Bill Parcells get a pass if...

[Zaxor]

Zax,
Its easy man.
You don't improve every position in a year.

At QB we have a better player than anyone could have expected when we tried to develop Carter/Wright/Hutch/Stoerner.
Just how much good did all that developing do us?????????
How much good has it done Houston or Detroit?

Wahle got more money and wasn't young. Its easy to second guess now after Rivera had a freak back injury and has looked mediocre but he was excellent last year.

For older teams look no further than Kansas City or Washington.
This team has been dropping age and will likely continue to do so. Singleton, Glover and a few others will be gone in the off-season replaced by younger bodies, likely rookie draftees.

No plan is perfect. You don't draft a guy and guarantee he doesn't get injured or sign a guy and have him fit as well in your system as he did another but the Cowboys have a young pass rusher, 2 young CBs and those are trouble positions we spent 10 years working on man. OL are generally older guys. QBs are generally older. Teams tossing out young QBs are doing so because they had no better option or because they invested the world in a young guy.

Offer any team for comparison's sake if you have a real point but I do not see it.

The Pats best players are older. The Colts best guys on offense at least are older. Tampa's best defenders.

Plaxico Burress is a head case. Thats why he wasn't added. Thats why he couldn't get many offers at all. The Giants in fact start ancient Toomer beside him. The best Giants are old Strahan and old Barber. Guess they should just cut those guys right?

They dont hand out trophies for having the youngest team, its the best team.

The NFL's youngest team in ATL which is why they are so maddeningly inconsistent.

While I am willing to agree that younger does not mean better... I do think that Wahle at 28 is a better option than a 30+ (33 I think) year old Rivera

My point is that you have to give your team a chance to get good together
if in two years the Defense is ready will the offensive window already be shut?

and there in lies the paradox of the situation... If I have the right of it your belief is that age matters little... mine is that too heavy of a reliance on aged or aging vets is just asking for trouble... a good mixture is important... but I would rather have a 5-8 year vet than a 10+ year vet and what I am also saying is that those choices where available and we chose not to pursue them and opted for the aging or aged veteran

 

[Maikeru-sama]

Of all those teams you are so envious of, how many have won Super Bowls?


Perhaps you are jealous over the wrong things.

Agree to disagree.

At least these teams, for the most part at least make the Tourney and give themselves a chance at winning it all. You cannot do that, sitting at home holding the romote with one hand and pounding your chest with the other because you won 10 games.

I am starting to enjoy rooting for other squads when the Cowboys are at home sitting on the couch :bang2: .

Arent you tired of your team doing this come playoff time?

- Mike G.

 

[wileedog]

While I am willing to agree that younger does not mean better... I do think that Wahle at 28 is a better option than a 30+ (33 I think) year old Rivera

In fairness Wahle wanted to go home to Carolina. We would have had to beat the Panthers offer by a lot to get him, which would have been a HUGE contract.

But no doubt he was a better option if we could have signed him.

 

[Zaxor]

In fairness Wahle wanted to go home to Carolina. We would have had to beat the Panthers offer by a lot to get him, which would have been a HUGE contract.

But no doubt he was a better option if we could have signed him.

I do not know what Wahle would have done... but I do know Rivera received a good chunk of change in SB...thought it was a real bad move than and still do but maybe what he is teaching the other guys will be very beneficial but it makes me wonder why we didn't just offer him a coaching position instead...

 

[jterrell]

BTW, Mike, I am a huge draftnik who writes for a draft site.

I understand teams draft QBs high regularly with largely varying success. When it works great, when it doesnt expect to draft another QB high in 3 years and to have sucked to high heaven all 3 years in between.

The hit rate on QBs is the lowest of any NFL position.
If had the first overall pick I'd gladly take Matt Lienart but I would not trade the world to move up to that spot and I wouldn't take another QB in round 1 at all.

Its all about winning, screw the QB.

