Not the same old salary cap

[superonyx]

It's not just about us having the money to sign Murray. It's more about the cost of replacing him as well. The team feels that the risk of his production falling off combined with the perception that his replacement will be able to perform at a level high enough that the team won't suffer while also freeing up money to allow us to improve other parts of the team like the pass rush.

I don't buy into the theory that we should just keep mortgaging the future so that we can overpay players now.
We finally have some cap space and history has shown that teams have not had success by overpaying players in the free agent market. Getting involved in a bidding war over anyone is not smart.

 

[skinsscalper]

Isn't Carr a restructure rather than a cut? From what I've seen you only save 500K this season cutting him (more in the outyears obviously) but you could easily free up 3 - 6 MM if you renegotiated him downward like they did with Doug Free. For Carr's agent is going to be a question of what contract he could get after being cut and how that compares to the restructure Dallas offers. As of today, I think Carr, his agent and everyone in his immediate family knows he isn't going to be playing on his existing contract when next season starts.

IIRC designating Carr a June 1st cut frees up a good amount of cap space. The dagger is taking the hit next year for the other half.

 

[Nightman]

Not all rebuilds look the same. That's your first mistake. We were rebuilding but we still had core players on the team and were trying to compete and win.

It's true, most rebuilds don't take 5 years, but it is also true that most rebuilds are a lot uglier than ours was.

When you have a QB like Tony Romo who is getting older, you don't completely dismantle the team. You try and keep it competitive. Unfortunately, they felt short four years in a row.

Also in the process of rebuilding the front office lost faith in Rob Ryan and the 3-4. Which created a rebuilding process within a rebuilding process.

With the contracts a lot of these players had, they weren't trade bait.

The salary cap penalty also slowed down the rebuilding process.

You look at every position group since 2010 and you can see that we rebuilt.

Dallas also had to deal with the new stadium. JJones didn't want a complete rebuild while still trying to keep the stadium and boxes full. The fact that they were able to completely rebuild the roster and still be alive for the playoffs every year in Week 17 was pretty impressive.

 

[Nightman]

This is where we disagree.

Here’s the problem with the claim the Cowboy have been slowly rebuilding. If that is the case, then current administration is really bad at rebuilding. It simply does not take five years to rebuild in todays NFL.

If you are rebuilding, you don’t do what the Cowboys did in 2013—restructure several players to get under the salary cap:

Miles Austin

Brandon Carr

Ryan Cook

DeMarcus Ware

Jason Witten

Jay Ratliff

Nate Livings

If you are rebuilding, you seriously consider whether a star player can be used as trade bait to get younger. This is what Johnson did with Walker. Cowboys could have done the same with Ware at some point. They never considered it. Why? Because they never were in rebuilding mode.

If you are rebuilding, then you don’t repeatedly and consistently waste draft picks to move up and get your guy. Instead, you move back and acquire as many picks as possible.

If you are rebuilding, you don’t go out and buy the most expensive cornerback on the free agent market, especially when you have to restructure contracts in order to do so.

A team that is rebuilding does not end up with 27 million dollars in dead money in year 5 of the rebuild.

It wasn't bad cap management as much it was bad personnel decisions. A series of poor drafts left the team having to reach more in Free Agency and in resigning their own older guys. The RWilliams trade and extension was bad. The Claiborne trade has been a bust. Carr hasn't been worth his contract.

Plus the owners really hammered the NFLPA in the lockout and CBA. They reset the cap LOWER than it was before the lockout and it didn't get back to pre 2009 levels until 2013. Add the 10m cap penalty and Dallas had to add a few restructures like you said, but really didn't have to cut players they wanted to keep.

And no one ever talks about the cap space that is created when doing restructures. if you create 30m in cap space, but add 10m in dead money, you are still way ahead of the game. Not maximizing the cap is failing to improve the team in order to make a bigger profit. Dallas' one advantage is cash flow and it they don't use it terms of large signing bonuses and cash restructures then they might as well be Jacksonville or Cincy

 

[Nightman]

I've been someone who has said almost every year that the Cowboys cap is not as big of an issue as fans/media were saying; however, there are reasonable limits to this years cap. Yes, they could go all out with restructures and pushing a huge amount forward, but it's not really a good idea to take that to the extreme.

While they can free up a lot of space, keep in mind that the current cap figures don't account for any of the current free agents and will only count the top 51 players is off-season. Once the season starts they have to account for the 2 extra players over 51, all players on PUP or IR and the practices squad.

