How we can get rid of Dak easiest financially?

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,987
Reaction score
4,343
I just heard that Justin Jefferson turned down a 30 million dollar a year contract. The salary cap just went up and it will go up more next season. None of the big three is going to sign early. Bosa did not sign early. Now Jefferson. Look at Burns. It’s not easy.
Yep, we say about the CAP increases, but we're still paying off Dak.
I'm sure the FO would love to stagger the Dak, CeeDee then Micah contracts (to get the benefit of the early 'cheap' year), problem is that France can see that and so wants to make the Cowboys to overpay to get Dak to sign early.
Annoying, but I can see both points of view (and the only possible concession is length of contract).
 

Sheepherder

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,605
Reaction score
1,272
1. Any trade needs to approved by Dak. Limiting options
2. Cut pre June 1st designation: 61mil cap hit, or 2mil more dead cap than his current 59mil cap hit.
3. June 1st cut now/before the 18th: 25,45mil dead cap this year. 36mil dead cap next year. (5mil roster bonus on the 18th)
4. Zero ways of not incurring dead cap, even if he walks next year due to void years in 2025 and 2026 coming home to roost next offseason.
5. If he plays out his contract as is, next year dead cap is still 36mil.
So what do you think is the best option?
 

John813

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,307
Reaction score
34,179
If they trade or cut Dak now, He still counts against the CAP as if he was still here, plus and additional $2.4 million or so, but it would mean he is off the books completely in 2025. It create $36 million in CAP space in 2025.

For most teams that would be huge because it would allow them to spend in free agency. For Dallas it means nothing because the Cowboys do not sign free agents.

To me, if the move on from Dak they have to get him to agree to a trade. Of course if he doesn't, there's not much they can do about it. Of course they could bench him and make Lance their QB1. Maybe that would get Dak to want out.

Yea, it would accelerate everything into this year. But even as a June 1st cut, as long as they don't touch that savings on June 2nd, the overall cap would be largely untouched going into 2025 as the dead hit of 36mil would be mostly eaten by roll over. Just lose 5mil in savings on the 18th

But for sure, it means nothing to this front office who instead goes on vacations or talking events during the legal tampering phase nor is actively trying to re-sign guys.
 

Reid1boys

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,737
Reaction score
9,892
But it’s about Dak ;

Can one of you expert explain to me -,us How we can get rid of Dak easiest: financially.

Can we cut Prescott today if so, what would be the implication Moneywise?

What happens if we cut Dak after June 1?

What happens if we trade Dak?

Is there any way to cut him or trade him without incurring dead cap space?

I read that if we let him play the season out and then we trade him or he leaves next year we will still have $60 million in penalties is that correct?
Can someone explain to me how I can cut off my head and not die?????
 

Reid1boys

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,737
Reaction score
9,892
Yes but look at the cap savings, which would allow you to at least maneuver and sign players. Getting rid of him is not a death sentence.
You can field a good team and not bottom out, which Jerry just will not due.

Just a hypothetical, make that move and draft Pennix Jr in the 2nd or third round. I would love to have signed Minshew, or Jacoby Brisset. We need an innings eater until we find the next guy. Hell the Niners got lucky with Purdy,
Cowboys got lucky with Dak and Romo, stuff happens.
The line above reminds me of the Matrix when agent Smith asks Neo, But what good is a phone call when you cant speak?
 

Verdict

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,092
Reaction score
20,288
The smartest way to handle this situation in my opinion is to sit Dak down and tell him we are moving forward with T. Lance

1) you find out what you have in lance
2) you don’t waste another season w Dak
3) it gives you leverage in trade talks. Dak either accepts a trade to your liking or he sits on the bench all season.
4) you either have something in Lance or he sucks and you have a premium pick next season.
This is the way.
 

plymkr

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,552
Reaction score
14,203
No matter what you do, Dak has 36m$ in dead cap money after this year. The reason for this is because Jerry Jones has been “credit carding” his previous salaries.

