Can we even fix the O-line in one off-season?

[neosapien23]

Does anyone know the cap hit Dallas would take if they cut Rivera in the third year of his contract?

 

[Eskimo]

Does anyone know the cap hit Dallas would take if they cut Rivera in the third year of his contract?

If cut before

June 1, 2006 - ~$7.2M in 2006
After June 1, 2006 - $1.8M in 2006 and $5.4M in 2007
Before June 1, 2007 - $5.4M in 2007
After June 1, 2007 - $1.8M in 2006 and $3.6M in 2008

In short, we're really screwed unless he comes back a much better player next year. I'm hoping really, really hard that last year was an aberration due to his back injury and lack of offseason conditioning.

Jerry Jones failed to learn his lesson about signing an ageing OG with some history of injuries to a gigantic signing bonus (see LA).

 

[Clove]

That's what happens when you have a Coach who is in a hurry to win. No time to retool, if that were the case, we would be looking at QB in the draft.

But this is the way it is, and we have to fix the OLine and can't start over.

Does BP want to go out on a limb on a RT in the 1st round when he has never drafted a pure Tackle in the 1st round in over 20 years of head coaching?

Does he trust anymore draft picks to hold down that position after the failures of Rogers and Petitti, and Tucker, and Al Johnson?

At some point, BP may decide to go strictly Free Agency on the oline. Parcells was given Flo and LA, and I'll bet he probably didn't want LA, but it's a fact he wanted Flo.

So these are the questions going into the draft and FA, and if he's fed up of his rookies and young players screwing him over, he may just stick with the VETS for now.

 

[BigDFan5]

If cut before

June 1, 2006 - ~$7.2M in 2006
After June 1, 2006 - $1.8M in 2006 and $5.4M in 2007
Before June 1, 2007 - $5.4M in 2007
After June 1, 2007 - $1.8M in 2006 and $3.6M in 2008

In short, we're really screwed unless he comes back a much better player next year. I'm hoping really, really hard that last year was an aberration due to his back injury and lack of offseason conditioning.

Jerry Jones failed to learn his lesson about signing an ageing OG with some history of injuries to a gigantic signing bonus (see LA).

your numbers forgot to take in account his salary savings\\\

If Cut before
June 1 5,325,000
After June 1 doesnt matter unless the cap is extended. If it is then 525k Hit in 2006 and a 2.8 mill loss in 2007

If cut before June 1 2007 its a 3.4 million loss

If cut after June 1 2007 we save 200k on the 2007 cap but lose 600k on the 2008 cap

If cut before June 1 2008 Lose 600k on cap
If cut after June 1 2008 save 1.8 mill in 2008 and save 600k in 2009

Final contract year 2009 we cut before June 1 and save 1.2 million

Cut after June 1 save 2.4 mill in 2009 and lose 1.2 mill in 2010



So In reality we can cut him after June 1 next year with minimal loss

 

[Eskimo]

your numbers forgot to take in account his salary savings\\\

If Cut before
June 1 5,325,000
After June 1 doesnt matter unless the cap is extended. If it is then 525k Hit in 2006 and a 2.8 mill loss in 2007

If cut before June 1 2007 its a 3.4 million loss

If cut after June 1 2007 we save 200k on the 2007 cap but lose 600k on the 2008 cap

If cut before June 1 2008 Lose 600k on cap
If cut after June 1 2008 save 1.8 mill in 2008 and save 600k in 2009

Final contract year 2009 we cut before June 1 and save 1.2 million

Cut after June 1 save 2.4 mill in 2009 and lose 1.2 mill in 2010



So In reality we can cut him after June 1 next year with minimal loss

Adam is the cap expert, but my understanding is Rivera signed a 5-year $20M deal with $9M signing bonus.

His salaries according to NFLPA are:

2005 700000.00
2006 1875000.00
2007 2000000.00
2008 3000000.00
2009 3000000.00

His cap costs for the next few years will be:

2006: 3.675M
2007: 3.8M
2008: 4.8M
2009: 4.8M

I think the relevant point is always cap costs and not cap savings because what really matters is how much he costs the team's cap in any given year. My numbers as stated above are basically correct in that essence.

The most likely scenario is that he plays here two more years and is cut prior to the start of the 2008 season (pre-June 1st) and the cap costs under that scenario would be:

2006: 3.675M
2007: 3.8M
2008: 3.6M
2009: 0

At that point he'll have played here for 3 years and "stolen" $13.5M from Jerry Jones. It sort of makes you want to puke when you think Randy Thomas makes less than that.

 

[BigDFan5]

Adam is the cap expert, but my understanding is Rivera signed a 5-year $20M deal with $9M signing bonus.

His salaries according to NFLPA are:

2005 700000.00
2006 1875000.00
2007 2000000.00
2008 3000000.00
2009 3000000.00

His cap costs for the next few years will be:

2006: 3.675M
2007: 3.8M
2008: 4.8M
2009: 4.8M

I think the relevant point is always cap costs and not cap savings because what really matters is how much he costs the team's cap in any given year. My numbers as stated above are basically correct in that essence.

