Adam - Cap Wise Jerry Said He Couldn't Cut TO & Sign Ware - True?

[Bleu Star]

I don't know why we're even debating whether TO returns... Jerry wants to fill his new stadium. TO will be a big part of that occasion. Get over the hatred. It's unhealthy.

 

[WG5516]

Ok fellas I have some questions.

1) If we trade T.O. that will still count 9m against the cap, correct?

2) What do you think we can get for him?

3) If T.O. retires do we still have to pay him all of the 9m?

We already know JJ is BSin by saying he wouldn't be able to resign Ware, because T.O.'s contract will be gone after the 09-10 Season and Ware's contract will be up at that point as well. You don't have to resign Ware this off-season and you could Franchise him if need be. Honestly, I'm torn, because I want T.O. to end his career here.

 

[Bleu Star]

If Wade stays TO stays. If somehow my dream comes true and Wade gets canned then all bets are off with regard to TO's status.

Wade - TO

No Wade -

 

[TellerMorrow34]

How in the world are the best teams in football getting by without him?

And most of them, except for Carolina, don't even have "star" wide receivers. How can that possibly be?

What I don't understand is why you'd even care if he got cut. You'd just follow him to the next team that picks him up and continue your crusade there.

Lets look at the playoff teams...

Indy - They've got Reggie Wayne. So they have their star reciever.

San Diego - Got in by the fact that they play in a crap division and the Broncos folded like a house of cards.

Ravens - They get by no matter who their WR's are because they've got an outstanding defense that kills people. Dallas doesn't have a defense as good as theirs to get by with lesser offensive talent.

Miami - This team certainly did a good job, all around, without a true #1 WR. They're a good run team, with good defense, and they just don't turn the ball over. So I'll grant you this one for sure.

Tennesse- Great run team with great defense. Once again that can overcome the lack of a good passing threat. Dallas doesn't have the defense this team does and they don't have an OC committed enough to the run game to have the running game this team does.

Pittsburgh - Great running team with outstanding defense again. Plus they have a quality, albeit no where near TO's talent, WR in Ward. But, again, defense and running game that Dallas doesn't have right now.


So 1 team out of the AFC side so far. Let's check the other side now.


Arizona - 2 #1 Wr's who got them in. So obviously they don't get in without their TO like threats.

Atlanta - OUTSTANDING run team that plays good team defense. They have a solid #1 WR as well in White. But they could get by without White cause of good team defense and that great running game.

Minny - OUTSTANDING run team that plays great run defense and above average pass defense.

Philly - Quality defense that doesnt need a #1 WR to at least be competitive. I'll give you this one as well.

Carolina - They have Steve Smith and they just happen to play solid D and have an outstanding running game to boot.

Giants - Until recently they did have a #1 WR and you've seen how not having him on the field has effected them. They've lost 3 out of the 4 games they've played since suspending him. We'll see if they are able to turn it back on in the playoffs. They could possibly get by without their #1 because of great defense and outstanding running.


So out of the playoff teams in the league exactly 2 get by without a #1 WR, and could continue to do so without one.

The rest of the teams either have one or they've got something Dallas doesnt have in much better defensive play and outstanding running games where you can get by not having legit #1's at WR.

That's how those teams get by without him. In Dallas the defense isn't good enough, and the OC doesn't care about running the ball enough to make it possible to get by without guys like him at WR.


Basically my point being that if you don't have a proven, play making, #1 WR on your team then you'd better be able to play great defense for 4 quarters and you better be able to pound the ball down people throats in the running game.

Dallas didn't prove they could do either of those this year.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Maybe because those teams all have better players at every other position. Ever think of that one?

Let's compare the Dallas defense to that of the Titans, Steelers, Ravens, and Giants.

I feel dirty for even thinking of it.

The latter four defenses are consistently excellent and keep their team in games, regardless of how their offense is performing.

The first defense gives up back-to-back 77+ yard touchdown runs late in the 4th quarter when they're within 2 points.

Getting rid of the best receiver on the football team (not counting ROY WILLIAMS, of course..........) isn't going to make the defense championship-caliber. It isn't going to stop Tony Romo from throwing boneheaded interceptions. It isn't going to make the line pick up the blitz better, or block for the run more consistently.

LOL. Glad to see you admit that the best teams aren't built on primadonna wide receivers, but on defense. And on the offensive line. And on limiting turnovers.

Not gaudy numbers from wide receivers.

Still curious why you'd care if he got cut. I'm sure Seahawkszone would love to have you.

And to BHF -- I don't consider most of those teams true contenders. The Cardinals sure aren't. And as you admit yourself, the Titans, Giants, and Steelers don't have one. (And funny how the Giants managed to beat probably the second best team in the conference in Carolina without Plaxico.)

 

[TellerMorrow34]

LOL. Glad to see you admit that the best teams aren't built on primadonna wide receivers, but on defense. And on the offensive line. And on limiting turnovers.

Not gaudy numbers from wide receivers.

Still curious why you'd care if he got cut. I'm sure Seahawkszone would love to have you.

And if we had that kind of defense or running attack here then I'd be all with you that it doesn't matter if they cut him.

We, however, don't have that here and simply eating 9 million in dead money isn't going to help us get that here.

 

[Randy White]

you're arguing apples and oranges.

