CFZ Salary cap myths and other misunderstandings of player pay

[Coogiguy03]

With all the big talk about contracts for Dak, Cedee Lamb, and at some point Micah Parsons, there is so much misunderstanding and myth about market value, ”greed”, etc. The biggest myth so often thrown about is that the players are greedy and if they would just take a “team friendly” deal (in and of itself also a myth) we could sign more players. That’s just not a fair assessment of what the cap is and how it works.

In 2023, Sports Illustrated published a good article by Andrew Brandt, a former Green Bay VP of player personnel who has negotiated numerous NFL contracts. The article is designed to separate fact from fiction regarding what the cap actually is and isn’t. The article is free - here’s the link: https://www.si.com/nfl/2023/05/17/nfl-business-football-explaining-salary-cap
It‘s a good read if you want to have a better view of how player salaries really impact the cap.

Just cherry picking a couple of key points from the SI article:

• “Cash is real money; the cap is simply accounting. Cash is what a player will actually receive in a contract. Cap is a mechanism of compliance, a way NFL teams account for a contract over the life of the deal.” What really matters in these player deals is the guaranteed amounts of cash and how long they can take to pay it out.
• “Elite players should take less to help the team. NO!” Brandt says the call for players to take less money is ridiculous. It is the owner’s responsibility to make the cap work, not the players.

One thought I’ve had for years: Whose job is it to manage the cap responsibly? Is it the players? Or the front office?

If our front office expects the players to help them manage the cap efficiently we are doomed. There are multiple NFL teams right now who are paying more stars at market value than the Cowboys and competing for championships.

The bickering over money at this point is silly. NFL stars are paid market value. Not a penny less. If you want them, you have to pay them market value. The Cowboys front office expecting their best players to take less than market value is crazy. If you want those players on your team, you pay them market value. If you don’t want to pay them market value, then you trade them or lose them in Free agency. That simple.

So maybe we just shouldn't draft well and have good coaches like (al harris) to get the best out of players for example Bob (no disrespect to you just making a comment)

 

[mcmvp]

What’s not true Kevin? Help me understand.

My understanding is there is no such thing as a “maxed out NFL contract”. Teams can pay a player whatever they chose as long as they stay within the cap. Players are almost always paid extremely close to what the “market value” is for that position for players considered to be at comparable performance levels.

What am I missing?

I think you are right in the sense that many agents and GMs negotiate by comparing recent signed deals of comparable players. Top performers will get top of market pay.
Ceedee Lamb, for instance, deserves it.

I do think it becomes highly debatable when you are talking about the quarterback position, however. Just because one team sets a new market price by signing a player, it should not necessarily be viewed as a smart decision by the rest of the teams out there. Deshaun Watson is the perfect example. There was a disconnect there, and that led to a long delay before Lamar finally signed his deal. Yes I know his agent situation had a lot to do with that, but he was asking for a fully guaranteed contract because of what Watson just received. Baltimore was smart not to blink. 30 other NFL GM’s were very thankful that Baltimore did not do the same thing by confirming that type of contract as the new precedent.

I personally think Jerry Jones is smart if is his true intention is to let Dak Prescott play out this year. He is the leader of the offense, and the most important player on the team, and there is enough negative postseason data with him to make one hesitate. If Jerry’s thinking is that Prescott has had enough time in the league where postseason results should matter now, then I believe he is being smart. Awarding a young QB his first big extension is one thing. With a young, productive QB, it’s more logical to believe in future potential and continued growth and development. It becomes much harder to do that when the QB is older, and you have additional data.

I don’t believe he’s being smart in regards to CeeDee Lamb, however. Jerry probably could’ve saved 40 mil over 4 years by making Lamb the highest paid WR during the previous off-season when he first became eligible for an extension. He is not a QB, and had done enough to show he was worthy of it.