Around June they will need extra space to sign the draft picks.

If they Franchise Dez, that all hits the cap this year (about 13M) and can't be spread out over following years.

I do think they can re-sign any and all of their own free agents AND sign a top outside free agent; however, they need to stay away from stupid contracts like they gave out in the past.

Murray is not as much about this years cap as it is future years and his probability of declining. The history of RBs that were overused like he was this season is not good in following seasons.

They have to re-sign the majority of these players:
Unrestricted
Dez Bryant, wide receiver
Bruce Carter, linebacker
Tyler Clutts, fullback
Justin Durant, linebacker
Doug Free, tackle
Dwayne Harris, wide receiver
Nick Hayden, defensive tackle
Rolando McClain, linebacker
Henry Melton, defensive tackle
DeMarco Murray, running back
Jermey Parnell, tackle
George Selvie, defensive end
Anthony Spencer, defensive end
C.J. Spillman, safety
Tony Hills, tackle

Restricted free agents
Sterling Moore, cornerback
Cole Beasley, wide receiver
Lance Dunbar, running back
Chris Jones, punter

The restructures are just Romo- which was always planned, Witten- has only 1.8m in dead money and TSmith-if needed for a top FA.

The cuts are Carr-overpriced, Melton-injured and Free- not really under contract

The FAs are pretty small time deals besides Dez and Murray. I would try to sign 2-3 LBers and I would sign Parnell, Leary and Weems on the OL. Beasley and Moore are no brainers.

I would max out and see how FA goes. Worst case is they have a ton of space and no one to spend it on and roll it over to 2016. Best case they sign a top DT and DE, get some mid level guys for CB, OL and FS. That would leave the Draft for BPA.

 

[Kaiser]

Flowers and A. Cromartie signed for 1-year 3M in 2014.

When I look at it I don't worry about dead-money. That amount stays regardless of whether the player is cut or remains, it just hits the cap at a different time.

For Carr they can free up 8M making him a June 1st cut. They question is how much of a pay cut will he take compared to how much will it cost to replace him. If he agrees to take a pay cut to 4M per season, then how do the available free agent CBs compare at that salary. It seems like they could free up the 8M by making him a June 1st cut and sign a better player for less than the 8M, but I'm just speculating on the market.

I would rather have a better player at a lower cost obviously and no one knows what the market will pay, but we could end up paying more than the Flowers example, which is why I listed Talib's contract.

The question is what salary Carr would get if he was cut and how it compares to a renegotiated deal, just like you say. But the negotiation is going to look very similar to the Doug Free 2012 offseason with the exception that Carr wasn't terrible coming into the negotiation. The talks will basically look like this:

Dallas to Carr: There is no way you are worth your listed salary and we will cut you instead of paying it. You have to renegotiate down or be cut outright.

Carr to Dallas: You will have 8MM in dead money if you cut me and will have to pay at least 3MM to replace me. The bidding starts at 11MM over the next two years.

There will be no rush to do this (Free's renegotiation was finalized late in the offseason) so Carr's agent will be watching the FA signings. He will also be having back channel talks with people in the league to gauge what Carr would get if he was cut, similar to the way DeMarcus Ware had a contract offer 30 seconds after being cut by Dallas.

I have no idea how the situation plays out and there are still moving pieces to the situation. If the #1 draft choice is a CB the team may cut him no matter what. But IMO the team is better off paying Carr the amount of the dead money hit to keep him around. He was solid in the playoffs and there just aren't that many good corners around.

 

[bayeslife]

We can afford Suh, but we can spend the money much better.

We can get two defensive stars for the same price.

The salary cap is open to us to be aggressive, especially if we're smart.

We can and should do much.

I'd like to hear some names of who you think we'll get two of for the price of Suh. And for that matter, why you think buying a hall of fame in his prime is a bad way to spend money.

 

[xwalker]

I would rather have a better player at a lower cost obviously and no one knows what the market will pay, but we could end up paying more than the Flowers example, which is why I listed Talib's contract.

The question is what salary Carr would get if he was cut and how it compares to a renegotiated deal, just like you say. But the negotiation is going to look very similar to the Doug Free 2012 offseason with the exception that Carr wasn't terrible coming into the negotiation. The talks will basically look like this:

Dallas to Carr: There is no way you are worth your listed salary and we will cut you instead of paying it. You have to renegotiate down or be cut outright.