The most likely scenario is that he plays here two more years and is cut prior to the start of the 2008 season (pre-June 1st) and the cap costs under that scenario would be:

2006: 3.675M
2007: 3.8M
2008: 3.6M
2009: 0

At that point he'll have played here for 3 years and "stolen" $13.5M from Jerry Jones. It sort of makes you want to puke when you think Randy Thomas makes less than that.

When you cut a player that has 5 million left in signing bonus that will hit the cap all at once 5 mill is in essence a cap hit but if his salary is 7 mill then we would actually save 2 million on our cap by releasing him and taking the 5 mill "cap hit"


Look at Laroi Glover this year he still has over a million in signing bonus that will hit the cap, but we will save 6 million when we get rid of him

 

[jterrell]

Hopefully Flozell will come back healthy, LA needs replaced ... we need a LG, Johnson needs replaced ... we need a C, Rivera needs to get healthy and come back strong with a years experiecne in Dallas, we need a RT.

Can we do all of that in one off-season, ... if not, next season will resemble 2005.

Well we absolutely can if the moves of last year: signing Rivera and drafting Petitti pay off this year. We'd still need a least one more piece if for nothing else other than depth but yea it can be done.

By the same token if we start losing guys to injuries and have a few hampered as well then it could be another long year. Not sure any team can lose their projected starter at RT in camp, lose their RG for all of camp and have him play subpar and lose their starting LT and be pretty good. Perhaps some teams have that kind of depth but it has to be somewhat rare.

 

[Eskimo]

When you cut a player that has 5 million left in signing bonus that will hit the cap all at once 5 mill is in essence a cap hit but if his salary is 7 mill then we would actually save 2 million on our cap by releasing him and taking the 5 mill "cap hit"


Look at Laroi Glover this year he still has over a million in signing bonus that will hit the cap, but we will save 6 million when we get rid of him

I realize what you are talking about with cap savings but the term is a bit of a misnomer.

If you look at Glover his cap costs are $1.5M if we cut/trade him before his roster bonus, $3.5M if we cut/trade him after his roster bonus or $7.5M if he plays the year.

I think the idea of cap savings is really mostly useful to team that are up against the cap and need to ditch some salary - there they need to do the accounting to come up with the "savings" to get under the cap.

Since that really isn't our situation, I usually find it more instructive to think in terms of cap costs. They are really just two different ways of presenting the same information. Savings is just putting a bit of an optimistic spin on things that doesn't fit well with my world view.

 

[BigDFan5]

I realize what you are talking about with cap savings but the term is a bit of a misnomer.

If you look at Glover his cap costs are $1.5M if we cut/trade him before his roster bonus, $3.5M if we cut/trade him after his roster bonus or $7.5M if he plays the year.

I think the idea of cap savings is really mostly useful to team that are up against the cap and need to ditch some salary - there they need to do the accounting to come up with the "savings" to get under the cap.

Since that really isn't our situation, I usually find it more instructive to think in terms of cap costs. They are really just two different ways of presenting the same information. Savings is just putting a bit of an optimistic spin on things that doesn't fit well with my world view.

I realize what you are saying, I was just showing that Rivera could be cut next season with little to no affect on the cap

 

[Eskimo]

I realize what you are saying, I was just showing that Rivera could be cut next season with little to no affect on the cap

I think that is why I don't like the cap "savings" idea - there is an effect on the cap either way. It is just that the cap effect is neutral whether we keep him or not.

 

[notherbob]

As someone else posted, Johnson won't get any bigger or stronger, ... and that kills us, especially when we play against a 3-4.

He just seems to get pushed back a lot, which is a killer for Bledsoe.

Rivera didn't impress me as much as I had hoped he would this year except I don't remember him getting penalized a great deal.

LA is not mean anymore, ... he used to maul people, now he misses a lot.

Will Flo come back as healthy and as strong as we all would like him to be?

We need some competition at RT for Petitti.

I'm concerned.

Good post, there's a lot to agree with there.

Throw in the fact that we really don't know about Columbo yet and if he turns up fully repared and can return to his old skill level, one of the OL's problems would be solved. Even if he comes back, it will probably take him a year to really get back into his old form. If he can't come back then it was a good gamble and the team didn't lose much.

Nothing can be done anyway until there's a new CBA, or not.

 

[notherbob]

..has been going on for many years and goes back all the way to Campo and then Gailey and beyond to '96, the last time we had a playoff team with any potential under Barry Switzer.

The OL philosophy has been one of trying to skimp on dollars and trying to have an offensive system that utilizes lesser athletes while overpaying one or more individuals in the OL to form a unit of questionable ability.

And it's not worked now for a decade. And BP is old school and he's continuing to try to get production from the OL in the same way.

That way being, have one or two guys of superior skills being paid the big bucks and then have the rest be able to produce at an average level and that will suffice. This philosophy begins in high school and college where the candidates for the OL are usually rejects from the other positions of skill, such as the DL, TE's and LBers.

In the NFL as played today, it's become increasingly difficult to do this because there is so much specialization at each position and the skills required to play in the NFL and play well are different with each system, whether it's the West Coast offense, the grind it out type or the air it out type.