 

[Flamma]

I don’t believe he’s being smart in regards to CeeDee Lamb, however. Jerry probably could’ve saved 40 mil over 4 years by making Lamb the highest paid WR during the previous off-season when he first became eligible for an extension. He is not a QB, and had done enough to show he was worthy of it.

There's no probably about it. That's what would have happened in regard to cash. They also would have had an extra low paid year to dilute the cap hits. But we don't know if Jerry is being shortsighted or intentional.

 

[Coogiguy03]

I think you are right in the sense that many agents and GMs negotiate by comparing recent signed deals of comparable players. Top performers will get top of market pay.
Ceedee Lamb, for instance, deserves it.

I do think it becomes highly debatable when you are talking about the quarterback position, however. Just because one team sets a new market price by signing a player, it should not necessarily be viewed as a smart decision by the rest of the teams out there. Deshaun Watson is the perfect example. There was a disconnect there, and that led to a long delay before Lamar finally signed his deal. Yes I know his agent situation had a lot to do with that, but he was asking for a fully guaranteed contract because of what Watson just received. Baltimore was smart not to blink. 30 other NFL GM’s were very thankful that Baltimore did not do the same thing by confirming that type of contract as the new precedent.

I personally think Jerry Jones is smart if is his true intention is to let Dak Prescott play out this year. He is the leader of the offense, and the most important player on the team, and there is enough negative postseason data with him to make one hesitate. If Jerry’s thinking is that Prescott has had enough time in the league where postseason results should matter now, then I believe he is being smart. Awarding a young QB his first big extension is one thing. With a young, productive QB, it’s more logical to believe in future potential and continued growth and development. It becomes much harder to do that when the QB is older, and you have additional data.

I don’t believe he’s being smart in regards to CeeDee Lamb, however. Jerry probably could’ve saved 40 mil over 4 years by making Lamb the highest paid WR during the previous off-season when he first became eligible for an extension. He is not a QB, and had done enough to show he was worthy of it.

I love this part right here!!!!!!

 

[Coogiguy03]

There's no probably about it. That's what would have happened in regard to cash. They also would have had an extra low paid year to dilute the cap hits. But we don't know if Jerry is being shortsighted or intentional.

My problem with this is we saved money ok good, in a few years when he puts up big numbers, looks around at other WR's and says "I'm underpaid!" then what?

 

[TheDude]

Why should Dallas Cowboys players not be able to sign for the most ever at their position?

Because they are mid

 

[Flamma]

My problem with this is we saved money ok good, in a few years when he puts up big numbers, looks around at other WR's and says "I'm underpaid!" then what?

That's always a possibility. Those are the types of holdouts I don't like. The rookie holdouts are just fine.

 

[CTcowboy203]

A major component of this that we need to take into effect imo is the cowboys antiquated thinking that a player should take less because we are the Dallas cowboys and in order to be a cowboy. This is an entitled and erroneous position to take in 2024. While the benefactors of playing for the cowboys do exist - they are more important for peripheral or role players.

There is no question a player gets more exposure as a cowboy and that can lead to certain endorsements that don’t exist in other places, high level players like a Ceedee, a dak, a Martin, a parsons, are going to be paid top of their position regardless of where they play.

With social media and streaming and the media environment, players are no longer restricted to just their current markets and their platforms are much bigger now than ever. Add in the fact that the cowboys haven’t won in 30 years, this is idea of a Dallas discount is a misnomer. The biggest Dallas discount is the state income tax that Texas provides, which often times many forget is only for the 8-9 games that are place in Texas as players are taxed for their road games.

I’m all for players trying to get as much money as possible. The cowboys are a destination where players want to play, but we aren’t taken serious by agents because we don’t par take in free agency on high level players.

 

[Pola_pe_a]

Real cash spending by team. Goes back to 2011.

Dallas had been bottom 10 a lot more than top 10

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cash/_/year/2024/sort/cash_total

Guaranteed dollars (less first year payout) need to be held in escrow. This is the Funding Rule and it was put in place by the owners,

 

[kskboys]

What’s not true Kevin? Help me understand.

