ESPN Watkins: Jay Ratliff looking at Vince Wilfork Contract

[WoodysGirl]

Feb 25
10:14
AM CT

By Calvin Watkins


Jay Ratliff has been to two Pro Bowls and earned his first All-Pro nod in 2009.

The Cowboys nose tackle is a force. He had seven sacks, second on the team, 33 quarterback pressures, fourth on the team and eight tackles for loss, second on the team.

Ratliff is considered one of the best at his position. But he's not paid like it.

In 2007, Ratliff signed a five-year contract extension worth $20.5 million with $8 million in bonuses.

It's really nobody's fault, but at somepoint the Cowboys will have to rip up this contract.

The reason? Nose tackle Vince Wilfork of the Patriots.

New England franchised Wilfork, who will get paid $7 million for the 2010 season, unless a long-term deal is worked out. And Wilfork will expect a big money contract from the Patriots that will be worth more than Ratliff's.

Check out Wilfork's numbers from 2009. While participating in 565 snaps, he had zero sacks, zero quarterback hits, one forced fumble and two passes defended.

Ratliff played in 851 plays in 2009 and put up better numbers.

Ratliff's Dallas-based agent, Mark Slough, said he's not worried about the contract right now.

Here's a reason: The current state of the collective bargaining agreement. If the owners and players union can't come to terms by March 5, the 2010 season is uncapped and the 2011 season might not happen, unless a new deal is reached.

Slough's plan, and probably the Cowboys', is to wait until a new deal is reached between the league and union before redoing Ratliff's contract.

He has three years remaining on his deal as follows:

2010 base salary: $2.1 million
2011 base salary: $3.75 million
2012 base salary: $4.87 million

Ratliff also has no roster bonus money due, he got it all when he signed, at $8 million.

So whatever Wilfork gets, Ratliff will ask for something more, at the time.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

Thank god it's an uncapped year.

Pay the man his money. It is well deserved.

 

[NoLuv4Jerry]

the title said Ratliff looking at Wilfork's contract...yet I don't see a quote from Ratliff in the article anywhere!

 

[WoodysGirl]

the title said Ratliff looking at Wilfork's contract...yet I don't see a quote from Ratliff in the article anywhere!

I added the contract part, but the rest of the headline is intact.

The reason I added it is because that's the gist of the article.

Logically speaking, why wouldn't Ratliff look at what Vince Wilfork or Casey Hampton get?

 

[Rampage]

Thank god it's an uncapped year.

Pay the man his money. It is well deserved.

go read the article again, bro

 

[CF74]

His agent is looking, that's all that matters..

 

[Randy White]

Thank god it's an uncapped year.

Pay the man his money. It is well deserved.

They can't give him a raise that's more than 30% of what he's making right now, but do it nevertheless..

 

[Randy White]

go read the article again, bro

I understand the article's point of view, but like everything else in life:

What costs 50 cents today, will cost $1 tomorrow, $1.50 two days from now.

Yes, the Cowboys might be eating some money in case of a lockout when/if they give him a new signing bonus, but it would only be for one year IF at all ( as it is, the NFL will lose alot of popularity if they lockout the players and lose a season, so don't think it's a guaranteed thing that they'll be one ). That figure will be alot less than what he would probably cost ( on a per year basis ) AFTER the lockout is lifted. Besides, nobody knows what kind of restrictions the new CBA is going to have, so might as well get a jump on that too. If the new CBA has a stritcter cap, then we'd be in good shape. If they have the same or looser cap, then we'd be in fantastic shape.

As per HIS side of the coin, is very simple: instead of losing a year worth of salary in a lockout, he'd get a year worth of salary up front. The rest of his contract calls for him to make a combined total of approx 9 million dollars. He could easily top that figure in signing bonus alone. Let's say he gets 15 millions signing bonus on a new 7 years, 45 million dollars contract. ( just to throw out some figures out there ). Whatever money he'd lose in a lock out would be very minimal since probably the 2nd year the contract would call for a small base salary, while he'd pocket the equivalance of what's left of his current contract + 6 millions right away.

If the new CBA contains a stricter cap, 2 years ( 2010 and 2011 ) worth of his signing bonus would have counted already by the time the new cap is installed in 2012, which helps the Cowboys quite a bit. If the new CBA is not strict, it wouldn't matter.

Also, it protects him in the long run. Right now he's still under contract. Lord forbids he suffers an injury this year, but if he does, his value would drop tremendously especially if he has to miss this season AND another year on top of that because of a lockout.

The Cowboys were very smart signing him to the contract they did and he's outperformed it. Keep using that intelligence and sign him to a long term new one that would give him a substancial raise, but would be budget friendly in the upcoming years.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

Jay Ratliff and Kevin Williams are two beasts.

 

[casmith07]

At least they aren't looking at Albert Haynesworth, haha.

 

[Eskimo]

This is the nature of the contracts sometimes.