There's " cap money " and there's " real money ". For those of you arguing the team should cut him so the team can save " real money " ( that his his base salary plus the roster bonus ) it would absolutely make sense in the business world. You just laying off somebody to prevent paying his salary. Of course, you must take into consideration the production that you're not going to get, but if you've made the decision to cut him, it usually means your business can survive without that production anyways.

The NFL does not work that way necessarily because, unlike most businesses, the teams have to pay a penalty when they " lay off " a T.O. type employee. Teams have to take into consideration that penalty when they make their business decision. Teams' business model is, basically, winning ( actually, their business is entertaining, but follow me on this one ). That means, for the most part, teams want to put the best available product/personnel on their field every time. However, they have to play by the rules of a salary cap that include restrictions on how much they can spend on such product/personnel. If they don't pay as much attention to those rules, as much as they do to their actual cost of business, ie: real money, their business model collapses.

They can't win because they don't have talent, but they can't sign talent because they don't have cap room.

It's a little more complicated than that, but that's the simplest way to understand it.

 

[wileedog]

Brilliant reply BHF.

I'm so sick of seeing the "cut" or "trade" or "sign" threads I could scream, because these Yahweh's have no idea what the cap ramifications are.

Because the dumb move was Jerry giving him the extension in the first place that basically made a known problem child uncuttable from a financial standpoint.

The first contract we gave him was set up correctly with yearly roster bonuses that didn't effect the cap overly if we cut bait at any time.

This one was just utter foolishness.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Ok fellas I have some questions.

1) If we trade T.O. that will still count 9m against the cap, correct?

2) What do you think we can get for him?

3) If T.O. retires do we still have to pay him all of the 9m?

We already know JJ is BSin by saying he wouldn't be able to resign Ware, because T.O.'s contract will be gone after the 09-10 Season and Ware's contract will be up at that point as well. You don't have to resign Ware this off-season and you could Franchise him if need be. Honestly, I'm torn, because I want T.O. to end his career here.

Trading him costs the same as cutting him. The remaining portion of his bonus hit our cap.

 

[Randy White]

3) If T.O. retires do we still have to pay him all of the 9m?

No, and the Cowboys would save 9 million dollars in actual money.

But guess what ? Those 9 million dollars they saved ? it goes into Jerry Jones' pocket due to the fact that Cowboys salary cap doesn't have room for it.

Again, over simplification, and not exactly 100% accurate, but it's the basic premise of the problem.

The best option is to keep him, make sure the team improves, and put him in position to help the team. That way you get a return for your investment in " real money " and " cap money ".

 

[EveryoneElse]

Some people seem to forget what all the dead money from our aging stars in the 90s did to this franchise.

 

[utrunner07]

I think we all need to realize here, whether you are for the cutting of TO or not, that this entire problem is largely a results of Jerry, once again for the 20th time in the apst four years, paying an aging star WAY TOO much money and signing him to WAY TOO long of contract. There is no good answer to the TO issue here. The only thing to be seen is yet ANOTHER example of failure by our inept GM.

 

[The Panch]

I think we all need to realize here, whether you are for the cutting of TO or not, that this entire problem is largely a results of Jerry, once again for the 20th time in the apst four years, paying an aging star WAY TOO much money and signing him to WAY TOO long of contract. There is no good answer to the TO issue here. The only thing to be seen is yet ANOTHER example of failure by our inept GM.

True. Im not even really mad at Wade and Owens. They cant help what they are. Jerry's the one that brought them here knowing what he was gonna get and didnt seem to give a damn.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Regardless of where you come down on the Owens issue, can someone explain to me how the $700k or so difference would affect your ability to give Ware a new contract?

I think it comes down to cap flexibility. Everyone agrees that T.O. would count at least 8.5 mil to 9m based on his presence on the roster.

How it affects Ware

If T.O.'s on the roster you can change up his contract to free up cash and reduce his cap number to sign Ware.

If T.O. is NOT on the roster, the team no longer has the flexibility to move numbers around in his contract to sign Ware. That 9m is dead money and untouchable.

 

[Idgit]

Brilliant reply BHF.

I'm so sick of seeing the "cut" or "trade" or "sign" threads I could scream, because these Yahweh's have no idea what the cap ramifications are.

[youtube]G2y8Sx4B2Sk[/youtube]

 

[chinch]

the shills on talkin' cowboys from 12/31 were spinning jerruh's nonsensical "can't cut TO and sign Ware" nonsense.

couple that with mickey's article and you can see how jerry "change" jones is simply trying to change your mind (about the state of the cowboys) with nonsense and mistruthts. the change agent is in full damage control mode.

 

[Eskimo]

I think we all need to realize here, whether you are for the cutting of TO or not, that this entire problem is largely a results of Jerry, once again for the 20th time in the apst four years, paying an aging star WAY TOO much money and signing him to WAY TOO long of contract. There is no good answer to the TO issue here. The only thing to be seen is yet ANOTHER example of failure by our inept GM.

BINGO.

Other recent long-term recent bad contracts given out:

Flo (too old, poor work ethic - should have just found a replacement in FA even if inferior in talent or just moved Davis to LT again until a solution was found)

TNew (too old, too many injuries recenlty - should have let him play out his contract year - after another injury plagued year with big gaffes his value would have been way down)

Hamlin (just not good enough for the contract - could have franchised and then let him walk)

Barber (just not good enough for the contract - could have let him played out his tender and see how he did as a feature back - he flopped)

Jerry has to be more selective about whom he signs to mega-deals. Ideally they should be young stars with good health.