My understanding is there is no such thing as a “maxed out NFL contract”. Teams can pay a player whatever they chose as long as they stay within the cap. Players are almost always paid extremely close to what the “market value” is for that position for players considered to be at comparable performance levels.

What am I missing?

Fighting for every last dollar to the detriment of the team. Agreeing to contracts and then renegging to get more money. Insisting on shorter contracts that make it impossible to redo, which makes it that much harder to build a contender.

Would it really be that bad to be forced to play for 50 mil/year instead of 53 mil/year?

 

[kskboys]

A major component of this that we need to take into effect imo is the cowboys antiquated thinking that a player should take less because we are the Dallas cowboys and in order to be a cowboy. This is an entitled and erroneous position to take in 2024. While the benefactors of playing for the cowboys do exist - they are more important for peripheral or role players.

There is no question a player gets more exposure as a cowboy and that can lead to certain endorsements that don’t exist in other places, high level players like a Ceedee, a dak, a Martin, a parsons, are going to be paid top of their position regardless of where they play.

With social media and streaming and the media environment, players are no longer restricted to just their current markets and their platforms are much bigger now than ever. Add in the fact that the cowboys haven’t won in 30 years, this is idea of a Dallas discount is a misnomer. The biggest Dallas discount is the state income tax that Texas provides, which often times many forget is only for the 8-9 games that are place in Texas as players are taxed for their road games.

I’m all for players trying to get as much money as possible. The cowboys are a destination where players want to play, but we aren’t taken serious by agents because we don’t par take in free agency on high level players.

I don't see that they think this.

The 2nd bolded is a disconnect. If you want the players to get as much money as possible, that will negate signing FA's. Can't have both.

 

[Diehardblues]

Fighting for every last dollar to the detriment of the team. Agreeing to contracts and then renegging to get more money. Insisting on shorter contracts that make it impossible to redo, which makes it that much harder to build a contender.

Would it really be that bad to be forced to play for 50 mil/year instead of 53 mil/year?

I hear and feel you. In theory you are right. It’s just not the reality in the NFL. We shouldn’t expect these players to take less.

There’s no guarantee the teams will use whatever scraps are left to build a a better team which isn’t their responsibility.

We’ve seen a couple players like Brady and Mahomes not maxing it out taking a more friendly team deal but it’s usually cause they want to stay on a championship team.

But those aren’t the examples we usually see . Most of these players will never be on a championship team. And most who are bolt to lesser teams for market price .

Unfortunately it’s just the nature of the beast. It’s why after winning championships teams are usually broken up. It is what it is.

I get what you’re saying . And in a perfect world if the big stars took less perhaps they could continue winning championships like the pre Salary Cap era.

But it’s the owners who created this juggernaut. And for what. We already had Parity with Equal TV Revenue and sharing ticket sales . And how smaller market franchises like Green Bay and Pittsburgh were able to compete.

The owners made their bed with this mess. And we all have to sleep in it .

 

[kskboys]

I think you are right in the sense that many agents and GMs negotiate by comparing recent signed deals of comparable players. Top performers will get top of market pay.
Ceedee Lamb, for instance, deserves it.

I do think it becomes highly debatable when you are talking about the quarterback position, however. Just because one team sets a new market price by signing a player, it should not necessarily be viewed as a smart decision by the rest of the teams out there. Deshaun Watson is the perfect example. There was a disconnect there, and that led to a long delay before Lamar finally signed his deal. Yes I know his agent situation had a lot to do with that, but he was asking for a fully guaranteed contract because of what Watson just received. Baltimore was smart not to blink. 30 other NFL GM’s were very thankful that Baltimore did not do the same thing by confirming that type of contract as the new precedent.

