s and skill drops even a bit, we will, I think, be a better team.
NFL football has to be a revolving door of player talent, not a crib-to-elderhood nanny. Cowboys half not learned that. Teams like New England, and now Atlanta, seem to be brave enough to cut ties and save money at the same time.

[View Full Quote]Let me no if you agree. If not, dont give me no lip.

Spencer is a marginal player?

He would get 10-12 million a yr on the open market, he is far from marginal.

[speedkilz88]

Originally Posted by Beast_from_East

Spencer is a marginal player?

He would get 10-12 million a yr on the open market, he is far from marginal.

Too bad the ignore feature doesn't work for thread starters. Huh?

[GimmeTheBall!]

Originally Posted by Beast_from_East

Spencer is a marginal player?

He would get 10-12 million a yr on the open market, he is far from marginal.

So in your book Spencer be top tier?
Put all his years together and you get a purely average or yes marginal or nominal. You want to base his stature on last season? By all means hope that we invest a lot of money and time and lots of seasons waiting for such athletes to flower and produce.
By that time you are rebuilding. Again.
That is our problem. We are so wowed by players who show promise one year and lose sight of younger and evolving talent.
We are so easily dazzled by the mediocre and then we are surprised by 8-8 seasons.

Unbelievable. Just wow.

[mickswag]

Originally Posted by Beast_from_East

Spencer is a marginal player?

He would get 10-12 million a yr on the open market, he is far from marginal.

This. Spencer is not marginal.

[Ratmatt]

Originally Posted by dfense

Spencer, Hatcher and Austin are marginal players? You lost me right there. Spencer had 11 sacks last year right? He had a Pro Bowl season. Hatcher is their best lineman easily. You did watch some games last year, right?

The Redskins would ditch Orakpo in a second for Spencer. And the Eagles going to a 3-4 would fly him in for a visit tomorrow, if they could. wow.

There is no way the Redskins would ditch Orakpo for Spencer.That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.Looks like your not the one watching much football.

[PJTHEDOORS]

Originally Posted by GimmeTheBall!

So in your book Spencer be top tier?
Put all his years together and you get a purely average or yes marginal or nominal. You want to base his stature on last season? By all means hope that we invest a lot of money and time and lots of seasons waiting for such athletes to flower and produce.
By that time you are rebuilding. Again.
That is our problem. We are so wowed by players who show promise one year and lose sight of younger and evolving talent.
We are so easily dazzled by the mediocre and then we are surprised by 8-8 seasons.

Unbelievable. Just wow.

Pretty sure there is a spot somewhere betwen marginal and being top tier. That is where Spencer fits.

[Canadian BoyzFan]

Originally Posted by joseephuss

Those cuts in Atlanta are not that stunning. Michael Turner(31) is clearly on the downside of his career and is old for a running back. John Abraham is 35 years old, which is far older than any of the players you listed from Dallas. Robinson has been a major disappointment for the Falcons and will turn 31 in a month. Those 3 guys cost Atlanta a lot of money and a lot of cap space. I would hardly consider it stunning that they were cut.

Agree 100%

[rocyaice]

Originally Posted by GimmeTheBall!

Well played but .... My point is cap relief we dont get because we keep some guys way too long. All i axs is cut the cord, dont overdo the expiration date and stuff.
Stunning in big overpriced player, stunning in cap relief, stunning in its businesslike apporch.
damn i' good.

But how you can compare the likes of Miles Austin, Spencer and Hatcher who are in the prime of their careers to guys like Abraham and Turner who are on their way out there door?

[TheRomoSexual]

That analysis is riddled with so many flaws it literally makes my head hurt.

[DFWJC]

What stunning cuts in Atlanta. They all seemed to make sense to me given the cost vs age/performance of players.

You don't think we should keep Hatcher?

Don't count out Free. We don't get nay cap help until June 1 with him, so there's no reason to drop him right now.

Some of those oters, however, are a bit similar to the Atlanta guys that were cut.