Twitter: Todd France and CAA part ways

[ABQCOWBOY]

You’ll have to expand . I don’t follow.

I did expand. I did that earlier. This is not necessarily about Dak. You can favor paying Dak or not paying Dak and it can still have nothing, at all to do about Dak. You suggest that the only reason people are not on board with paying Dak whatever amount of money is because they are not on board with Dak as the QB. That's not true. It could literally be any QB in the NFL and I would not be on board with simply paying them any amount of money to get them signed. It's a team game and while QBs are important, they are not everything. I think you have to manage your cap and it's a fiscally responsible approach to managing your team that I believe is best. It could be any QB and I wouldn't go along with that line of thought because I fundamentally don't agree with it. It has nothing at all to do with believing or not believing in the player, per say.

 

[CouchCoach]

I think more will come from this situation with France and his departure from CAA but we will see. Of course, there will be spin and that will run rampant but one Dak announces his decision on who is representing him, that's going to tell a whole lot about what's what. That's going to be very interesting indeed.

Yes, that will give us something else to guess we know about. Assumptions will fly.

These players change agents all the time for a variety of reasons. The assumption might be made that Prescott didn't want France any longer and the reverse could be true. Some are assuming CAA wants to get rid of France but he has the history of being the one to walk.

It is plausible that France agreed to try and get a better deal for Prescott than Goff and Wentz while thinking he's not really worth it? Maybe he doesn't want to fight that battle of "here's what you think you're worth and here's what you're really worth" with players' egos?

 

[CouchCoach]

teams, and their owners and gm's also answer to the fans whether they like to admit it or not. cincy probably received many offers for the rights to burrow. but they knew it would be FANticide to trade those rights away.

if there is tanking, it will be for the right to get lawrence, not get him and trade him away.

as for fuddy duddy, my wife tells me to grow up all the time.

Agree, this jockeying for Lawrence has been in the coming since he was a senior in high school. He's been the second coming of Manning, no, not that one, the other one, since high school. The difference is he is athletic and probably more accurate than Peyton Manning.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yes, that will give us something else to guess we know about. Assumptions will fly.

These players change agents all the time for a variety of reasons. The assumption might be made that Prescott didn't want France any longer and the reverse could be true. Some are assuming CAA wants to get rid of France but he has the history of being the one to walk.

It is plausible that France agreed to try and get a better deal for Prescott than Goff and Wentz while thinking he's not really worth it? Maybe he doesn't want to fight that battle of "here's what you think you're worth and here's what you're really worth" with players' egos?

It could obviously be any number of things here but the idea that he might be tired of the whole, "Here's what you think you are worth and here's what you are actually worth" falls flat with me. Goff was never that good IMO and yet, he had no issue pushing that envelope. Same with Cousins but there again, he's never had a problem with that approach.

I mean, you could be right but I just don't really believe that personally. I think France likes that kind of deal. He likes getting teams to pay more then they should for lessor talent because that puts a lot of credibility in his pocket, to say nothing of actual money.

 

[CouchCoach]

It could obviously be any number of things here but the idea that he might be tired of the whole, "Here's what you think you are worth and here's what you are actually worth" falls flat with me. Goff was never that good IMO and yet, he had no issue pushing that envelope. Same with Cousins but there again, he's never had a problem with that approach.

I mean, you could be right but I just don't really believe that personally. I think France likes that kind of deal. He likes getting teams to pay more then they should for lessor talent because that puts a lot of credibility in his pocket, to say nothing of actual money.

Oh, I agree, the real payoff would have been him landing Prescott a Wilson deal, they'd be lining up for his services after that.

I have never agreed with the NFL making players contracts public. It has tainted the sport for me because it attaches a value to a player beyond his contribution to the team. There was a time that the TV Nets wouldn't allow the announcers to talk money but that changed as well.

That's why I favor college ball far ahead of the NFL, if we would only have one this year, I would choose college bands down. Fewer clown showoffs as well.

 

[gjkoeppen]

We were not in cap hell. I have to wonder, have you ever really seen cap hell with the Cowboys? Honest question here.

An extension is a renegotiation. I don't understand where you are going there. I am aware that an extension starts after the current contract but so what? You and move money around, it makes it a lot easier to pay out upfront money and then spread it out over years. It's just easier but I'm not going to argue those points with you. That's a waste of time that everybody on this board knows and understands.

I didn't say these things after week one last year. I said all of this after Dak hired CAA and France but that's hear nor there. If you don't like what I'm saying or you don't want to hear it, then don't respond to my posts. It's not really hard.

For someone who thinks you know everything about the Cowboys you obviously don't know as much as you think if you're questioning that the Cowboys were in cap hell the first 20 years the cap was in existence. It looks like you need a history lesson.

