Cowboys Contract Restructures: Who They Didn't Re-do Just As Important As Who They Did

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,997
Reaction score
27,917
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
After a spate of contract restructures get the Cowboys under the cap, its the contracts they chose not to restructure - and who they belong to - that tells us more about the team's intended direction.

On Tuesday, the Cowboys did some neat work to get under the NFL's $134 million salary cap by "flipping the switch’’ on clauses in three players' contracts. As expected, the team reworked Tony Romo’s deal, converting base salary into signing bonus that can be spread over the remainder of the contract, thus cutting his hefty $22-million cap figure roughly in half. In addition, the front office engineered similar restructures for Sean Lee and Orlando Scandrick (whose deals also had restructuring clauses - "switches" - built into them), which will give Dallas another $7 million worth of room.

None of this work should come as a big surprise; re-working these contracts was planned from the day the original deals were signed. As a result of these maneuvers, the team finds itself within a million dollars of the cap. With the rumored release of backup center Phil Costa, the Cowboys will erase another $1.5 million of cap commitment and, with fewer than a handful of moves, get under the cap in time for the advent of free agency. Should the team care to make it an even five, they can designate Miles Austin for a June 1 release, saving another $5.5 million in the process.

But, to my mind, that's not the real news. The real story here is who they didn't restructure. There are other Cowboys contracts that include this same sort of restructuring option. Two notable examples are Jason Witten and Brandon Carr, both of whom could have been given the same treatment had the team wanted or needed further cap relief. That the Cowboys didn't exercise either of these options is a telling instance of financial prudence, as are the recent stories coming from Valley Ranch that the team wants DeMarcus Ware to take a pay cut (insiders say Dallas wants something in the $6 to $8 million range).

Allow me a brief detour: in the first installment of my "front office report card" series, I wrote that its bad business to give big-money and/ or long-term contracts (typically "third" contracts) to veterans who are 30 or older, whether they be your own or another team's. When it comes to other team's veteran castoffs, the front office has operated fairly shrewdly; however, Jones' soft spot for productive (or only semi-productive) homegrown players, I wrote, has produced far too many contracts for older, declining Cowboy lifers whose production then failed to meet their pay grade by the end of the deal.

Along these lines (and related to this issue) is the team's recent policy of "kicking the can" via restructuring deals so that money on the present cap is deferred to future caps. While this has given the team immediate relief, it puts even more pressure on future caps. And the real problem lies in who they have tended to restructure: their "core" players, the majority of whom were brought in between 2003 and 2007. That means that now, in 2014, they are geriatric by NFL standards. Thus, the Cowboys "kick the can" fiscal policy has achieved roughly the same result as offering big contracts to old free agents with declining skills: it inevitably adds dead money to the rolls.

According to Spotrac, the Cowboys carried $17,297,848 in dead money in 2013. With an adjusted cap of roughly $119.2 million, that 2013 figure represents nearly a seventh of the total cap. And that's not an isolated incident; the team is currently holding $11,809,439 in dead money in 2014, and that's before they cut the likes of Miles Austin, DeMarcus Ware (if that happens) or any other FAs, draftees or UDFAs to whom they give guaranteed money. And, as long as the franchise continues to carry huge chunks of dead money on the rolls, they will continue to put themselves at a competitive disadvantage.

More... http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2014...ation&utm_medium=mustreads&utm_campaign=blogs
 

Alexander

What's it going to be then, eh?
Messages
62,482
Reaction score
67,294
Pure speculation. Perhaps not all of the contracts had the little "switches" in them in the first place.
 

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
Free agency hasn't started yet and all the moves are still there to be made. With roll over there is no harm in restructuring those contracts. If they plan on keeping Carr and Witten for 2014, they should restructure them.
 

Alexander

What's it going to be then, eh?
Messages
62,482
Reaction score
67,294
Free agency hasn't started yet and all the moves are still there to be made. With roll over there is no harm in restructuring those contracts. If they plan on keeping Carr and Witten for 2014, they should restructure them.

Why? Is there a law that in Dallas that says players can't perform from season to season within their contracts?

I would as soon just sit there and do nothing in free agency than extend players I know I really do not want beyond 2014 just so I have money to play with. That is a big reason why they probably were not touched.
 

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
Why? Is there a law that in Dallas that says players can't perform from season to season within their contracts?

I would as soon just sit there and do nothing in free agency than extend players I know I really do not want beyond 2014 just so I have money to play with. That is a big reason why they probably were not touched.

Because it's beneficial cap wise. If they get 5m from Carr and don't use they can carry it over and lowers this year's hit and next year's hit. And next year the hit is lower percentage wise. It's better to get it from restructures now and not need it, than to need it once the season approaches and the only way to get it is extend someone's contract and add money and years.
 

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
I think people give too much credence to dead money. Depending on what kind of team you have dead money generally isn't a problem unless you have dead money and you are top heavy.