Remember when you’d hear Dak restructured his contract every year and Dallas suddenly would get a ton of cap space? What is actually happening is Dak gets exactly the same money, but Jerry Jones is changing it from a cap hit all that year to prorated cap hits. What prorated cap hits are is the same total cap hit but spread over 5 years, like a credit card for the cap. But all money paid out HAS to hit the cap eventually. Theres no getting out of it. So right now Dak has a 35m$ salary for this year. Why is his cap hit 59m$? Because you still have prorated money hitting the salary cap that you paid him many years ago. Make sense?

Prorated money is also commonly called dead money when the player is no longer on the team. Now let’s look at hypotheticals with that info in mind. Dak has 24m$ in prorated money just for this year, and 36m$ in prorated money spread out in future years (2025, 2026, 2027). He also has a 35m$ salary this year. In the event he leaves the roster, all future prorated money is accelerated to that year. So the 36m$ in the future spread evenly over many years all gets dropped right now with the 24m$, that’s how we get 60m$. So let’s go through them:

Cut or Trade Now: Save 35m$ salary, only have 24m$ prorated dead money for this year, but also have to take all accelerated prorated money from future years because he left the roster (36m$). So total is 60m$ cap hit this year but completely off the books in 2025.

Cut or Trade After June 1st: Save 35m$ salary, only have to pay 24m$ dead cap number. Difference here though is all prorated money is accelerated to next year, so it’s a 36m$ lump sum in 2025 because it all accelerated due to him being off the roster. Thats what June 1st allows, delaying the accelerated dead money that occurs after this year.

Keep him for 2024 with no new contract: You have to pay 35m$ salary, with a 24m$ dead cap number from previous money already paid and prorated. Then he’s off the roster next year and you take the remaining accelerated 36m$. So this is kind of similar to June 1sting him with the dead money next year, but you also have to pay him his salary. Thats how it’s still 36m$ next year still, but also 60m$ this year.

Extend him: You can rip up his 2024 salary, lowering his cap hit this year greatly, and give him bonuses to compensate that can be further prorated. His 2024 cap hit can never go below the 24m$ proration number as that’s still required from previous money given. With his continued proration, new signing bonus and 2024 new salary likely being around 40m$ total cap hit, you’re probably saving 20m$ overall for 2024 cap. But the most important part of extending him is he’ll be on the roster 2025, 2026, 2027, so the future prorations don’t get accelerated into a 36m$ lump sum, instead it stays spread out over those years.
Great information. Thank you for explaining it. That clears up a ton of confusion I had.
 

plymkr

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,552
Reaction score
14,203
Cut or Trade Now: Save 35m$ salary, only have 24m$ prorated dead money for this year, but also have to take all accelerated prorated money from future years because he left the roster (36m$). So total is 60m$ cap hit this year but completely off the books in 2025.
This is what I would want if he gets suspended by Goodell. Unfortunately we won’t know what, or if, or when, Goodell will suspend him.

I’m speaking strictly about football here and the team because I’m very concerned about the situation and the people involved. But with that being said if we would have extended Dak last week and made him the highest paid player in NFL history and this week that situation broke, that would have been disastrous. Especially with the inconsistency of Goodell.
 

Beast_from_East

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,522
Reaction score
26,585
Where's the other 36 coming from??
The void years on his contract.................there were 2 void years added to his contract for the purpose of cap proration, they have absolutely nothing to do with having his rights as a player.

Here is the bottom line...........2024 is the last year Dallas has Dak's rights under his current contract. If he plays the year out as is, he is an unrestricted free agent next offseason and can sign anywhere he wants to.
 

Adreme

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,152
Reaction score
3,061
The smartest way to handle this situation in my opinion is to sit Dak down and tell him we are moving forward with T. Lance

1) you find out what you have in lance
2) you don’t waste another season w Dak
3) it gives you leverage in trade talks. Dak either accepts a trade to your liking or he sits on the bench all season.
4) you either have something in Lance or he sucks and you have a premium pick next season.
"Take our reduced deal or we will pay you to sit on the bench and then you sign a record deal next offseason after the offense takes a major step back and it makes you look significantly better". There is no leverage. The only way there would be leverage is if Lance was good but considering there is competition to be a backup that does seem likely.
 