I don't hear RW offering to give back money for underperformance. However, I expect an extension may be worked out once CBA is done, if possible.

The other thing that jumps out is he plays way too many plays. We need to have a more viable backup who gives him some snaps off so he is fresher later in games.

 

[zrinkill]

This is the nature of the contracts sometimes.

I don't hear RW offering to give back money for underperformance. However, I expect an extension may be worked out once CBA is done, if possible.

The other thing that jumps out is he plays way too many plays. We need to have a more viable backup who gives him some snaps off so he is fresher later in games.

Yea .... I never understood the whole "pay them more than the contract they signed" deal ..... if they have to do that, the owners should have the right to ask for money back from under producing players.

 

[burmafrd]

its smart business on our part. Shows we value the guy and are willing to pay for it. Jerruh has a very good rep about doing things like that. If a guy outperforms a contract then its in your own best interest to show respect and gratitude and make the contract better. Its also a very good example for others on the team.

 

[sonnyboy]

Yea .... I never understood the whole "pay them more than the contract they signed" deal ..... if they have to do that, the owners should have the right to ask for money back from under producing players.

I usually side with management. However, the owners do have the right to ask for money back. They simply cut the player.

Redoing a deal for a player who is far exceeding or outplaying a current deal isn't something an owner has to do. Its something an owner can choose to do to build a huge amount of good will between management and the player. And not just that player. It sends a positive sign to the whole team..........."see what happens when you do the right things and bust your *** here in Dallas, we take care of you."

If it were I, I'd sign him to a new deal with the understanding that this is it. This is the last deal you'll see from us.

I'd make it 6 years 44 mil without a signing bonus. A deal that pays well upfront and designed to be cap friendly going forward.
12.0 mil in 2010 guaranteed to take the place of a SB. And guaranteed salaries in 2010 and 2012 provided there is no work stoppage.

2010...2011...2012...2013...2014...2015
12.0....8.4......6.0.....4.2.....6.0.....8.4

This very fair for both sides.

 

[ROUSH8692]

its smart business on our part. Shows we value the guy and are willing to pay for it. Jerruh has a very good rep about doing things like that. If a guy outperforms a contract then its in your own best interest to show respect and gratitude and make the contract better. Its also a very good example for others on the team.

True. How many players get a good payday and then stop performing (Marion Barber)......

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I added the contract part, but the rest of the headline is intact.

The reason I added it is because that's the gist of the article.

Logically speaking, why wouldn't Ratliff look at what Vince Wilfork or Casey Hampton get?

Because Haynesworth already got more money last year and it wasn't an issue then. This is how rumors get started.

 

[aikemirv]

Well, 3 years is a long time. I have no idea why you would even try to redo his contract until after the 2011 season. That is how you get yourself into trouble and actually how we screwed up with T.O.

3 years is going to put a lot more wear and tear on a guy Ratliffs size. Be careful throwing money at him for no reason other than to make him "feel' better.

 

[Randy White]

Well, 3 years is a long time. I have no idea why you would even try to redo his contract until after the 2011 season. That is how you get yourself into trouble and actually how we screwed up with T.O..

Because he's outplayed his contract and he's a special player.

Yea, yea, I know that a contract is a contract and that if he was signed to a big contract and flopped he wouldn't give the money back ( I can hear the Roy Williams detractors knocking on the door already ), but that's the price you pay when you want to keep happy and productive players. You want to reward them whenever possible because they're very few of them.

The Cowboys have the money, so it's not as if they're going to be mortgaging Jerry's house to get it, but the key is to come up with a deal that's friendly towards their budget and towards a possible future cap.

 

[aikemirv]

Because he's outplayed his contract and he's a special player.

Yea, yea, I know that a contract is a contract and that if he was signed to a big contract and flopped he wouldn't give the money back ( I can hear the Roy Williams detractors knocking on the door already ), but that's the price you pay when you want to keep happy and productive players. You want to reward them whenever possible because they're very few of them.

The Cowboys have the money, so it's not as if they're going to be mortgaging Jerry's house to get it, but the key is to come up with a deal that's friendly towards their budget and towards a possible future cap.

Ware is a special player too and we did not extend him early.

 

[zrinkill]

Because he's outplayed his contract and he's a special player.

Yea, yea, I know that a contract is a contract and that if he was signed to a big contract and flopped he wouldn't give the money back ( I can hear the Roy Williams detractors knocking on the door already ), but that's the price you pay when you want to keep happy and productive players. You want to reward them whenever possible because they're very few of them.

The Cowboys have the money, so it's not as if they're going to be mortgaging Jerry's house to get it, but the key is to come up with a deal that's friendly towards their budget and towards a possible future cap.

I understand that ..... but the unfair and meager contract he has right now pays him $20.5 million dollars with a $8 million dollar signing bonus.

Its not like he is working for the vet min or anything

Let me repeat

5 years for $20.5 million dollars with a $8 million dollar signing bonus.