Honestly you don't wanna vists drafthistory.com amd look at all the 1st round QBs over the past 10 years. I have and its ugly. Lotsa names you barely remember. Some real gems of course include The Carr, Harrignton, Ramsey draft was a real doozy.
The 99 draft was supposed to be one of the best ever yet yielded only McNabb and Culpepper to go with Akili Smith, Cade McNown and Tim Couch all taken top 12. 98 had the split decision of Peyton versus Leaf. 97 offered only 1 first rounder Druckenmiller.

So you get about .75 franchise guy per year out of the draft. 1. And 32 teams fighting for 1 guy makes it a bit cost prohibitive unless you have a number 1 overall.

1st rounders
1990:Jeff George , Andre Ware.
1991: Dan McGwire, Todd Marinovitch
1992: David Kilinger, Tommy MAddox, Dave Brown-supp.
1993: Drew Bledsoe, Rick Mirer
1994: Heath Shuler, Trent Dilfer
1995: Steve McNair, Kerry Collins
1996: none
1997: Jim Drunkenmiller
1998: Peyton Manning, Ryan Leaf
1999: Tim Couch,Akili Smith, Donovan McNabb, Daunte Culpepper, Cade McNown
2000:Chad Pennington
2001: Michael Vick
2002: Carr, Harrington, Ramsey

 

[wileedog]

I do not know what Wahle would have done... but I do know Rivera received a good chunk of change in SB...thought it was a real bad move than and still do but maybe what he is teaching the other guys will be very beneficial but it makes me wonder why we didn't just offer him a coaching position instead...

Wahle got a 5 year, $27M deal with a $11.5M signing bonus. That's tackle money for a OG. Beating that deal would have been absurd.

Rivera got a $20M 3 year deal with a $9M signing bonus. We overpaid for him too, but looking at it I don't think Wahle was an option.

 

[AbeBeta]

I do not know what Wahle would have done... but I do know Rivera received a good chunk of change in SB...thought it was a real bad move than and still do but maybe what he is teaching the other guys will be very beneficial but it makes me wonder why we didn't just offer him a coaching position instead...

But let's remember what happened to Rivera during the off-season. He had back surgery. He's a different player following that surgery. He just doesn't have enough strength.

It is very possible that Rivera can come back and give us a couple of good years -- given his contract, we are pretty much stuck with him for at least one more season.

He's not so old that he can't come back and play several more years. In fact, he's about 10 years younger than the Skin's current starting RG.

 

[Zaxor]

But let's remember what happened to Rivera during the off-season. He had back surgery. He's a different player following that surgery. He just doesn't have enough strength.

It is very possible that Rivera can come back and give us a couple of good years -- given his contract, we are pretty much stuck with him for at least one more season.

He's not so old that he can't come back and play several more years. In fact, he's about 10 years younger than the Skin's current starting RG.

Oh I agree whole heartily that Rivera can play better than he has and it is probably because the back...

But his last year in GB was not all that good and he showed signs of being done than even though he went to the Pro Bowl (name recoginizition)...

 

[jterrell]

While I am willing to agree that younger does not mean better... I do think that Wahle at 28 is a better option than a 30+ (33 I think) year old Rivera

My point is that you have to give your team a chance to get good together
if in two years the Defense is ready will the offensive window already be shut?

and there in lies the paradox of the situation... If I have the right of it your belief is that age matters little... mine is that too heavy of a reliance on aged or aging vets is just asking for trouble... a good mixture is important... but I would rather have a 5-8 year vet than a 10+ year vet and what I am also saying is that those choices where available and we chose not to pursue them and opted for the aging or aged veteran

Wahle was more coveted than Rivera.
He was younger and cost more.

This team makes efforts not to sign older guys. It gets discussed repeatedly by Jerry and Bill.
Henry was a younger signee. But guys coming off of their first contract that can actually play are very expensive. You don't get to sign those guys without compensating other teams or spending out the wazoo.

We do have a mix of vets and older guys. Thats how you fix a talent deficit. You short stop areas with older guys and draft well. The cap doesn't allow signing quality 27 year olds at many positions in an off-season.

We drfated poorly for a decade. That takes its tool in a major way. We have nearly no vets with 4 to 7 years experience that are our original draftees. Of those many are backups or barely hanging on to a job.

