Twitter: Fisher: Cowboys restructure Zack Martin contract

[Corso]

Nope. Since he was saying everything in the future is hypothetical and therefore had to look at the past (ie championships) I pulled up the stats from the past. Dak was better than Peyton in most statistical categories when comparing their first 4 years. That’s a fact, the numbers are there if you click on the links.

But for arguments sake, if Dak continues to have better numbers than Peyton and wins 2 SB’s (even if he had almost no role in the regular season or playoffs for one of those SB’s) would he then be better?

I would say yes.

 

[aria]

I would say yes.

So out of curiosity, would it be the stats or the Super Bowls? What if Dak finished his career with better stats but never won a Super Bowl a la Dan Marino?

 

[Corso]

So out of curiosity, would it be the stats or the Super Bowls? What if Dak finished his career with better stats but never won a Super Bowl a la Dan Marino?

It would be the combination.

 

[Corso]

So out of curiosity, would it be the stats or the Super Bowls? What if Dak finished his career with better stats but never won a Super Bowl a la Dan Marino?

IF Dak had better numbers and didn't win it all? I would have to look at his teams in general.
I don't put blanket statements upon one player.

 

[aria]

IF Dak had better numbers and didn't win it all? I would have to look at his teams in general.
I don't put blanket statements upon one player.

And I assume coaching.

 

[Corso]

And I assume coaching.

Absolutely my friend.

 

[Swagger]

Nope. Since he was saying everything in the future is hypothetical and therefore had to look at the past (ie championships) I pulled up the stats from the past. Dak was better than Peyton in most statistical categories when comparing their first 4 years. That’s a fact, the numbers are there if you click on the links.

But for arguments sake, if Dak continues to have better numbers than Peyton and wins 2 SB’s (even if he had almost no role in the regular season or playoffs for one of those SB’s) would he then be better?

To answer your second question, Dak would pretty much be a lock for the Hall of Fame. Whether he would be better than Peyton is unlikely but people could make the case for him based on stats.

 

[aria]

To answer your second question, Dak would pretty much be a lock for the Hall of Fame. Whether he would be better than Peyton is unlikely but people could make the case for him based on stats.

Agree with everything you and @Corso have said, I was honestly just curious what makes some people think one QB is better than another (ie stats, SB’s, longevity, etc). There are so many different factors I think you have to take into account several different factors and look at the overall picture.

Peyton was brilliant at reading defenses (Eli was very good too but doesn’t get ANY credit) and making adjustments. I don’t think Dak, or any other QB right now, is comparable to Peyton in that regard and it may be years before we see another.

 

[Redball Express]

yet Crawford's deal remains untouched..hmmm

Beating a dead horse there.

The brain trust obviously got a plan for that money.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Ok, simple enough. I would love to give you the stats without names attached but I’m not taking the time, look it up yourself. Dak smokes Peyton in almost every category when you compare their first 4 years. Go ahead...let’s hear the excuses.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MannPe00.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PresDa01.htm

Why would I? Dak is not Payton Manning at this point in his career. He's not even close but if you want to argue this point, go ahead. I don't think it's worth the time spent myself.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So you are claiming that Dak Prescott is a better QB than Peyton Manning?

Yep. That's what he's saying.

 

[aria]

Why would I? Dak is not Payton Manning at this point in his career. He's not even close but if you want to argue this point, go ahead. I don't think it's worth the time spent myself.

The stats say otherwise but no, I’m not going to sit here and argue about it. I really don’t care that much, I just think it’s foolish to think we can draft a QB who will immediately match Dak’s production and that Jerry blew a chance to sign him at a much cheaper price in favor of a RB.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The stats say otherwise but no, I’m not going to sit here and argue about it. I really don’t care that much, I just think it’s foolish to think we can draft a QB who will immediately match Dak’s production and that Jerry blew a chance to sign him at a much cheaper price in favor of a RB.

Don't start this again. The stats say whatever you want them to, depending on agenda. Compare the two based on their situations and the competition they played with at the time. Dak joined a loaded team, Manning didn't. Game was much different 20 odd years ago.

This is why this discussion is not worth having. Dak is not Payton Manning at this point in his career.

The idea of getting a different QB is a different discussion. While you may fear that idea, I do not.

 

[PhillyCowboysFan]

.
(b)(v)Carrying Over Room.
(b)(v)(1)

A Club may designate an amount of its current League Year Room (“Room”) to credit to its Team Salary for the next League Year by providing the NFL with written notice signed by the owner. The NFL must be in receipt of this notice prior to 4:00 pm New York Time (“NYT”) on the day following the Club’s final regular season game (“Carry Over Measuring Date”). The NFL shall promptly provide a copy of any such notice to the NFLPA.