Beast_from_East

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,522
Reaction score
26,585
The smartest way to handle this situation in my opinion is to sit Dak down and tell him we are moving forward with T. Lance

1) you find out what you have in lance
2) you don’t waste another season w Dak
3) it gives you leverage in trade talks. Dak either accepts a trade to your liking or he sits on the bench all season.
4) you either have something in Lance or he sucks and you have a premium pick next season.
You are going to sit a player on the bench that is eating 25% of your entire cap???

I have never seen that done, not just in the NFL, but in any sports league in existence that has a cap.
 

Beast_from_East

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,522
Reaction score
26,585
"Take our reduced deal or we will pay you to sit on the bench and then you sign a record deal next offseason after the offense takes a major step back and it makes you look significantly better". There is no leverage. The only way there would be leverage is if Lance was good but considering there is competition to be a backup that does seem likely.
Exactly............Dak and his agent Francis would laugh in the Cowboy's face if they even dared to mention it...............It would be such a horrendous idea of epic proportions............Why???

Who is playing QB while Dak rides the pine? Lance? What if he sucks, you think all the other players on the team are totally fine with flushing a season of their careers down the toilet, especially Lamb who is trying to cash in and his stats take a hit because you are playing Lance (who sucks) while Dak sits on the bench laughing and eating nachos and knowing his value just went up in free agency so that is another $300 mill coming??? And if you do this to Dak, why would Parsons or Lamb or any other player sign an extension with Dallas when they are thinking, dam if they do that to Dak they could do that to me.
 

JBS

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,587
Reaction score
22,248
"Take our reduced deal or we will pay you to sit on the bench and then you sign a record deal next offseason after the offense takes a major step back and it makes you look significantly better". There is no leverage. The only way there would be leverage is if Lance was good but considering there is competition to be a backup that does seem likely.
Yeah sure. Being forced to sit out an entire season on the bench is plenty leverage. The lazy accomplish nothing at all people in here look at sitting in the bench as a bonus. These are elite athletes. They don’t have these loser mentalities.
 

JBS

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,587
Reaction score
22,248
You are going to sit a player on the bench that is eating 25% of your entire cap???

I have never seen that done, not just in the NFL, but in any sports league in existence that has a cap.
No, he will cave and eventually a trade will happen
 

Adreme

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,152
Reaction score
3,061
Yeah sure. Being forced to sit out an entire season on the bench is plenty leverage. The lazy accomplish nothing at all people in here look at sitting in the bench as a bonus. These are elite athletes. They don’t have these loser mentalities.
Except it is when it is seen as due to owner arrogance and the offense looks significantly worse (which it likely will either way). When the offense goes from top 3 to 16-20 range Dak's value goes way up and he gets the bonus of teams knowing he is healthy. So yes zero leverage. The only possible way that there is leverage is if Dak believes Lance would play well and keep the offense where it was but that is by far the least likely scenario.
 

JBS

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,587
Reaction score
22,248
Except it is when it is seen as due to owner arrogance and the offense looks significantly worse (which it likely will either way). When the offense goes from top 3 to 16-20 range Dak's value goes way up and he gets the bonus of teams knowing he is healthy. So yes zero leverage. The only possible way that there is leverage is if Dak believes Lance would play well and keep the offense where it was but that is by far the least likely scenario.
What are you talking about? Dak is long gone by that point. The idea isn’t for Dak to take less money. The idea is for him to leave. Accept a trade on our terms. He won’t even make it to training camp. This has nothing to do w paying him less. It’s getting rid of him now.

And yes. We will win far less games next season without him. That’s the point!!! Start the full rebuild now
 

Adreme

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,152
Reaction score
3,061
What are you talking about? Dak is long gone by that point. The idea isn’t for Dak to take less money. The idea is for him to leave. Accept a trade on our terms. He won’t even make it to training camp. This has nothing to do w paying him less. It’s getting rid of him now.
Which he has no reason to do. If he sits out for a year he gets paid, is guaranteed to be healthy, and therefore have maximum value when the Cowboys look worse on offense. The only way Dak loses leverage is if he believes Lance would actually play well (no basis for this) which would harm his future value. The idea offers zero leverage otherwise because accepting a trade to a bad team actually puts him in a worse position so he could, and would, stick to his guns of only wanting to go to specific teams if this were the route the Cowboys went because it is the best thing for him.
 
Top