Carr to Dallas: You will have 8MM in dead money if you cut me and will have to pay at least 3MM to replace me. The bidding starts at 11MM over the next two years.

There will be no rush to do this (Free's renegotiation was finalized late in the offseason) so Carr's agent will be watching the FA signings. He will also be having back channel talks with people in the league to gauge what Carr would get if he was cut, similar to the way DeMarcus Ware had a contract offer 30 seconds after being cut by Dallas.

I have no idea how the situation plays out and there are still moving pieces to the situation. If the #1 draft choice is a CB the team may cut him no matter what. But IMO the team is better off paying Carr the amount of the dead money hit to keep him around. He was solid in the playoffs and there just aren't that many good corners around.

My main point is don't get distracted by the dead-money, it hit the cap with or without him on the team.

Carr scenarios:

June 1st cut:
2015 Cap Hit: 4.7M
2016 Cap Hit: 7.4M

Keep with X salary for 2015 and then cut after 2015:
2015 Cap Hit: 4.7M + X
2016 Cap Hit: 7.4M

 

[xwalker]

It wasn't bad cap management as much it was bad personnel decisions. A series of poor drafts left the team having to reach more in Free Agency and in resigning their own older guys. The RWilliams trade and extension was bad. The Claiborne trade has been a bust. Carr hasn't been worth his contract.

Plus the owners really hammered the NFLPA in the lockout and CBA. They reset the cap LOWER than it was before the lockout and it didn't get back to pre 2009 levels until 2013. Add the 10m cap penalty and Dallas had to add a few restructures like you said, but really didn't have to cut players they wanted to keep.

And no one ever talks about the cap space that is created when doing restructures. if you create 30m in cap space, but add 10m in dead money, you are still way ahead of the game. Not maximizing the cap is failing to improve the team in order to make a bigger profit. Dallas' one advantage is cash flow and it they don't use it terms of large signing bonuses and cash restructures then they might as well be Jacksonville or Cincy

Yes, that get overlooked. The key is signing the right free agents. The cap is rarely a problem when players are living up to their contracts.

 

[Bluefin]

There will be no rush to do this (Free's renegotiation was finalized late in the offseason) so Carr's agent will be watching the FA signings. He will also be having back channel talks with people in the league to gauge what Carr would get if he was cut, similar to the way DeMarcus Ware had a contract offer 30 seconds after being cut by Dallas.

There shouldn't be any rush on Dallas' part to get the situation resolved. They don't need to do anything with Brandon Carr's cap number prior to the start of free agency.

The team can get its ducks in a row by restructuring Tony Romo and Tyron Smith, allowing Henry Melton's deal to void and making a decision on Doug Free (contract voids or re-work deal beforehand).

Carr, however, should want to know his status as quickly as possible.

His agent will be able to get an idea of what kind of offer they can expect on the open market, but Carr has to be released in order to go get it.

Teams will sign other cornerbacks if there is a delay in Carr being cut loose.

I agree that Carr stands to make a lot more by taking a pay cut over the remaining years of his contract with the Cowboys than he will get as a free agent.

Following a reduction in pay, Carr could still probably make $12M to $15M over the remaining three years of his deal.

It might be $7M to $9M over the next two seasons.

Is there even a chance he could do better than that as a free agent?

I don't think so.

The real question is does Rod Marinelli want to keep Carr at any price or does he want a different CB starting in his scheme?

 

[Nightman]

I would rather have a better player at a lower cost obviously and no one knows what the market will pay, but we could end up paying more than the Flowers example, which is why I listed Talib's contract.

The question is what salary Carr would get if he was cut and how it compares to a renegotiated deal, just like you say. But the negotiation is going to look very similar to the Doug Free 2012 offseason with the exception that Carr wasn't terrible coming into the negotiation. The talks will basically look like this:

Dallas to Carr: There is no way you are worth your listed salary and we will cut you instead of paying it. You have to renegotiate down or be cut outright.

Carr to Dallas: You will have 8MM in dead money if you cut me and will have to pay at least 3MM to replace me. The bidding starts at 11MM over the next two years.

There will be no rush to do this (Free's renegotiation was finalized late in the offseason) so Carr's agent will be watching the FA signings. He will also be having back channel talks with people in the league to gauge what Carr would get if he was cut, similar to the way DeMarcus Ware had a contract offer 30 seconds after being cut by Dallas.