BP hasn't really defined what this offense is trying to be, IMO. He wants it to be a ground game ball control attack, but he also wants to throw the screen pass and to protect Bledsoe to the max.

He is asking a very wide range of variation from the OL to achieve these goals and it's really asking too much from the type of personnel we have.

After three years now under BP, I've yet to have a definite idea of what the offense does best. I've yet to get a clear definition of what the offense is known for and can be counted on to be successful at.

Because we don't have this identity and because each year we constantly seem to change what we want from the offense, we end up changing, but inveriably, the OL gets sucked down the tubes because the personnel on hand aren't able to adapt.

Look at all the players we have tried in the OL as FA's or drafted under BP and look at their histories. One after another have failed to perform, either up to expectation or not played at all.

Tucker, Pettiti, Rivera, Rodgers, Peterman, Guorde, Johnson, not to mention the list of guys he had when he came that are now all gone and the guy, I forget his name we signed right after BP came to Dallas to man the RT spot and he'd last 4 games or so and was cut.

So while I'm wanting us to improve at the OL level, BP's history in this area is actually pretty poor.

His changing offensive philosophy of now bringing in Bledsoe to install a passing attack on top of a non-existant running attack coupled with breakdowns all across the OL with injury, poor drafting and poor FA signings has brought this to a head.

Bledsoe is slow a foot, holds the ball too long and the OL can't and isn't built to protect him well and it also isn't built to be a dominating ground control OL, either.

It's neither fish nor fowl. The OL is a 'tweaner operation and that's a large part of the problem offensively.

Until Dallas creates an OL that establishes one thing that it does clearly that the opposing defense has to account for and be challenged to stop each week, the offense is not going to any playoffs.

We either have to commit to playing smash-mouth football and bring the lunch bucket and attitude with our OL that that is the mission and do it and draft and play those players needed to do it..

..whatever that takes..

..or we go out and play throw the ball West Coast offense ball control with Bledsoe at the helm and run the ball to just keep things honest and give the OL that mission and draft and sign guys to do that..

..whatever it takes..

..and stop trying to vassilate each week from one to the other with the playcalling and coaching that just confuses and places too much pressure on an OL that doesnn't possess the skills to transition well from one type to another.

My feeling is that based on the present situation with Bledsoe here and BP having signed a rollover contract for essentially a one year extension to his previous contract..

..all this smokescreen about having Julius Jones and MIBIII as our offensive philosophy is not going to work. JuJo is injury-prone, we can't count on him for 25+ carries a game and MIBIII isn't able to do it either.

The OL isn't a dominant unit at opening holes and is being asked to do something that isn't well suited for them as a whole.

This team is going to win or lose on Bledsoe's arm. Period.

I don't have a problem with that. So long as the OL is retooled to suit him and the playcalling and coaching is created to give him the opportunities to do what he does well.

Throw the ball.

And I mean throw it on 1st down from the first snap and throw if need be on the last play of the 4th QT if that's what works best.

Steve Young, a person I respect and even though he was a 49er SB MVP player, had an offense built around him that allowed him to use his strengths to get there. He a had small, mobile OL that could pass protect and a

WR AND BACK CORP THAT COULD CATCH THE BALL AND MOVE THE CHAINS

..and when needed had speed downfield to spread the defense.

They never pretended to try to run the ball for 150 yds a game. They had the likes of Ricky Waters and a host of other less than stellar RB's who rarely broke 100 yds a game..

..but they used Steve Young in ways that magnified his strengths and adapted the offense and the players available to create an identity that defenses had to stop each week if they were to succeed.

My belief is that we have most the tools inplace to succeed in '06 offensively, but what we lack is the willingness to change the philosophy about playcalling and we lack an OL that is designed, manned and practiced to accomplish a singular skill set to compliment this.

Take Marco Rivera for example. I know he has had a significant injury. But the significant change in offensive philosophy for him in coming to Dallas from GB has to be affecting his skills.

Rivera was not known for his run-blocking skills. He was known for protecting Brett Farve. Yet in this offense, he's being called upon to run block a significant amount of the time and beyond that, he's having to be a crutch for Pettiti and his problems, too.

Not to mention having to also split time being a crutch for Al Johnson, too.

He's failing or being seen as a failure by some because he just isn't able to do the things he does well, pass block, and instead is getting sucked into the whole OL mess.

So I think the problems here are greater than just personnel. And until the offense is changed to play to it's strength and an offensive identy found and established..not much is going to change even if we sign All-Pro players and draft #1 picks to revamp the entire OL.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Bledsoe and BP go fishing someplace and really talk honestly about what each other sees and come to an understanding about what the offense is going to be about in '06.

Otherwise, I see more mistakes and more wasted draft picks and more frustrating play on Sunday.

We'll see.

Parcellswaterboy

Good post, long but well thought out.

Are you Quigley from the old, old DMN board by any means?

 

[burmafrd]

You know, guys, you REALLY do not need to copy & paste the same thing nine or ten times in a thread.