Twitter: Stephen: Cowboys spending the amount in total players' salaries, regardless what we spend on Dak

cowboyed · May 19, 2020

Verdict said:
I think that’s reasonable.

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:
Left over cap money doesn't go in Jerry's pocket. And if you read through this thread you'll see about ten other explanations or interpretations of Stephen's words, including yours. So I just posed the question..."what does that even mean?"

The revenue generated from the NFL including from television, tickets sales, merchandise, etc.. is evenly distributed to each team. It comes out to the 10's of millions of dollars per team. I guess the owner makes the most direct money if and when he or she sell the team. Left over cap money does not go into any owner's pocket!

blueblood70 · May 19, 2020

SAS this is stupid its basic budgeting , you have a set amount of money and many necessity's to spend it on first, if something's left over you can get a want vs a need..

However if you take a normal persons budget for their home and they decide to get pool and didnt realize the water heater and HVAC system was going to go out and now have no money, you want to live with out Heat and hot water? or enjoy your pool?

well Dak the Pool right now and well he should be paid like a hot tub so we have money for necessities around him to win like Heat and hot water..

basics SAS it does matter what we pay a single player and of that the highest salary in the nfl for a player ranked around 10 at his craft..that serious mistake that can cripple your team in a lot of ways IF Dak doesnt turn into aaron rogers in his prime and can carry a team without Pro bowlers at all the skill positions and line..I mean you give this dude 40mil or more and now players in 2 years will have to be traded or cut and well if he rather be paid and be on some 6-10 teams hes not thinking straight..

The DC has made this offense much easier for dak to run and daks being a DB..His ego has outgrown his talent..

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country · May 19, 2020

cowboyed said:
The revenue generated from the NFL including from television, tickets sales, merchandise, etc.. is evenly distributed to each team. It comes out to the 10's of millions of dollars per team. I guess the owner makes the most direct money if and when he or she sell the team. Left over cap money does not go into any owner's pocket!

Myself and @Verdict already know left over cap money doesn't go to owners. So WHY are you quoting us?

I mean, read the first sentence in my post that you quoted. What does it say?
:facepalm:

@blueblood70...why did you even give his post a like? Did you not read the first line in my post that he quoted? How is he going to tell me something, I just said?

Somebody got too much VODKA in their coffee this morning.

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country · May 19, 2020

blueblood70 said:
SAS this is stupid its basic budgeting , you have a set amount of money and many necessity's to spend it on first, if something's left over you can get a want vs a need..

However if you take a normal persons budget for their home and they decide to get pool and didnt realize the water heater and HVAC system was going to go out and now have no money, you want to live with out Heat and hot water? or enjoy your pool?

well Dak the Pool right now and well he should be paid like a hot tub so we have money for necessities around him to win like Heat and hot water..

basics SAS it does matter what we pay a single player and of that the highest salary in the nfl for a player ranked around 10 at his craft..that serious mistake that can cripple your team in a lot of ways IF Dak doesnt turn into aaron rogers in his prime and can carry a team without Pro bowlers at all the skill positions and line..I mean you give this dude 40mil or more and now players in 2 years will have to be traded or cut and well if he rather be paid and be on some 6-10 teams hes not thinking straight..

The DC has made this offense much easier for dak to run and daks being a DB..His ego has outgrown his talent..

SAS?

Normally stands for Stephen A. Smith around here, not special accounting services.

TheSkaven · May 19, 2020

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:
What does that even mean? They have a cap within their cap?

He is battling for hearts and minds of fans now, which is scary because it means he’s digging in for the long term.

But he’s basically trying to say that you should care about the size of this contract because if Dak gets more money it doesn’t come out of the Jones’ family pocket, it means less good players on the team. And conversely if he’s willing to work with them, it might mean adding that one player who puts them over the top.

blueblood70 · May 19, 2020

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:
SAS?

Normally stands for Stephen A. Smith around here, not special accounting services.

yes this was about Stephen a smiths quote on paying Dak wont effect his deal..maybe I was on too many similar threads and thought its what i was relying to, either way the analogy stand...

you cant give one player that big a % of the pie unless hes able to be a 5 star chef who can make more pies on his own, Daks not that hes a 3star chef who needs his sous chef to help create the recipes..

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country · May 19, 2020

lkelly said:
If Dak doesn't sign a long term deal by July 15, he can't do anything other than play under the tag next season. Jerry and Stephen can't "cave" and give him a big offer to sign 3 games in.

Yes they can. Its called an extension. They picked up Zeke's fifth year option then gave him an extension. So they can tag Dak for the one year then give him an extension. It happens all the time, in every sport. The Eagles done Wentz the same way.

So Jerry can cave and give him a big offer to sign three games in.

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country · May 19, 2020

ksg811 said:
This isn't correct. The 95% spending guarantee is league wide and it is also over a multi-year period, not yearly. 2020 is the last of a 4 year period (2017-2020) where teams must collectively spend 95% of the cap, which coincided with the final year of the old CBA. Per the new CBA, the spending guarantee is still 95% beginning in 2021 and broken down into 3, 3, and 4 year periods over the length of the 10 year CBA.

Under the old CBA, teams had a minimum spend of 89% concluding with the same 4 year period ending in 2020. In the new CBA, teams must now spend 90% of the cap over the same 3, 3, and 4 year periods. There is also no limit on cap rollover, so I'm not sure where you are getting 95% and 5% rollover.

The major consideration here is that these spending minimums are on a CASH basis, not cap space used. Cap space is accounted for on an accrual basis and there are no restrictions outside of the yearly cap.