I personally think Jerry Jones is smart if is his true intention is to let Dak Prescott play out this year. He is the leader of the offense, and the most important player on the team, and there is enough negative postseason data with him to make one hesitate. If Jerry’s thinking is that Prescott has had enough time in the league where postseason results should matter now, then I believe he is being smart. Awarding a young QB his first big extension is one thing. With a young, productive QB, it’s more logical to believe in future potential and continued growth and development. It becomes much harder to do that when the QB is older, and you have additional data.

I don’t believe he’s being smart in regards to CeeDee Lamb, however. Jerry probably could’ve saved 40 mil over 4 years by making Lamb the highest paid WR during the previous off-season when he first became eligible for an extension. He is not a QB, and had done enough to show he was worthy of it.

Lamar is his own agent. Made the negotiations incredibly stupid. And then he got paid about what they were offering all along. He needs an agent.

 

[kskboys]

I hear and feel you. In theory you are right. It’s just not the reality in the NFL. We shouldn’t expect these players to take less.

There’s no guarantee the teams will use whatever scraps are left to build a a better team which isn’t their responsibility.

We’ve seen a couple players like Brady and Mahomes not maxing it out taking a more friendly team deal but it’s usually cause they want to stay on a championship team.

But those aren’t the examples we usually see . Most of these players will never be on a championship team. And most who are bolt to lesser teams for market price .

Unfortunately it’s just the nature of the beast. It’s why after winning championships teams are usually broken up. It is what it is.

I get what you’re saying . And in a perfect world if the big stars took less perhaps they could continue winning championships like the pre Salary Cap era.

But it’s the owners who created this juggernaut. And for what. We already had Parity with Equal TV Revenue and sharing ticket sales . And how smaller market franchises like Green Bay and Pittsburgh were able to compete.

The owners made their bed with this mess. And we all have to sleep in it .

Lots of truth here.

There are actually a ton of players who quietly sign their contracts and don't fight for every last dime. You just don't hear about them because contract squabbles and holdouts make the news. I don't remember hearing Creed Humphrey or Fred Warner or Joel Bitonio holding out.

Maybe I'm just fighting more and more on what our society has become. Probably.

 

[DallasEast]

What’s not true Kevin? Help me understand.

My understanding is there is no such thing as a “maxed out NFL contract”. Teams can pay a player whatever they chose as long as they stay within the cap. Players are almost always paid extremely close to what the “market value” is for that position for players considered to be at comparable performance levels.

What am I missing?

You and @CWR are correct. Top new NFL contracts are governed by players' market value.

The NBA established the 'max contract' definition. NBA owners and players' union actually codified what maximum contracts are in their collective bargaining agreement (link | beginning page 36). Certain specific conditions must be met or assigned to an NBA player to be considered and included in a max contract, such as:

• A mandatory percentage of a team's salary cap, either 25% for veterans or 30% for rookies [per the Derrick Rose rule]--who have achieved a) an all-NBA team selection, Defensive Player of the year selection & Most Valuable Player selection
• A mandatory 35% of a team's salary cap or (a.k.a. Supermax contract) plus 8% annual increase for veterans, who a) have played eight or nine seasons; b) played in an all-star game the previous season or two all-star games in the previous three seasons; c) named NBA Defensive Player of the Year the season prior to signing their extension or named twice within the previous three seasons; d) named league MVP at least once during the past three seasons

Essentially, any of the top NFL players can bid for whatever they can get unconditionally. An NFL player's compensation may or may not equal a preset maximum percentage ceiling of their team's annual salary cap.

On the other hand, only specific NBA players, accomplishing specified league accomplishments, can negotiate and receive a fourth, third or higher percentage of their team's salary cap. The latter can secure the maximum compensation (e.g. max contract) allowable under the NBA's CBA.

 

[CTcowboy203]

I don't see that they think this.

The 2nd bolded is a disconnect. If you want the players to get as much money as possible, that will negate signing FA's. Can't have both.

On the 2nd no, it’s not a disconnect because I’m speaking about all nfl players getting as much as possible not just specifically cowboys players. And I vastly disagree that they don’t negotiate like players should take less because we are the Dallas cowboys. Listen to them speak, it’s clear as day they talk about this franchise as it’s a dynasty anywhere but the balance sheet.

