Strategic Error Made With Elliott?

[glimmerman]

Actually, this is similar to the position the Jags took with Ramsey. Word is they told his agent they would not even discuss contract extension or new deal until AFTER his 4th year. Notice Ramsey reported to camp on time....pixxed off, but he's there. Makes you wonder, Jerry and Stephen apparently have no problem with the two-year issue.

Yep. I think SJ meant the comment to say he will be signed after this year and won’t have to worry about the 5th year option even though we picked it up and wont have to worry about the franchise tag. He should have only said that we will start offering this year and sign him after this year. But Elliot is more important to this team than ramsey is to there team. Which is why I dislike Elliot’s agent, he is advising him to do something that players have never done. Holding out before his 4 year rookie deal is up has never happened.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Yep. I think SJ meant the comment to say he will be signed after this year and won’t have to worry about the 5th year option even though we picked it up and wont have to worry about the franchise tag. He should have only said that we will start offering this year and sign him after this year. But Elliot is more important to this team than ramsey is to there team. Which is why I dislike Elliot’s agent, he is advising him to do something that players have never done. Holding out before his 4 year rookie deal is up has never happened.

I'm not sure it's all his agent.......remember Stephen has made an offer which means he has no problem give Zeke a new deal with 2 years left.

 

[glimmerman]

I'm not sure it's all his agent.......remember Stephen has made an offer which means he has no problem give Zeke a new deal with 2 years left.

So are you thinking that maybe it’s Elliot’s idea as much as the agent. It seemed like a dumb idea from the start. That would be in line with other decisions he has made off the field.

 

[CowboyRoy]

You don’t build around RBs. Classic case of the Jones hubris. Guy thinks he is smarter than everyone else.

Yep...….and when you have a great Oline like we do, you definitely don't pay huge money to a back.

 

[fansince68]

I don't know the standard operating procedure with using the 5th year option on 1st round draft picks but it seems to be the prudent thing to do would be to talk to the agent and inform them of the intention of the team to exercise that option.

They could have done that but that would make this holdout really stress the relationship and maybe if they'd discussed this and known their intention, they might not have that option, which amounts to a one year contract, effectively allowing them to tag him twice and have three one year contracts in a row and he is guaranteed only that one current year. Including this year, Elliott would make about 36M over the next 4 years, if tagged and not injured.

Gurley on this latest contract is guaranteed 45M. See the math problem that Elliott sees?

The RB tag for this season is 11.2M, so he is already 2M in the hole with this option exercised and that would be going up next season.

Elliott has been injury free but he is a contact back and leads the NFL in carries per game over the last three years and he and his agent would see no reason for a decline in that this season. He is the definition of workhorse back.

I do see a lot of venom aimed in Elliott's direction but when I put myself in his place, I believe I would be doing the same thing he is, his only play is to hold out.

They exercise his option but then the COO goes on the radio and starts talking about a new contract, does that make sense? Sure there was a deadline but that's no excuse, they had time. Then he makes it worse by bringing up the Gurley contract, THE player the Elliott sees as his challenger to best in the NFL.

When you add the numbers being thrown around for the QB, that same QB that's not supposed to be very good without the RB and the WR that's been with the team for 10 games, can you not see where this could get you sideways if you were him?

I could be off base here and they did address the option before exercising it but I don't think that happened or they would not have been acting so blindsided. Those numbers above are exactly what Elliott is looking at and he and his agent are sending the message before most players do, Elliott is not a taggable player.

Excellent analysis.....

 

[pansophy]

Unless he changes that running style, he's done before 30. Even power backs like Bettis, Csonka and Lynch knew when to protect themselves.

I remember in one game, the commentator made the observation about how Emmitt was protecting himself. He said tacklers are taught to try and hold the ball carrier up to get additional hits on him and those additional ones are what shortens their careers.

Add to this Elliott led RB's with fumbles last season, 6, the same number of TD's.

Right so he needs to make money now. So he could sit a while.

 

[CB61]

it is rational for Elliot to hold until the 11th game to get credit for his year.
that is because the salary is low for this year and he loses only about 18k per game.
that reduces the wear and tear while the salary ramps up next year.

it is also rational for cowboys to let him sit until 11th game.
if the team is a contender, it will be fine for 10 games, saving elliot for the games that count.
if the team is not a real contender, then who cares.

I don't get into too much of the credit years and all of that but didn't someone say that Elliott had to report by August 5th to get a credit for this year?

 

[CB61]

I don't know the standard operating procedure with using the 5th year option on 1st round draft picks but it seems to be the prudent thing to do would be to talk to the agent and inform them of the intention of the team to exercise that option.

They could have done that but that would make this holdout really stress the relationship and maybe if they'd discussed this and known their intention, they might not have that option, which amounts to a one year contract, effectively allowing them to tag him twice and have three one year contracts in a row and he is guaranteed only that one current year. Including this year, Elliott would make about 36M over the next 4 years, if tagged and not injured.

Gurley on this latest contract is guaranteed 45M. See the math problem that Elliott sees?

The RB tag for this season is 11.2M, so he is already 2M in the hole with this option exercised and that would be going up next season.

Elliott has been injury free but he is a contact back and leads the NFL in carries per game over the last three years and he and his agent would see no reason for a decline in that this season. He is the definition of workhorse back.

I do see a lot of venom aimed in Elliott's direction but when I put myself in his place, I believe I would be doing the same thing he is, his only play is to hold out.