^^^THIS^^^

I don't think he knows how pension plans work. That 95% is the cap ceiling because the other five goes toward retirement.

I mean, the employees have to contribute something toward retirement for the employers to match, right? And these players are employees. That's why that 95% exists. He just making things up, talking about a 5% rollover.

Jake · May 19, 2020

doomsday9084 said:
I believe he is trying to say:
- Dak's pay comes out of other people's pay
- Dak's pay has no impact on Jerry's wallet
Its a back handed slam on Dak and the "just pay him" group supporting Dak.

That seems a lot more like your opinion than anything SJ said.

cern · May 19, 2020

The cap is a pie. A generation of young Americans grew up understanding the pie. The nfl has caused us to overthink the pie.

OmerV · May 19, 2020

leeblair said:
Dak was a rookie who got to stand behind the best offensive line in football, with the best running back in the NFL, in the worst division in the NFL.
He did okay- because the team was doing well.
But then reality set in, and he struggled the next 3 years.
By the way- he never should have been under center in his second year, but Garrett was hoping he would show everyone what a great coach he was.
As usual, Garrett didn't have a clue.

Being a rookie somehow made him more likely to do great? lol. Dude, you have to do better than that. He did have a great OL, but he was inexperienced and unexpectedly thrown in as the starter after 2 injuries, and you are somehow acting as if that was an aid to success rather than a hurdle.

And no, he hasn't struggled the next 3 years. His stats in years 2&3 were slightly off year one, but not dramatically like you want to pretend, and the team won the division and made the playoffs in his 3rd season. Of course, you claim they have only won the division and been to the playoffs once with Dak, so you don't really care much about facts anyway.

As for your opinions about whether he should have been under center his second year, are you really saying it was a no brainer to go with a guy that had gotten hurt 3 of the last 5 times he had been in a game? I get liking Romo, and I even get if a person felt Romo should have been given another chance, but to act as if there was no rationale for the change is nonsensical and shows a complete unwillingness to look at things logically and rationally.

kskboys · May 19, 2020

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:
Myself and @Verdict already know left over cap money doesn't go to owners. So WHY are you quoting us?

I mean, read the first sentence in my post that you quoted. What does it say?

@blueblood70...why did you even give his post a like? Did you not read the first line in my post that he quoted? How is he going to tell me something, I just said?

Somebody got too much VODKA in their coffee this morning.

Why would you say that? It didn't overflow.

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country · May 19, 2020

kskboys said:
Why would you say that? It didn't overflow.

"The perfect pour" on an empty stomach is too much for some people.

doomsday9084 · May 19, 2020

Jake said:
That seems a lot more like your opinion than anything SJ said.

That sounds like you don't like what he said so are choosing to ignore it. Feel free to come up with other logical reasons why he would feel compelled to publicly note that Dak's salary doesn't impact the total salary. What he said was rather straightforward and there aren't many different messages that can be pulled from it.

lkelly · May 19, 2020

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:
Yes they can. Its called an extension. They picked up Zeke's fifth year option then gave him an extension. So they can tag Dak for the one year then give him an extension. It happens all the time, in every sport. The Eagles done Wentz the same way.

So Jerry can cave and give him a big offer to sign three games in.

You seem unfamiliar with the way this works. Other leagues and their CBA rules are completely irrelevant. Carson Wentz was never given the franchise tag. Neither was Zeke.

From the league's website:

Tagged players have until 4 p.m. ET on July 15 to negotiate a multiyear contract with the team. After July 15, the player may sign only a one-year contract with his club for the 2019 season, and the deal cannot be extended until after the team's last regular-season game.

cowboyed · May 19, 2020

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:
Myself and @Verdict already know left over cap money doesn't go to owners. So WHY are you quoting us?

I mean, read the first sentence in my post that you quoted. What does it say?

@blueblood70...why did you even give his post a like? Did you not read the first line in my post that he quoted? How is he going to tell me something, I just said?

Somebody got too much VODKA in their coffee this morning.

Aren't you full of yourself. I started out commenting on the various revenue pathways to teams, and in my last sentence I was concluding by agreeing with you and Verdict. I will let you get back to your intimate style of posting.

TwentyOne · May 19, 2020

Hawkeye0202 said:
Not surprised as long as we're not interested in sign any outside free with huge contracts...

This guy has no clue.

How did he get his MIT degree idk. Says something about MIT does it ?

Ok he has a bachelor "degree". Which says a lot.

TwentyOne · May 19, 2020

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:
What does that even mean? They have a cap within their cap?

Believe me he doesnr even know what he is talking about.

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country · May 19, 2020

cowboyed said:
Aren't you full of yourself. I started out commenting on the various revenue pathways to teams, and in my last sentence I was concluding by agreeing with you and Verdict. I will let you get back to your intimate style of posting.

I woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. Haven't had my head on straight all day. My apologies.

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country · May 19, 2020

lkelly said:
You seem unfamiliar with the way this works. Other leagues and their CBA rules are completely irrelevant. Carson Wentz was never given the franchise tag. Neither was Zeke.

From the league's website:

Tagged players have until 4 p.m. ET on July 15 to negotiate a multiyear contract with the team. After July 15, the player may sign only a one-year contract with his club for the 2019 season, and the deal cannot be extended until after the team's last regular-season game.

I have no problem being wrong. That's for educating me about the tag. But I thought for sure they'd done that with Dez a couple of years back. But I guess they pulled the tag then signed him.

Again, thanks for the info.

Twitter: Stephen: Cowboys spending the amount in total players' salaries, regardless what we spend on Dak

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Last Man Standing

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Beyond tired of Jerry

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member