And you can absolutely have both- the cowboys haven’t signed a big name free agent since Brandon Carr. I’m not saying we need to sign splashy items every year, but being completely non existent is not the answer either.

 

[kskboys]

On the 2nd no, it’s not a disconnect because I’m speaking about all nfl players getting as much as possible not just specifically cowboys players. And I vastly disagree that they don’t negotiate like players should take less because we are the Dallas cowboys. Listen to them speak, it’s clear as day they talk about this franchise as it’s a dynasty anywhere but the balance sheet.

And you can absolutely have both- the cowboys haven’t signed a big name free agent since Brandon Carr. I’m not saying we need to sign splashy items every year, but being completely non existent is not the answer either.

Since I don't listen to those buffoons, I will take your word for that. And, BTW, I consider that a very weak negotiating tactic, quite chicken poop!!!!

Overpaying your own keeps you from FA. Of course, the much bigger elephant in the room is that we absolutely suck at evaluating players. I mean, think of this:

Roy Williams(WR) was primarily a slant runner. Romo did not throw slants well. How did this make sense?
Brandon Carr was a #2 type CB. Didn't have the skillset to be a #1. How did paying him as a #1 make sense?
Cedric Thornton was a good rotational type 3 tech(Under Tackle). We signed him and immediately changed his position to NT.
Jaylon never got his lateral agility back. Why did we pay him huge?


Mistake after mistake after mistake due to very very poor player evaluations. That's why we don't sign FA's, we don't have anyone to evaluate them.

I wish someone would go ask Jerry why these guys failed. I bet he has no clue.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Just not true, Bob. We're not asking for team friendly deals, we're asking for non-maxed out contracts. Big difference. Almost no one is saying a player should play for chump change.

what is a maxed out contract? this is not the NBA. or MLB

 

[rags747]

With all the big talk about contracts for Dak, Cedee Lamb, and at some point Micah Parsons, there is so much misunderstanding and myth about market value, ”greed”, etc. The biggest myth so often thrown about is that the players are greedy and if they would just take a “team friendly” deal (in and of itself also a myth) we could sign more players. That’s just not a fair assessment of what the cap is and how it works.

In 2023, Sports Illustrated published a good article by Andrew Brandt, a former Green Bay VP of player personnel who has negotiated numerous NFL contracts. The article is designed to separate fact from fiction regarding what the cap actually is and isn’t. The article is free - here’s the link: https://www.si.com/nfl/2023/05/17/nfl-business-football-explaining-salary-cap
It‘s a good read if you want to have a better view of how player salaries really impact the cap.

Just cherry picking a couple of key points from the SI article:

• “Cash is real money; the cap is simply accounting. Cash is what a player will actually receive in a contract. Cap is a mechanism of compliance, a way NFL teams account for a contract over the life of the deal.” What really matters in these player deals is the guaranteed amounts of cash and how long they can take to pay it out.
• “Elite players should take less to help the team. NO!” Brandt says the call for players to take less money is ridiculous. It is the owner’s responsibility to make the cap work, not the players.

One thought I’ve had for years: Whose job is it to manage the cap responsibly? Is it the players? Or the front office?

If our front office expects the players to help them manage the cap efficiently we are doomed. There are multiple NFL teams right now who are paying more stars at market value than the Cowboys and competing for championships.

The bickering over money at this point is silly. NFL stars are paid market value. Not a penny less. If you want them, you have to pay them market value. The Cowboys front office expecting their best players to take less than market value is crazy. If you want those players on your team, you pay them market value. If you don’t want to pay them market value, then you trade them or lose them in Free agency. That simple.

Is Mahomes being paid market value?

 

[Coogiguy03]

That's always a possibility. Those are the types of holdouts I don't like. The rookie holdouts are just fine.

I guess in the end, we don't have to honor it and tell him he signed the deal and you're not getting anything extra