They exercise his option but then the COO goes on the radio and starts talking about a new contract, does that make sense? Sure there was a deadline but that's no excuse, they had time. Then he makes it worse by bringing up the Gurley contract, THE player the Elliott sees as his challenger to best in the NFL.

When you add the numbers being thrown around for the QB, that same QB that's not supposed to be very good without the RB and the WR that's been with the team for 10 games, can you not see where this could get you sideways if you were him?

I could be off base here and they did address the option before exercising it but I don't think that happened or they would not have been acting so blindsided. Those numbers above are exactly what Elliott is looking at and he and his agent are sending the message before most players do, Elliott is not a taggable player.

Very well said all good points !

 

[waldoputty]

I don't get into too much of the credit years and all of that but didn't someone say that Elliott had to report by August 5th to get a credit for this year?

dont think 8-6 applied.

 

[CB61]

dont think 8-6 applied.

Well like I said I don't get into all that but I remember hearing something about having to report by August 5th to get a credit year maybe that's something to do with years of service I don't know that's why I was asking if you knew what that was?

 

[waldoputty]

Well like I said I don't get into all that but I remember hearing something about having to report by August 5th to get a credit year maybe that's something to do with years of service I don't know that's why I was asking if you knew what that was?

i dont remember the details to that.

 

[CB61]

i dont remember the details to that.

Me either I just remembered either hearing or reading about something like that

 

[CB61]

i dont remember the details to that.

Whatever the case is the Cowboys screwed up with him it should have been done with Elliott a long time ago we may be able to win without him but I'd rather not see how that turns out but they're also in a pickle with having to pay Cooper and Prescott

 

[Flamma]

I do see a lot of venom aimed in Elliott's direction but when I put myself in his place, I believe I would be doing the same thing he is, his only play is to hold out.

I personally don't like the FT because it puts a large hit on the salcap every year it's used. If you like the player and want to keep him, give him a contract. I just think Elliott is doing this one year too early. He's hurting himself and his team. I think they would have given him a contract next year. That said, whatever the Cowboys had planned for him, he was still set to make a truckload of money. Do you really want to not play over a few million? It's not like it is the difference between starving and surviving. We're talking about just how rich you want to be.

 

[aaev84]

with that argument it cements Zekes position.

if dak and Amari can get 2-3 MORE contracts then they should take less at least top 5 money they were offered, given Zekes may only have this shot once, its why he did it, can you people not see that..that argument is why he is holding out.

Sorry to really say, but I've noticed massive blinders with this fan base and how quick they are to throw away and be critical of players that have done a lot to keep this team in the running. Meh, it is what it us. People will think what they think.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

If I put myself in his shoes then I would be at camp helping my teammates. I would play out this year because we know Zeke will get paid. I will be there for Jerry since he went to bat for me and fought the commissioner on my behalf. I would show my teammates like Dak and Cooper that I'm there for them and understand they need to get paid first.

 

[birdwells1]

I never expected Elliot to play the 5th year option or play under the tag without a new contract. But honor your 4 year deal. They were going to sign him long term. Or at least that’s what SJ said. They were expecting to work on it during the year or next offseason.

If they were going to work on it next offseason then can move it up a year.
Zeke doesn't trust Stephen nor would i.

 

[HowardC]

People keep bringing up the suspension but we all Zeke was railroaded on some PC agenda BS.

 

[CouchCoach]

Yes. But that will show us what he's made of......... you'd think in the original contract that fullfilling a signed agreement is to be honored to the end of said document. No interruptions. JMO, of course.

Oh, you're considering the NFL like the real world, a man's word is his bond. Not in the NFL on either side.

The NFL should have gone with guaranteed contracts and we'd see a lot more realistic numbers. I saw the interview with Aikman after he signed that 100M contract and I could tell he knew that was all fluff, all ego pumping, he knew the guaranteed part was what he was playing for and would not like see more than that.

It's like the owners, agents and players are playing some silly game that they think they're fooling people. The only part of that contract that is real is the guaranteed part and I'd bet that's the stumbling block here and when the COO states that they've made solid offers or even top 5, he is not saying that in guaranteed money.

The only part of Gurley's contract Elliott and his agent are looking at is the 45M guarantee and that's their starting point, not sure that was the COO's in his radio comment.

 

[CouchCoach]

I personally don't like the FT because it puts a large hit on the salcap every year it's used. If you like the player and want to keep him, give him a contract. I just think Elliott is doing this one year too early. He's hurting himself and his team. I think they would have given him a contract next year. That said, whatever the Cowboys had planned for him, he was still set to make a truckload of money. Do you really want to not play over a few million? It's not like it is the difference between starving and surviving. We're talking about just how rich you want to be.

If I am looking at 3M this season and 9M the next and if they tag him for 11-12 the next two seasons, that's 34-36 compared to Gurley's 45. I would sit out the 3M and show up just to make this year qualify for the 9M next unless I decided to sit that out.

But then he could sit out all of this year and call their hand just as Bell did only Elliott is only giving up 3M.

It all comes down to what kind of a team and season do they have without him. If they struggle, he wins. If they don't, he still wins because they end up trading him to get rid of that 9M on the books, even if they only got a 3rd round pick.

Flamma, I believe this is also about the Cowboys tendency to blink with star players. And the fans and media might be mostly on the Joneses side in this with two years to go but start losing and that will change in a hummingbird's heartbeat. He will get more press if they're losing than if he was playing and they were winning.