Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by supercowboy8, Jan 12, 2013.
Thats funny, that is all he does is complain, dont know why you would expect anything else.
I knew they could make room, wasn't really that sure on how much so thanks for the info good stuff.
On Romo though, I'm not sure they can make any room with him by simple restructure. His contract is voidable after this next season. I can't imagine the team would be able to push money onto years that may not exist. If they could do it and he did opt out, that would leave tons of dead money wouldn't it? If they are going to work on his number, they're probably going to have get him a new contract and I can't imagine his cap number will be less than 8M which is where it would be in a situation in which they could restructure.
I agree and disagree with Stephen. Yes you can always make room. Moving money isn't a problem so we agree in that regard.
We disagree in just how wise it is to make pushing money down the road your standard operating procedure. He must think it isn't harmful or else they wouldn't do it. I think it creates the potential for harm down the line. Seems like if other teams do not have to operate in that fashion but have the choice to that you can always be outbid and in a case where you are the highest bidder you've only set yourself up for more money moving down the road.
Also, if you always anticipate moving money from the moment the contract is signed when you have contracts that go sour and are forced to cut an underachiever it seems like you'd be stuck with a larger burden in dead money. If only because you've converted a giant base salary into guaranteed money and spread across the remainder. I'm not sure if that is all that accurate in "real life" but as opposed to not converting that base (in reality it would likely be a smaller base salary if it weren't structured to be converted) salary and guaranteeing it, it just seems that way.
One last thing area where I think it can create some problems is when you hit on multiple players in multiple drafts.
As of late, Dallas seems to have done that. Tyron, Dez, Murray, Lee, Carter. These are guys I would think the team would have interest in keeping. Dez is probably gonna be a top dollar contract for his position, Tyron possibly the same if develops into the player he can be. I think Lee is a guy who if healthy would be a top dollar contract and if Carter continues to improve he will likely get to a point where he is just below top dollar. Murray is a RB and they are kind of disposable in a sense but I really believe he could be a dominant player at his position behind a good line.
How it pans out remains to be seen but right now these guys are probably going to cost a little bit to retain. In that sense when guys come off those rookie contracts and your SOP is to make room in order to make moves in the first place, I think you could be in a position now where you are making room simply in order to keep what you have or at least keep as much as you possibly can. So maybe now you aren't even able to make room in order to acquire more talent, maybe you're making room to avoid losing talent.
When you combine the two, I think there's the possibility for cap trouble. You have Doug Free on one end who's probably going to be eating space without even being on the roster and you have contracts in the foreseeable future that are likely going to be significant.
What it really comes down to is cap space is the limiting factor in player acquisition after owner willingness. It doesn't appear there are too many penny pinching owners in the league anymore and even for those who are there's going to be a cash floor coming on board in the future isn't there?
All teams have the ability to "make" cap space but some just have it without doing so. If you have to make room in order to operate I think you have less flexibility in negotiating because a team with tons of cap room can give the same signing bonus and then on top of that hand out a fat base salary for the first year that the cap-strapped team can't match. All teams can make the room but those who are sitting with it to start with can still operate more than a team that's working to get compliant.
I don't really care for the "make room" method. I'd rather the team had space without having to restructure players. There certainly doesn't seem to be any advantage to operating the way Dallas has. Certainly not in terms of outcomes for Dallas. I guess the only real plus to having such a mindset is that you can be sure that your elite players never leave and if you are willing to push enough down the road you can take anyone's elite that you'd like.
he won't do squat in free agency to improve this team.
jerry is such a clueless, incompetent, and narcissistic owner/gm
This thinking has eaten the Cowboys lunch for years. And until recently it's killed the Skins too. Stability in anything requires a budget...and not repeatedly strip-mining the future.
Why do you think there is less money committed down the road? Because at this point we only have a handful of players signed for those seasons. THINK ABOUT IT, PEOPLE.
THINK! THINK! THINK!
He doesn't complain. He uses reality when it comes to the Cowboys.
The results have come to past. I like Claiborne but those picks for him could have helped this team out.
Dallas was not two corners away from going to the Super Bowl. The evidence is this past season.
That cap penalty for cheating is minor in comparison to the God awful contracts this team has on it's books.
I will stop worrying about the cap when this franchise learns how to draft in the 3rd, 4th and 5th rounds. If they would improve in that area, then we'd rely less on free agency b/c we'd have solid depth and good young players on cheap, i repeat CHEAP contracts.
The Mara penalty hurt to no small degree. Carr ended up with a big signing bonus and big second year salary to help sign what players that they could.
Romo is not so much 'make room' as he is an expiring contract. There was no doubt there was going to be a extension or a release for this last year. I just made the assumption theey would guarantee around the amount he makes this year and start with a min salary. Very well could be more. Carr has to be the same way because the base salary for this year is astronomical. The restructure was surely negotiated with the expectation that it would be restructured this year..
With those two contracts and cutting Doug Free plus pushing the few million we are under from last year and you are looking at upwards of $30m off next year.