I have no idea how the situation plays out and there are still moving pieces to the situation. If the #1 draft choice is a CB the team may cut him no matter what. But IMO the team is better off paying Carr the amount of the dead money hit to keep him around. He was solid in the playoffs and there just aren't that many good corners around.

Carr doesn't have much leverage except for the fact Dallas doesn't get the salary space until June 2nd. Like xwalker said he has dead money charges next year whether he is on the team or not. Dallas got 2 years of extremely cheap cap charges in 2012 and 2013 when they needed the space.

With Scandrick, Claiborne, Moore, Patmon, Webb and a probable draft pick, Dallas would be in pretty good shape at CB

 

[Galian Beast]

I'd like to hear some names of who you think we'll get two of for the price of Suh. And for that matter, why you think buying a hall of fame in his prime is a bad way to spend money.

JPP, Orakpo, Jerry Hughes, Nick Fairley, Jared Odrick, Stephen Paea to name a few.

And when that hall of famer can get himself suspended at a moments notice... yeah... not the guy I want to dump boatloads of money into.

 

[Bluefin]

JPP, Orakpo, Jerry Hughes, Nick Fairley, Jared Odrick, Stephen Paea to name a few.

And when that hall of famer can get himself suspended at a moments notice... yeah... not the guy I want to dump boatloads of money into.

Dallas would be pushing a good, young starter in Tyrone Crawford into a reserve role if they were to sign Ndamukong Suh.

The bigger issue is outside at DE, we need to upgrade from Anthony Spencer and George Selvie.

 

[Nightman]

Dallas would be pushing a good, young starter in Tyrone Crawford into a reserve role if they were to sign Ndamukong Suh.

The bigger issue is outside at DE, we need to upgrade from Anthony Spencer and George Selvie.

That's not the case at all. Marinelli needs at least two 3Ts with the amount of time they are in the nickel or passing downs.

Suh can easily slide to the 1T when in the lineup with Crawford and handle the 3T when Crawford needs a rest. They both can get well over 600 snaps and be fresh in the 4th and late in the season.

They still need SDE but can use the draft to fill that spot

 

[Bluefin]

That's not the case at all. Marinelli needs at least two 3Ts with the amount of time they are in the nickel or passing downs.

Suh can easily slide to the 1T when in the lineup with Crawford and handle the 3T when Crawford needs a rest. They both can get well over 600 snaps and be fresh in the 4th and late in the season.

They still need SDE but can use the draft to fill that spot

Ndamukong Suh would be the starting UT.

Tyrone Crawford would be his back-up.

Even if both play on passing downs, you are still limiting the development of the best young DL on the roster at this time.

I don't see any reason to go that route.

And the money some fans want to pay to sign Suh, should Detroit let him leave, should have Dez Bryant's name on it.

 

[Kaiser]

Carr doesn't have much leverage except for the fact Dallas doesn't get the salary space until June 2nd. Like xwalker said he has dead money charges next year whether he is on the team or not. Dallas got 2 years of extremely cheap cap charges in 2012 and 2013 when they needed the space.

With Scandrick, Claiborne, Moore, Patmon, Webb and a probable draft pick, Dallas would be in pretty good shape at CB

My bad, I got confused between numbers on Sportrac and here. At those rates Carr has a lot less leverage but may still be a better bargain than the FA they acquire. I also am not as sold on the group as you are, I think they have to have either Carr or a different veteran from FA - plus take a CB in the first three rounds of the draft.

 

[burmafrd]

In this day and age a DT even as good as Suh is not worth his cap hit. Edge rush is our great weakness and there is little chance that we can get a top pass rusher where we will be drafting.

So if we can get two decent edge rushers for the price of suh that is a much better way to go.

 

[Nightman]

In this day and age a DT even as good as Suh is not worth his cap hit. Edge rush is our great weakness and there is little chance that we can get a top pass rusher where we will be drafting.

So if we can get two decent edge rushers for the price of suh that is a much better way to go.

You could say the same thing about Romo, Dez, TSmith or Carr. At least with Suh you know you are getting an All-Pro

It doesn't have to be an either or situation. You can still draft DL in the first and sign one of these super cheap edge rushers that everyone here knows about, but no other NFL teams do.

 

[Setackin]

NO RESTRUCTURING!!!!! Narrowing from Peter to pay Paul is no way to pay u r bills....

 

[Setackin]

Yes we can be $50M under the salary cap if we want to. That doesn't make it the smartest thing to do either. Pushing big dollars into the future only delays the pain.

And makes it more painful