Dallas is NOT in Salary Cap trouble in 2014

[superpunk]

One of the more off-base responses I've seen on here.

That's probably because you mis-read it. It's ok we all make mistakes reading. Better luck next time. Any time you re-sign or extend a player off their rookie deal (and they're a player worth keeping) there's going to be bigger guaranteed money and more risk. I'm sure the Pats thought they were sitting pretty with 25 yo Hernandez locked up. Oops.

 

[Stash]

The Cowboys are in salary cap trouble next year but they can always climb out of it.
They were definitely in salary cap trouble this year thus didn't pursue free agents they might have otherwise.

Not at all a fan of the "scheduled restructure". Locks the team into doing silly things like continuing to pay Miles a very high yearly bonus.

The Cowboys have been at best mediocre with cap mgmt but that isn't going to cost them stars like Sean Lee or Dez Bryant.
It may cost them second tier guys like Spencer or Carter down the road.

Agree very much with you here.

Good stuff.

 

[xwalker]

When was the last time that the Cowboys lost a player that they wanted to keep due to the salary cap?

 

[BAZ]

Might as well worry about getting hit by a magic truck that turns you into an eggplant on the way to work.

I thought I was the only one with this concern.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

When was the last time that the Cowboys lost a player that they wanted to keep due to the salary cap?

That's a valid point.

It's been a while.

 

[BAZ]

When was the last time that the Cowboys lost a player that they wanted to keep due to the salary cap?

Chris Canty?

 

[Nightman]

Chris Canty?

They didn't want Canty at the price he was getting and hindsight proved he wasn't worth it.

 

[Eskimo]

When was the last time that the Cowboys lost a player that they wanted to keep due to the salary cap?

Laurent Robinson?

 

[Idgit]

The Cowboys are in salary cap trouble next year but they can always climb out of it.
They were definitely in salary cap trouble this year thus didn't pursue free agents they might have otherwise.

Not at all a fan of the "scheduled restructure". Locks the team into doing silly things like continuing to pay Miles a very high yearly bonus.

The Cowboys have been at best mediocre with cap mgmt but that isn't going to cost them stars like Sean Lee or Dez Bryant.
It may cost them second tier guys like Spencer or Carter down the road.

I'd be surprised if we start losing guys we want to keep because of the cap. Guys like Robinson and Spencer are going to leave because the free market dictates someone will overpay for them, but if we really want a guy, we'll get a deal done, or we'll franchise him.

I don't mind Dallas using it's cap space aggressively if it puts us in a better position to retain guys we want to keep long-term. Once we start losing guys we want to keep because we can't afford them, that's one thing. But not shelling out for Laurent Robinson who had a history of underperforming everywhere he went and then exploded his career TD numbers one season here, or passing on extending Spencer at $10+/year both qualify as prudent cap decisions as far as I'm concerned. I guess we'll see what happens when it comes to extending Dez and Sean Lee to see how well the team's really managed its resources.

 

[durrrr]

Laurent Robinson?

No.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

It amazes me how people miss the value of how the Cowboys structure contracts. By providing the ability to restructure, the Cowboys (1) maintain flexibility to modify their salary cap situation as needed, and (2) basically receive an interest-free loan.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The definition of being in salary cap trouble is having to re-structure deals to create space.

Salary cap trouble to me means that you have to release or be unable to resign talent (ie losing talent) because you cannot get under the cap.

 

[jobberone]

When the restructures are unilateral and the club's option, that's a bad definition.

All the salary cap data I've seen is reported on a total dollars/season basis. None of it also tells you how many players are covered for those periods, much less how much can be restructured without requiring a negotiation with the player. Given how much variety there can be amongst 32 different organizations when it comes to handling such things, it's hard to get too worked up about a cap number until, pretty much literally, the week before VFA starts.

