1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

Breakdown on Romo contract - really 4 for 65.5

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Matts4313, Mar 29, 2013.

  1. Frozen700

    Frozen700 Well-Known Member

    11,597 Messages
    377 Likes Received
    Then cry about it.
  2. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,326 Messages
    281 Likes Received
    I have a preteen daughter, so I'm fluent in hysterics. ;)
  3. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,326 Messages
    281 Likes Received
    Yes, Romo will get his money. The guaranteed portion only goes away when it's paid. But it's how and when it's paid that makes all the difference.

    By converting his base salary next year, it allows Dallas to use that money to take care of other needs (extension, free agents, etc.).

    By converting his base salary the following year, it allows Dallas to use that money to take care of other needs (extensions, free agents, etc.).

    And when it comes time to collect on those restructurings, the cycle begins again with other restructurings.

    There are only a couple of ways the Cowboys can avoid doing business this way:

    1) Draft so well that they can replace their stars every four to five years when it's time for them to get new contracts. (Imagine if Stephen McGee had developed like Dallas hoped he would. Then the Cowboys could have traded Romo for picks and moved McGee into the starting role.)

    2) Be tightwads and let their stars go anyway.

    I'd like to see our front office do a better job with the first one because it would make managing the cap easier. I'm glad our owner doesn't do the second one, that he's willing to juggle the cap to keep his best players ... but it appears that many would rather have the tightwad.
  4. bkight13

    bkight13 Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    1,958 Messages
    419 Likes Received
    After 2015 and the restructures that will probably happen in 2014 and 2015, Romo will have around 25m in dead money left. Assuming no restructure in 2016, it will be 15m after 2016. He almost has to play in 2017 to make his exit easy at 6m left.

    His actual cap hits
    13 11.8m
    14 13.7m
    15 15.2m 25m dead money after season
    16 19.1m 15m dead money after season
    17 23m 6m dead money after season
  5. Hoofbite

    Hoofbite Well-Known Member

    31,275 Messages
    1,240 Likes Received
    Restructuring now just to get under the cap with the players they have. Restructuring then just to get under the cap for players they don't have?

    I'm sure this is how it might play out but I'm not seeing some sort of benefit in having to restructure significant money every year just to get cap compliant and then ultimately having to restructure in order to cover the dead money left behind by a player who was cut.
  6. DIAF

    DIAF DivaLover159

    4,009 Messages
    12 Likes Received
    Well, in order to do #2 and still stay successful, you have to do #1. We don't do #1 very well.

    It's easy to say "well, we can just restructure someone else on down the line" and that makes sense when you are talking about 5 or 10 million, but not the 20+ million were are talking about here. That's a whole lot of other deals that will need reconfiguring, and the whole thing goes to hell if a few of them refuse. Eventually the cycle stops and you'll have to eat the dead money. As Cowboy fans, we ought to be pretty familiar with dead money by now.
  7. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,326 Messages
    281 Likes Received
    It's not just to get cap compliant. Although some of the restructurings cover that, others allow Dallas to do things like tagging Anthony Spencer, or if the Cowboys hadn't done that, going after FAs it wants.

    This year, Dallas was $20-plus-million over the cap before free agency started, but had numerous contracts set up for restructuring to not only cover that but free up money for other purposes.

    That's the way it works and the way it's going to work, unless Dallas purges the roster some day and sinks with the dead money for a few years while rebuilding through the draft.

    I don't see that happening, so I'm fine with rolling with this plan.
  8. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,326 Messages
    281 Likes Received
    Absorbing $20-plus million over two years (June 1 cut) is not as hard as you seem to think it is. Other contracts created over the next few seasons will have years in it like Romo's where the player(s) receives $10-plus million in base salary. (And it will always make the contracts seem bigger than they are when the guaranteed money is the main thing to look at.)

    Dallas is planning these things in advance, knowing what it will need over the next few years to absorb the dead money and still be able to work out extensions and be players in free agency. Romo's base salary will be used for those purposes next year and the year after, and others will be used for those purposes after that.

