This pretty much sums it up

[gimmesix]

Interesting article.

It bites a little.

I don't agree that all of those contracts where terrible...

The Ratliff one, however, is a recent stinker that casts Stephen Jones in a not so great light. Why? It was evident his play was already declining AND he still had another two and half years left on his relatively cap friendly deal AND he was 30 years old.

In otherword, there was no absolutely no sane reason to extend Ratliff when they did to the extent they did.

The big contracts come down to the years we didn't draft well. If you're not replacing older starters with younger starters, you're paying what the market says is necessary to keep them around. That gets expensive.

 

[Rack]

When's the last time Jerry paid hard ball with a player on a contract negotiation?

Emmitt Smith?

If so, I guess he decided to never make that mistake again.

how was it a mistake?

he played hardball and we won a Superbowl that year.

 

[IAmLegend]

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowb...readful-dozen-2009-draft-class-done-in-dallas

 

[yimyammer]

how was it a mistake?

he played hardball and we won a Superbowl that year.

The point is the excellent talent evaluator that JJ is decided to play hard ball with a hall of fame running back and seems to hand out contracts without batting an eye ever since, but I may have forgotten other similar instances, thus my question.

Personally, I'd like to see more hardball with all players and hopefully the current negotiations with Spencer and Romo are evidence of that.

The fact that the team started 0-2 but overcame Jerry's buffoonery and won the Super Bowl in spite of him has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make.