This year was the perfect storm in that regard for Dallas, with a franchise number on Spencer, the cap penalty, the restrictions placed by the newly negotiated CBA, and Tony Romo up for renewal...and I still don't know if we missed out on any players we'd have liked to have signed. Maybe we'd have been in the market for Clabo (probably) or a veteran Safety. But that's about it, as far as I can tell. Anybody else think of someone we might have wanted this offseason that we didn't go after? A backup RB, maybe?

No one we wanted. Maybe an interior G or a better backup safety but I don't know who it would be. I think they want to see what they have with the young guys. And that's the way to go...mostly. If they think they have something in Johnson then there was no need to spend money on a better safety than Allen if one existed. We went to a SB with Harris as a rookie. Woodson went to a SB as a first time starter in his second season in 93. So we're nervous and rightfully so about safety. Doesn't mean the young guys can't at least do well enough. Many felt someone or two would step up from the younger interior linemen this year. We'll see.

 

[Doomsay]

When was the last time that the Cowboys lost a player that they wanted to keep due to the salary cap?

Overpaying, or mortgaging the future, to keep players past their prime is not a virtue, nor is not having enough cap space to sign FA's that are better than the players that you are paying to not lose.

 

[Blue Eyed Devil]

The definition of being in salary cap trouble is having to re-structure deals to create space.

I'm beginning to think that 99% of fans think that "restructure" means "magically make salary cap money go away" instead of "push guaranteed money into another year"

The reason we couldn't even sign a single guard to our pathetic offensive line is because we "weren't in salary cap trouble" so much in previous years that we pushed tens of millions of dollars into this year, including paying for guys like Terrence Newman.

 

[Blue Eyed Devil]

...and I still don't know if we missed out on any players we'd have liked to have signed. Maybe we'd have been in the market for Clabo (probably) or a veteran Safety. But that's about it, as far as I can tell. Anybody else think of someone we might have wanted this offseason that we didn't go after? A backup RB, maybe?

Do we still have Livings as a starter? Bernie? Safety still a hot mess? If Ratliff gets injured who has proven they can play DT in the NFL? Same question at DE.

 

[jobberone]

Having to restructure is definitely part of the game and may be inevitable but it's not a freebie. Every time you do that you're borrowing money to pay your bills. Since its inevitable then I guess you have to be good at it. It can also mean you haven't drafted well or you're still having to borrow money to pay your bills because the last three years you borrowed money, too. Now you're borrowing money to pay the interest, too. TANSTAAFL.

 

[jobberone]

I'm beginning to think that 99% of fans think that "restructure" means "magically make salary cap money go away" instead of "push guaranteed money into another year"

The reason we couldn't even sign a single guard to our pathetic offensive line is because we "weren't in salary cap trouble" so much in previous years that we pushed tens of millions of dollars into this year, including paying for guys like Terrence Newman.

You posted this while I was typing mine. Agreed. I think you have to minimize it better than the league average or you'll fall behind the curve in talent acquisition.

 

[Blue Eyed Devil]

You posted this while I was typing mine. Agreed. I think you have to minimize it better than the league average or you'll fall behind the curve in talent acquisition.

I'm with you. Used in moderation shifting money around is a good idea. If the salary cap were to raise 5% every year then pushing 5% out every year would give you a slight advantage over opponents who didn't because you'd be one step ahead of the game.

The problem comes when you have to restructure 7 of your starters just to sign Justin freaking Durrant.

 

[coult44]

the sooner people realize that any team can get to any number just by doing X, Y, Z and poo and stop writing/worrying or even thinking about the cap the better.

It's a non-issue, always.

It's such a non issue that we haven't been able to acquire a stable offensive line or safety for years. If we could do X,Y,and Z to fix it, then why the heck do they even publish the numbers...Have you ever heard of you get what you pay for? It's true even in the NFL...And before you bust out the Dan Snyder innuendo, or tell me how much the Fecals spent on their dream team, I'm not talking about THE AMOUNT of money you spend...You have to spend very wisely. Make good choices, and good investments. Don't buy the most expensive free agents...Be smart and find the best for the right price...