The net hit to the cap is basically $0. Explain how there is no offset here. We saved 3.5 mill. We owe 3.5 mill. Net result. Zero hit on cap.
Like most on this board you are getting hung up on the term "dead money." It would be 7 mill against the cap this year and next if we kept him. Tell me now how saving 3.5 mill is bad?
You are all over the place here.
I have no problem with saving 3.5 million and I don't think that is bad in this situation. However, that is not what we are debating. What we are debating is your call out of those fans who, as you put it, don't know that dead money is "offset" by not having to pay the base salary. You are simply wrong. And your own post demonstrates that:
The net hit to the cap is basically $0. Explain how there is no offset here. We saved 3.5 mill. We owe 3.5 mill. Net result. Zero hit on cap.
If you owe 3.5 million (which you admit) the Net Result cannnot be a Zero Hit on the cap!
There is an offset at work. But that offset applies to the total contract price for that year. Let me break it down for you.
in 2014 Kyle Orton was set to earn $4,377,500. That cap number is comprised of two components:
$3,500,000 -- base salary
$1,127,500 -- Pro-rated bonus.
By cutting Orton, the Cowboys do get an offset. But the offset is against the $4,377,500, not the pro-rated bonus, which remains on the books as dead money.
Here is overthecap:
Releasing Orton should save the Cowboys $3.25 million against their salary cap immediately ... Dallas will still need to account for $2.255 million in cap charges next season for Orton.
So its not a "Zero Cap Hit"; its paying money to a player that is not on your roster.