    Obviously, drafting well is the best plan, but teams can't rely on that.
  9. bkight13

    bkight13 Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    1,958 Messages
    419 Likes Received
    Ware, Witten, Carr, Austin, Ratliff and now Romo and maybe Spencer will all have salaries that can be re-done. They might also be able to carry over 15-20m from this year after Free, Spears, Spencer?, Vickers, Bern and others are dealt with. The cap will eventually be a problem, but it is probably being timed to coincide with Romo's and Ware's departures.
  10. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,326 Messages
    281 Likes Received
    They don't have to have only $6 million left to handle his exit. Again, his exit will be covered by other restructures. It's the circle of life in the NFL.
  11. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,326 Messages
    281 Likes Received
    I don't think it will be a problem as long as we continue adding players who will need long-term extensions: Smith, Lee, Carter, Bryant, Murray, Claiborne, etc.

    The only way it would be a problem is if all those players you mentioned decided to retire all at once. Then there's no way to restructure enough contracts to cover that. (The ideal is that you have no more than a couple leave, get cut, retire in the same season.)

    Otherwise, this is just a continuous cycle that will be carried on by the next generation of Cowboys, as long as the salary cap rules don't change.
  12. bkight13

    bkight13 Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    1,958 Messages
    419 Likes Received
    It still has to paid. A 15m cap for it a QB not on the team is bad business regardless of restructures. A 6m cap hit that can be spread over 2 years is much better and it is why I expect him to play thru the 2017 season. Everyone calling it a 3 year deal are mistaken in my opinion.
  13. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,326 Messages
    281 Likes Received
    It is bad business in the sense that Dallas has to pay it because it didn't draft a cheaper replacement.

    It's the way of doing business if that doesn't happen (unless you are cheap and willing to take your chances with whomever you can get for cheap). You are going to take a hit. Controlling how and when you take that hit is the next-best thing you can do, and Dallas does that well.

    And no, I don't think he'll play through 2017, and if he is still starting then, it will be under a different contract because this one isn't set up to be viable that long.

    This contract is set up for Dallas to take that heavy hit a few years from now (likely when it is set up to not take any other heavy hits at that time), but it is also set up for Dallas to be able to move some money around to its benefit over the next couple of years.
  14. TwentyOne

    TwentyOne Well-Known Member

    2,391 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    We did not have plenty of cap room. If we had we would have been able to sign a good player to help out at Guard or Center. So we were only able to plug a whole at CB.

    Dallas had $17 mills of cap space in 2012. That seems to be alot but it is not. Why ? Because you have to put it in relation with other teams and their cap space.

    Here's a source: http://nflfootballnow.com/2012/02/14/salarycap12/

    Take a look especially at teams who competed in 2011 already and what kind of money they are able to spend. If you want to pay for a player it's not the amount of money you have. It's the amount of money you have in relation to others who are interessted in that player also.
  15. TwentyOne

    TwentyOne Well-Known Member

    2,391 Messages
    45 Likes Received
    Very sharp from you. It was not.

    I decided it's not worth to post further arguments until you start giving one.
  16. PJTHEDOORS

    PJTHEDOORS Well-Known Member

    1,599 Messages
    203 Likes Received
    New ownership? I'm guessing Stephen will take over operations when Jerry is gone. If that's what you call new ownership.
  17. PJTHEDOORS

    PJTHEDOORS Well-Known Member

    1,599 Messages
    203 Likes Received
    Too funny, and he's calling others a moron. That was classic.
  18. TheFinisher

    TheFinisher Well-Known Member

    2,159 Messages
    278 Likes Received
    We're going to have to restructure his base numbers for at least 2014 and 2015. We're already nearly $30MM over the cap for 2014 and that $21MM cap number for Romo will be the first thing the FO looks to chop. Same thing with 2015, we only have 21 players under contract for that year and are already $10MM over the projected cap number. He has a $25MM cap number for 2015 with a $17MM base.

    We will push another $20MM in dead money into his contract from 2016-2019. This is NOT a 3 year extension, he'll be playing for us at least until 2018.
  19. theranchsucks

    theranchsucks Active Member

    690 Messages
    228 Likes Received

    It will look a lot different after they "renegotiate" every single offseason to free up cap space.
  20. Doomsay

    Doomsay Well-Known Member

    5,509 Messages
    620 Likes Received
    Yup, and usually the incentive from a player's perspective during these restructurings is an increase in guaranteed money which ultimately increases the aggregate cap hit of an individual player over the lifetime of his playing time with the team and beyond.

Share This Page