Generally you want to avoid dead money, but it isn't the killer that people want to make it out to be. The biggest issue is that we are a team that is too top heavy. We built the team around a core of guys who couldn't deliver consistently. That's just a bad formula to have.

In one year you can get rid of Austin and Ware, and in that year you would see us create a lot of dead money, but we would still end up freeing a lot of space for the cap.
 

KingintheNorth

Chris in Arizona
Messages
18,443
Reaction score
25,825
I have no why I am being optimistic with this Front Office but I'm (blindly) hoping they are ready to restructure Carr, Witten, and maybe Ware if they think they can land a FA or two. I really just think they are playing hardball with Wre.
 

daveferr33

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,192
Reaction score
2,257
As the Article relates, the dead money that would result in releasing Carr almost guarantees he stays on the team at his current rate.

[Carr] can't possibly be released before [2016]: it would cost the team almost $17 million in dead money to cut him in 2014, $12,151,000 to do so in 2015 and $7,434,000 in '16.

On the other hand, the Rams were able to release Cortland Finnegan for a relatively modest cap hit [Source: http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2014/3...elease-salary-cap-and-off-season-implications]

To me, this is a real world example of why it is not a good idea to habitually restructure players--simply put, you get stuck with them. [See also: Tony Romo]. Both Carr and Finnegan were signed in the 2012 offseason. Finnegan was given a bonus of $5 million, compared to Carr's $10 million. The Cowboys needed to restructure Carr last season. The Rams did not need to do that with Finnegan.

Consequently, the Cowboys are now stuck and the Rams can move on.
 

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,997
Reaction score
27,917
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
As the Article relates, the dead money that would result in releasing Carr almost guarantees he stays on the team at his current rate.



On the other hand, the Rams were able to release Cortland Finnegan for a relatively modest cap hit [Source: http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2014/3...elease-salary-cap-and-off-season-implications]

To me, this is a real world example of why it is not a good idea to habitually restructure players--simply put, you get stuck with them. [See also: Tony Romo]. Both Carr and Finnegan were signed in the 2012 offseason. Finnegan was given a bonus of $5 million, compared to Carr's $10 million. The Cowboys needed to restructure Carr last season. The Rams did not need to do that with Finnegan.

Consequently, the Cowboys are now stuck and the Rams can move on.

That's true. The Cowboys have less maneuvering room with Carr, but in all honesty Finnegan was bad in 2012 and truly awful in 2013... He's been far worse than Carr.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,193
Reaction score
64,699
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
There's no need to restructure before you need the space. It only take 1 day to do it.
 

Hoofbite

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,865
Reaction score
11,566
Because it's beneficial cap wise. If they get 5m from Carr and don't use they can carry it over and lowers this year's hit and next year's hit. And next year the hit is lower percentage wise. It's better to get it from restructures now and not need it, than to need it once the season approaches and the only way to get it is extend someone's contract and add money and years.

The percentage wise argument is far overplayed and the added value that is gained is entirely too small to worth the attention it receives.
 

jnday

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,292
Reaction score
11,422
I have no why I am being optimistic with this Front Office but I'm (blindly) hoping they are ready to restructure Carr, Witten, and maybe Ware if they think they can land a FA or two. I really just think they are playing hardball with Wre.

There us no way that I want those players restructured for a couple mid-tier free agents. I don't see where a couple free agents will make this into a playoff team. I would rather see these contracts play out and hope that the front office starts using some common sense with contracts and the cap. Most years, the cap limits what free agents can be considered for signing. I would like to see the team get to a point where they are always able to sign free agents when the value is there.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
For MONTHS people on the board noted Scandrick, Romo, and Lee as the restructures because they all had deals designed to be redone in 2014.

We don't need some long post discussing implications of the decision as there was no decision here. Plan was clear from the outset
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,193
Reaction score
64,699
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
There us no way that I want those players restructured for a couple mid-tier free agents. I don't see where a couple free agents will make this into a playoff team. I would rather see these contracts play out and hope that the front office starts using some common sense with contracts and the cap. Most years, the cap limits what free agents can be considered for signing. I would like to see the team get to a point where they are always able to sign free agents when the value is there.

If you want the team to be good in 2015, it would be beneficial to add some YOUNG free agents now.
 

Bullflop

Cowboys Diehard
Messages
25,712
Reaction score
30,906
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
If the FO is REALLY intent on providing some useful fortifications to the team, perhaps the recent cuts provide an indication. Will McClay has revealed his intention is to supply the Cowboys with additional speed in 2014. Doing so would seem to imply that a continuation of the youth movement would be the most likely course of action to enable that to materialize. Cutting some of the aged and relatively stagnant vets is apparently making room for that to happen. At least, it's a scenario that would seem a distinct possibility to allow team speed to be added to the mix on this team's roster. I think it's well past time for that to happen.
 
Top