The cowboys are not ever going to hit on every free agent or draftee. No team does.
BUT this team is hitting on more players now and is getting much better.

 

[Zaxor]

Wahle got a 5 year, $27M deal with a $11.5M signing bonus. That's tackle money for a OG. Beating that deal would have been absurd.

Rivera got a $20M 3 year deal with a $9M signing bonus. We overpaid for him too, but looking at it I don't think Wahle was an option.

I disagree we way over paid Rivera and could have easily matched the contract for Wahle or gave another 4 Million SB... for the 5 year contract

the 20M vs. 27M are a non factor as many incentive laden clauses could be laid amongst that...

 

[AbeBeta]

Wahle got a 5 year, $27M deal with a $11.5M signing bonus. That's tackle money for a OG. Beating that deal would have been absurd.

Rivera got a $20M 3 year deal with a $9M signing bonus. We overpaid for him too, but looking at it I don't think Wahle was an option.

Rivera signed for 5 years not 3.

Here's a breakdown. The contract contained a $8.125 million signing bonus and a $300,000 roster bonus in 2005. His base salaries will be $700,000 in 2005, $1.875 million in '06, $2 million in '07 and $3 million in '08 and '09.

Based on these #s if we cut him or he retires before next season, we have a 4.625 million net cap hit (6.5mill of the SB minus his salary). After June 1 a cut hits us for 1.375 in dead money for '06 and 3.25 for '07. That's not how we usually do it but if he doesn't play well in TC then he may retire.

If he is cut after next season the hit is 2.875. After his 3rd season, it costs us 250k to cut him.

Looking at these #s, I think we've got a reasonable contract that protects us pretty well. This is basically a 3-year deal.

 

[Zaxor]

Wahle was more coveted than Rivera.
He was younger and cost more.

This team makes efforts not to sign older guys. It gets discussed repeatedly by Jerry and Bill.
Henry was a younger signee. But guys coming off of their first contract that can actually play are very expensive. You don't get to sign those guys without compensating other teams or spending out the wazoo.

We do have a mix of vets and older guys. Thats how you fix a talent deficit. You short stop areas with older guys and draft well. The cap doesn't allow signing quality 27 year olds at many positions in an off-season.

We drfated poorly for a decade. That takes its tool in a major way. We have nearly no vets with 4 to 7 years experience that are our original draftees. Of those many are backups or barely hanging on to a job.

The cowboys are not ever going to hit on every free agent or draftee. No team does.
BUT this team is hitting on more players now and is getting much better.

that is true but the price is still usually okay over the long haul as long as it is not too many...

there is no substition for good drafting... but this team has not done a good job of it till recently in order to over come that you have to spend in FA and you have to be judicious in what it is spent on... so what I am saying is it is better to give Wahle 12 million with a 5 year deal than it is to give Rivera 9 mill and a 3 year deal...because by the time you maybe able to do something in the Playoffs that 9 mill guy may be done and you got nothing to show for it

 

[Trip]

Rivera's deal is a five year.

The difference between the two is $1.4 million per year for five years.

When it gets that close, it's crazy to sign to sign the lesser player if you truly believe Wahle is better.

 

[wileedog]

I disagree we way over paid Rivera and could have easily matched the contract for Wahle or gave another 4 Million SB... for the 5 year contract

Matching wouldn't be good enough, again he wanted to play home in NC so we would have to significantly beat the Panthers offer for him to come here.

And a $15M signing bonus for a guard is insanity. Wahle is good but he's not Larry Allen in his prime.

 

[Trip]

Rivera signed for 5 years not 3.

Here's a breakdown. The contract contained a $8.125 million signing bonus and a $300,000 roster bonus in 2005. His base salaries will be $700,000 in 2005, $1.875 million in '06, $2 million in '07 and $3 million in '08 and '09.

Based on these #s if we cut him or he retires before next season, we have a 4.625 million net cap hit (6.5mill of the SB minus his salary). After June 1 a cut hits us for 1.375 in dead money for '06 and 3.25 for '07. That's not how we usually do it but if he doesn't play well in TC then he may retire.