The main issue I have with guaranteeing the other guys is they may or may not be here next year much less the year after that. However if they have only three years left on there deals then you can prorate it over the last two years anyway because of the new June 1 rules.
Ware makes a shoe in for restructure because of the above. Two other guys you can reasonably expect to be around are Witten and Scandrick. Livings is a candidate but he is definitely going to be cut before those last two season becasue of how his contract is structured. He is due over 4.5m both those last two years.
But Austin or Ratliff? That is playing with absolute fire. I doubt they are cut from looking at the numbers, but the replacements would cost more than you save and we just have too many needs already.
I am interested to see what they do though.
Which ones do you have in mind? I am assuming you are talking Carr because of your ideological standpoint on secondary play. The others are not that bad really.
I'm not excited about them at all. Because they are irrelevant to winning. You could sign three more of them this offseason. We won't be even a little better. I get excited about impact players. They matter. They make their teammates better.
It's hard to talk about the state of the team, the true state of the team, and not bring up the abortion that was the 2012 offseason. We had great resources and quality players available to seriously address our critical needs.
This year our resources aren't so great. You won't be seeing a 50 million dollar FA brought in. You won't see nearly the amount of total FAs signed. You're picking later in the draft.
The decisions made last March and April set us back significantly.
I deal with reality. Not what I hope or want to believe. It prevents me from wasting time thinking a secondary is going to lead a team somewhere or a complete stiff like Phil Costa can play.
This is asinine and there is absolutely no empirical basis for this. The only time he has done 'nothing was after Haley, Aikman, Irvin and Sanders left them in a bind because of injury or selfishness.
Jerry may be a lot of things but cheap is not one of them.
Your mindless absolutist ideological takes are pretty boring, dude. Substituting hyperbole and personal emotions for analysis wastes all of our time. They said we wouldn't be able to make a splash the last two years yet we offered large contract both times even if only one was signed.
Carr. Free. Ratliff. Austin. Sensabaugh. Scandrick. The dead money from prior bad deals.
Carr clearly got market value. Free was easy to cut after the first couple of years. Sensabaugh makes a pittance compared to NFL safeties. Ratliff I agree. Austin was signed to that deal because we were not expecting for the owners to collude. Scandrick makes about what veteran corners make.
You have to pay market value. It is what it is.
How is Free easy to cut?
He is due $7m and has ~$6m left in SB. You assign the cut to the following year and you push 4m to 2014. He is due $8m in 2014 plus proration. You save about $5m by cutting him this year.
Right now hes a $9m cap charge.
All of those contracts with the exception of Free is the market for those guys. The only time you can you get a bargain on a player is while they are on their rookie contracts.
That math was wrong. If you designate a June 1 cut it is the regular proration remaining this year and the rest the following year I think. I could be wrong. If this is right then it's a $7m savings this year with $2m dead and next year $4m dead. We have to eat $6m one way or another.
$9M isn't chump change. It would have been $5.5M but the restructure bumped it up nearly $3M. Restructuring deals makes fans feel good in the short term but if the player needs to be cut in the future (like Free) then that increase in the prorated signing bonus comes back to bite us.
Yeah hopefully we get more clarity on these numbers the next few weeks. Would you prefer Free be on the team in 2013?
One thing I wanted to mention above but the post got long was the idea of cap "savings". I dunno why but the word "save" just kind of seems a little less appropriate than say, "avoidance".
He must be replaced by someone and presumably if they're wanting the type of play that they expected for him they're going to have to pay for it.
In Free's case, you could probably get equal play from Parnell and just draft a guy to be the backup so I suppose the term "save" is probably as accurate as it gets.
But more generally the term "save" seems a little less applicable. There's threads every year, "how much do we save but cutting...[insert name]" and many times while the player may be underperforming the cost of getting an equal player for a contract more reflective of play would result in additional cap charges when combined with the cut player's accelerated money.
I dunno, just kind of one of those things you see and cringe a little. Pet peeve, I guess. Like I said, Free's play was so poor that the team could probably just cut him and go with what they've got and not really have to worry about replacing his production.
I understand why we say it. I've said it numerous times before because it's simple and represents the gist of the effect but as I have sort of navigated into cap waters over the last couple seasons, I've kind of started to view it as more of an "avoidance" of cap charges and there are certainly times when it wouldn't be "saving" at all but just the opposite.
Just a random thought. Not really meant to single you out so I hope you don't take offense to it.
Actually something I was thinking about with Austin's contract. Cap number of 8.3M and bonus money of 4.5 left to account for. I have zero doubt that someone will ask what it might "save" to cut him at some point during the offseason and this would be a scenario where you just won't get an equal player for the difference. Probably won't even come close. Like Miles or not (I personally am a little annoyed with right now but there's no way you cut the guy when he can produce at a level well above his cap figure for the next 3 seasons.), you aren't getting equal play for a cap figure of 4M unless you backload that contract, which is something I've recently become more opposed to. If 4M in cap charges won't get you Laurent Robinson last offseason, it sure isn't getting you Miles Austin this year.