(b)(v)(2)
This notice must identify the amount of the Club’s Room (expressed in dollars or as a percentage of its Room at the conclusion of the Club’s final regular season game) that the Club intends to Carry Over to the next League Year. In the event that a Club designates an amount exceeding its Room at the conclusion of the Club’s final regular season game, such notice shall be automatically amended to reflect the Club’s entire Room at that time.

(b)(v)(3)
If a Club provides such notice, then at 4:00 pm NYT on the Carry Over Measuring Date, there will be an additional charge to that Club’s current League Year Team Salary corresponding to the amount of Room it has designated to Carry Over to the next League Year. The Club will receive an equivalent credit to its Team Salary for the following League Year. (For example, and without limitation, if one week before its final regular season game a Club possessing $5 million in Room provides notice to the NFL of its intent to Carry Over $5 million in Room to the next League Year, and if at the conclusion of the Club’s final regular season game the Club has $4 million in Room, then the Club’s notice shall be automatically amended to reflect a $4 million designation. As a result, at 4:00 pm NYT on the Carry Over Measuring Date, the Club shall: (i) be charged $4 million to its current League Year Team Salary; (ii) have no Room for the remainder of the current League Year; and (iii) be credited $4 million to its Team Salary for the following League Year (i.e., increasing the Club’s Room in the following League Year). As another example, and without limitation, if one week before its final regular season game a Club possessing $5 million in Room provides notice to the NFL of its intent to Carry Over $5 million in Room to the next League Year, and if at the conclusion of the Club’s final regular season game the Club has $7 million in Room, then the Club’s notice shall not be amended and its designation shall remain $5 million. As a result, at 4:00 pm NYT on the Carry Over Measuring Date, the Club shall: (i) be charged $5 million to its current League Year Team Salary; (ii) have $2 million in Room; and (iii) be credited $5 million to its Team Salary for the following League Year. Alternatively, if the same Club had designated 100% of its Room to Carry Over (rather than $5 million), then it would instead: (i) be charged $7 million to its current League Year Team Salary; (ii) have no Room for the remainder of the current League Year; and (iii) be credited $7 million to its Team Salary for the following League Year.)

(b)(v)(4)
The amount of any Room Carry Over pursuant to this Section shall be taken into account in the year-end netting of incentives described in Section 6(c)(ii) and (iii) of this Article.

(b)(v)(5)
Nothing in this Section shall affect the Guaranteed League-Wide Cash Spending or Minimum Team Cash Spending provisions set forth in Article 12.

Ok did I misread this as I don’t see anywhere that there is a capped percentage amount.

 

[CyberB0b]

Not sure the "cap always goes up" accounting method is going to work going forward. The overall piece of the pie is going to shrink in the short term.

 

[John813]

Ok did I misread this as I don’t see anywhere that there is a capped percentage amount.

I've never seen that before. What I've seen in relation to cap, is that the league overall spending via cap space needs to reach 95% each year and teams need to be at 90% over a 2-3 year span and then a 1 term 4 year span.
Teams can use signing bonuses to reach the 90% requirement while their cap hits can be much lower.




Section 8. Guaranteed League-Wide Cash Spending
(a)

[Omitted].

(b)
For each of the following multi-League-Year periods 2017–2020 (four League Years) 2021–2023 (three League Years), 2024–2026 (three League Years), and 2027–2030 (four League Years), there shall be Guaranteed League-Wide Cash Spending of 95% of the Salary Caps for such League Years for each such period multiplied by the number of Clubs in the League during each such period. (Appropriate adjustments will be made if the number of Clubs in the League increases during each such a period.) (For example, if the Salary Caps for the 2024–2026 League Years were $180, 3200, and 220 million, respectively, the Guaranteed League-Wide Cash Spending over that four-year period would be $ 18.24 billion (95% of $600 million total Caps times 32 Clubs)).

Section 9. Minimum Team Cash Spending
(a)

For the four-League Year period covering the 2017–2020 League Years, there shall be a guaranteed Minimum Team Cash Spending of 89% of the Salary Caps for such period.

(b)
For each of the following multi-League-Year periods 2021–2023 (three League Years), 2024–2026 (three League Years), and 2027–2030 (four League Years), there shall be a guaranteed Minimum Team Cash Spending of 90% of the Salary Caps for such periods.

(c)
Any shortfall in the Minimum Team Cash Spending at the end of a League Year in which it is applicable (i.e., the 2020, 2023, 2026, or 2030 League Years) shall be paid, on or before the next September 15, by the Team having such shortfall, directly to the players who were on such a Team’s roster at any time during the applicable seasons, pursuant to the reasonable allocation instructions of the NFLPA.

(d)
Nothing contained herein shall preclude a Team from having Cash Spending in excess of the Minimum Team Cash Spending, provided that the Team complies with the accounting rules of the Salary Cap set forth in Article 13.