Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by GloryDaysRBack, Oct 20, 2013.
+1 for any post that uses the word "asinine" in it.
Too much guaranteed money for a contract that wasn't played out until the end? That's hardly a once in a lifetime event. You just see what happens when the dead money reaches a critical mass. We'll probably see it again with Romo. Every single year we restructure him, we're creating new guaranteed money to be realized at the end of the contract. Do you really think he's going to last until he's 40? We're talking about creating an extra $10 million guaranteed for the guy just this next year alone. What about the year after that? Another $10 million to sign Dez and Tyron, or to maneuver that year's portion of the extra $28 million created in 2013 on top of the extra $40 million that needs to be created in 2014? It only works until you have to cut these guys, then it's Aikman all over again. Borrowing against Ratliff's contract created a $7 million cap hit for a player whose production still has to be replaced. Then there's going to be Austin's cap hit. Eventually you have to cut ties with Witten and Ware also.
The Cowboys created about $28 million in borrowed money this year, and only $7 million of it hits the cap in 2014. Think about that -- $7 million down, $21 million to go. And we're talking about creating an extra $40 million on top of that! That money doesn't just go away if you love your team enough.
Aikman was a once in a lifetime event because our highest paid player got hurt in the middle of a big contract, then forced his release to accelerate all the dead money hit into one year. Its only happened once, but sure - if Romo, Ware and Sean Lee all suffer career ending injuries we will take a big cap hit. Not exactly news there.
The reality is that if you want to keep veteran players you have to give them signing bonus money and take the risk of dead money like Ratliff. The alternative to that is letting your veterans leave in FA like some teams do. That is the alternative that the critics never mentioned.
Yes, we will take some cap hit from Miles Austin. We will have dead money from Ratliff. But if you took your previous post word for word three years and substituted the names "WR Roy Williams" and "Marc Columbo" and "Andre Gurode" and "Flozell Adams", it would look exactly like the posts we have seen since the cap was instituted. And three years ago Williams, Columbo, Gurode and Flozell were all moved off the roster and we didn't hit the "Cap Hell" that some posters predict every day.
Ok, then ask "your guy" how close to 31million are we over, and if there are any teams as far over as we are?
Broaddus is on twitter claiming it's actually more than 31 million while Mike Fisher seems to have made it his calling to prove that its a non-issue.
When he chooses to post everyone will know. Until then we wait.
Cowboys over the cap, Cowboys brutal cap management, Cowboys train wreck of an organization...blah....blah..blah...
Every year it's the same story, every year they figure a way to be well below. Maybe not enough to sign any key free agents, but enough to fill a few depth spots.
2015-TV money kicks in, many contracts go away. They'll be fine, free agency is vastly overrated anyhow.
Slowly walk away from the cliff, everything will be alright.
Doesnt look good at all. Well austin will be gone and ratliff is gone and ware needs a huge pay cut. But I dont know how much those 3 will help.
This is the 10th year in a row they've said this.
Read Mike Fisher. He explains how they can get under the cap very easily.
And when he affirms we are close to what was reported, what will a lot around here say???