If he is cut after next season the hit is 2.875. After his 3rd season, it costs us 250k to cut him.

Looking at these #s, I think we've got a reasonable contract that protects us pretty well. This is basically a 3-year deal.

We're not protected at all.

If we cut him this year we have $7.2 million in dead cap

2007 we have $5.4 million in dead cap

2008 we have $3.6 million in dead cap

And 2009, we have $1.8 million.

Just because he has high base salaries, and it looks like you save money, you still take huge dead cap hits.

(No June 1st cuts this year, by the way. All bonuses of cut players are accelerated onto 2006 salary cap. )

 

[Zaxor]

Matching wouldn't be good enough, again he wanted to play home in NC so we would have to significantly beat the Panthers offer for him to come here.

And a $15M signing bonus for a guard is insanity. Wahle is good but he's not Larry Allen in his prime.

While I too find it an very high price to pay... it is what needs to happen when a team drafts as poorly as we have for so long... a continual problem it will remain till it is addressed in the draft or FA... the patches sometimes cost more over the long haul... but spending a large amount of money can't be done for every position... it has to be calculated... and 9 mill for Rivera regardless of health was not worth it...imho but 2 years ago it would have been...

I am not sure we did not over pay for Ferg also...

Glenn, Aron was a good signing so was Henry..so was Terry Glenn as he came cheap...Key has played better than hoped for 2 years but we have not really done anything outside of Crayton developing (thank goodness) to prepare for there departure... are you willing to sign them to big contracts? I am not sure but I think both are due to come up here real soon...

Also the older players don't recover from injuries as fast or as well as the young guys do...

So sometimes or I should say most times you have to over pay to get the help you need...

 

[AbeBeta]

We're not protected at all.

If we cut him this year we have $7.2 million in dead cap

2007 we have $5.4 million in dead cap

2008 we have $3.6 million in dead cap

And 2009, we have $1.8 million.

Just because he has high base salaries, and it looks like you save money, you still take huge dead cap hits.

(No June 1st cuts this year, by the way. All bonuses of cut players are accelerated onto 2006 salary cap. )

Dead cap space is still cap space -- and the base contract does make a huge difference. Perhaps you hear "dead space" and think that is important -- but that is like looking at your bank account and only focusing on the withdrawls rather than the withdrawls and deposits.

You have to talk about "dead space" in relation to what it costs to keep the player. For example, you say if we cut him in 2009 we have 1.8 million in dead space -- well so freaking what? That's 1.8 million of a cap hit compared to 4.8 million if we keep him. Cutting him there produces a net 3 million GAIN in cap space. I can't see how the 1.8 million of dead space there is a problem. Same with all those other #'s you have to chop the base salary off there b/c we aren't paying that amount.

 

[AbeBeta]

While I too find it an very high price to pay....

But let's be clear here. Free agency is about over paying. That's how you get top guys to come to your team. And their contracts always look too big for a year or two. But you get to year 3 or 4 and the deals become reasonable. That's just the nature of free agency -- nobody is getting any sort of special deals.

 

[wileedog]

So sometimes or I should say most times you have to over pay to get the help you need...

Overpay, sure. Everybody overpays for free agents, its the nature of the market. We overpaid for Rivera, even if he didn't hurt his back.

But just writing blank checks to good not great offensive guards is a quick road to salary cap hell. The rest of the league would have laughed their collective arses off if we gave Wahle a $15M signing bonus.

Carolina has struggled running the ball and protecting Delhomme all year. Wahle has played well but just handing out a ton of cash to him would not fix all the problems we have, nor has it fixed all of Carolina's.

 

[Zaxor]

But let's be clear here. Free agency is about over paying. That's how you get top guys to come to your team. And their contracts always look too big for a year or two. But you get to year 3 or 4 and the deals become reasonable. That's just the nature of free agency -- nobody is getting any sort of special deals.

agreed so better to spend on a 5-8 year vet than a 10+ year vet even if you have to spend a bit more for the younger guy...and as long as they are similiar value