Here's a thought for all the gloom and doomers. Please explain how Dallas would have kept all their free agents and signed Carr without working the cap the way they do? Who should have been let go? Ware, Witten, Romo, Lee, Free, Scandrick, Austin, Hatcher, Church? You can't have them all and stick to the strict cap limit. Who should we not sign going forward? Bryant, Carter, Mo, Smith, Harris, Hatcher, Bailey? What free agents should they not have signed? Carr, Durant, Sims, Waters? Sure there have been some misses in free agency but no team can hit on 100% of anything. You simply cannot have all the players listed above without manipulating the cap the way Dallas has done. The key is managing how many players that you have been restructuring leave the team in a given year. They can easily absorb the dead money from 2 or 3 players each year. How? Because they are basically creating an additional 50%+/- in cap space every year and only 20-25% is used for the dead money situations. Basic math tells us they are coming out way ahead and all it takes to do it is Jerry's money. Then there's another aspect that the gloom and doomers leave out. Every 7 or 8 years, new TV contracts are done and the cap jumps up. When that happens, much of what Dallas is doing can be reset back to near zero. With the latest contract, the jump is supposed to happen in 2015, meaning they only need to get by for one more year and they can reset a lot of this. It is not that hard to do what they are doing and stay ahead of it until the next TV deal comes down the line and lets them reset. The reason other teams are not operating in this fashion is because their owners don't have or are unwilling to fork out the sacks and sacks of cash it takes to do it and many of them let their star players leave in free agency. Dallas' current roster is remarkably free of high priced free agents from other teams. Go look at the roster. Its amazing how many players were drafted by Dallas or signed as rookie/street free agents. To keep them all, you have to do what Dallas has done with the cap. There simply is no other way except letting good players walk.
Thanks for reading the entire post.
You provide some logical questions.
1. Forty million is a number that some message board people were throwing around last season.
2. Having more cap space is an advantage if used properly. Yes, it's always possible that a team could have access to an advantage and not use it properly; however, if you have team X that is a well managed team and generally makes good decisions, then that team has an advantage when it has access to 150% of the salary cap compared to when it only has access to 100% of the salary cap.
3. The point about Free Agents and the Redskins is that the Cowboys are keeping the players that they developed as opposed to trying to sign an excessive number of Free Agents. The Cowboys have been projected to be over the cap for many years, yet they have not lost any of the players that they really wanted to keep. They had cap space to sign a guy like Stephen Bowen, but didn't see him as worth the salary that he received in Free Agency.
4. Dead-money and contracts come off the books every year. Dead-money does not to continue accumulate. There will be new dead-money but old dead-money goes away.
5. The point of my original post is that the projected numbers for 2014 are meaningless. Different teams have different numbers of players under contract for 2014. Some teams have top players that are not under contract and don't show up in the projected numbers. If Romo was a Free Agent, the Cowboys projected salary cap would appear much lower.
6. The 2nd point of my original post is the concept of a virtual salary cap. Teams can operate a rate where the average paid out to players over the years is over 100% of the cap. Yes, there is a limit to this concept; however, what people can't understand is that it never all comes due if they stay within the limit. They can always push money out. Part of the "borrowed" money each year is used to pay dead-money that comes off the cap.
7. There is danger with guaranteed money; however, teams give out guaranteed money now even if they're not trying to max out the cap. Players and agents expect signing bonuses and guarantees. All teams have to deal with this issue. Any team that gives the QB a big contract is probably going to have problems if that QB gets injured. Restructure bonuses appear to be a danger; however, the player was going to have that money guaranteed on game 1 of the season anyway. The team is just giving it to him in the Spring. The only danger is that he has a career ending injury in OTAs or Training Camp.
8. If the Cowboys were really worried about the 2014 cap, they would have kept Ratliff and made him a June 1st cut. They could have deferred over 3M to 2015 if he were a June 1st cut.
Summary: Yes, it's always possible that the Cowboys could have future cap problems; however, it has been predicted for years now and has yet to materialize. It's fairly easy to see that they are not going to have problems in 2014.
I calculated the numbers last year around this time. The actual (not message board) projection was about 24M over the cap based on existing contracts. My spreadsheet showed that they could get far enough under the cap to give Spencer the Franchise Tag and still have money remaining. They did Franchise Spencer and signed Will Allen, Justin Durant and Brian Waters. They also signed all of their draft picks. Kept Free Agents like Costa and Ladouceur.
I think my calculations turned out to be fairly accurate. The primary difference is that I had them cutting Doug Free. Since they kept him at 3.5M, that would come off of my projected number.
Ratliff had 2 more years remaining until we gave him that ridiculous extension. We weren't forced into that one.
@AdamJT13 where are you??? i'm standing on the edge of a cliff b/c of this news. i'll jump if i dont see you post soon.