Prior to the NFL starting the cap, the Cowboys were the deepest team in the NFL because their backups ended up as starters on other teams when the cap started. Now those backups chose to stay with the Cowboys prior to the cap because Jones paid them like starters. Then the cap started so the Cowboys let some walk who's contracts had expired and some players the Cowboys had to release. Not only that they had to renegotiate contracts to defer payments to the end of the contracts but this ended up as dead money. They had to do this just to come up some money to resign a couple of their stars and their draft choices. Now every year the Cowboys had to renegotiate contracts just to get enough money to resign a couple of their stars and their draft choices. This vicious cycle went on for 20 years until about 5 years ago when Stephen stopped renegotiating contracts. Now along with just wanting to refute what I say, you also either didn't read what I said or you didn't comprehend what I said. At no time did I say the Cowboys are now, today, in cap heel. I only said if the Cowboys revert back to renegotiating contracts like they did for the first 20 years that they will find themselves in the same cap hell.

AGAIN you're lumping extending contracts and renegotiating contracts as the same thing. They're not. Renegotiating is done on a current non-expired contract. When a team signs a player to an extension they just adding additional years to the end of the current contract. or the player signs a totally new contract that starts when the current contract expires. Yes with ALL contracts the team spreads all the bonus money over the life of the contract to make the first year easier to take.

So now you're saying that if someone disagrees with what you say that they can't call you.on it.
.
.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

For someone who thinks you know everything about the Cowboys you obviously don't know as much as you think if you're questioning that the Cowboys were in cap hell the first 20 years the cap was in existence. It looks like you need a history lesson.

Prior to the NFL starting the cap, the Cowboys were the deepest team in the NFL because their backups ended up as starters on other teams when the cap started. Now those backups chose to stay with the Cowboys prior to the cap because Jones paid them like starters. Then the cap started so the Cowboys let some walk who's contracts had expired and some players the Cowboys had to release. Not only that they had to renegotiate contracts to defer payments to the end of the contracts but this ended up as dead money. They had to do this just to come up some money to resign a couple of their stars and their draft choices. Now every year the Cowboys had to renegotiate contracts just to get enough money to resign a couple of their stars and their draft choices. This vicious cycle went on for 20 years until about 5 years ago when Stephen stopped renegotiating contracts. Now along with just wanting to refute what I say, you also either didn't read what I said or you didn't comprehend what I said. At no time did I say the Cowboys are now, today, in cap heel. I only said if the Cowboys revert back to renegotiating contracts like they did for the first 20 years that they will find themselves in the same cap hell.

AGAIN you're lumping extending contracts and renegotiating contracts as the same thing. They're not. Renegotiating is done on a current non-expired contract. When a team signs a player to an extension they just adding additional years to the end of the current contract. or the player signs a totally new contract that starts when the current contract expires. Yes with ALL contracts the team spreads all the bonus money over the life of the contract to make the first year easier to take.

So now you're saying that if someone disagrees with what you say that they can't call you.on it.
.
.

OK well, thanks, I guess.

So you didn't actually answer the question I asked which was, have you actually ever seen the Cowboys in Cap Hell? I'm guessing from your "answer" that you are saying you have. OK, then it should be fairly simple to understand why the Cowboys demand longer contracts, rather then shorter term deals for key players. Obviously, this is how they create cap flexibility. They use this to renegotiate and extend. They push cap backwards and forwards all the time.

I don't know what all your BS is coming from. I never said anything about what you can respond to but if you are going to complain about it, then just don't respond to my posts. You aren't calling me on anything. You are being juvenile.

The Cowboys are not in cap hell right now. And if they manage this right, they won't be later. However, if they make the wrong choices, they could easily find themselves there again. That's how I see it.

 

[gjkoeppen]

OK well, thanks, I guess.

So you didn't actually answer the question I asked which was, have you actually ever seen the Cowboys in Cap Hell? I'm guessing from your "answer" that you are saying you have. OK, then it should be fairly simple to understand why the Cowboys demand longer contracts, rather then shorter term deals for key players. Obviously, this is how they create cap flexibility. They use this to renegotiate and extend. They push cap backwards and forwards all the time.

I don't know what all your BS is coming from. I never said anything about what you can respond to but if you are going to complain about it, then just don't respond to my posts. You aren't calling me on anything. You are being juvenile.

The Cowboys are not in cap hell right now. And if they manage this right, they won't be later. However, if they make the wrong choices, they could easily find themselves there again. That's how I see it.

I don't know how many times I have to say the Cowboys, now today, are not in cap hell. They will end up there if they start renegotiating contracts again. AGAIN I can't help it if you think renegotiating and extending contracts are the same thing. I also can't help it if you think when a team initiates extending a players contract it's really the player demanding to renegotiate his contract. I also can't help it that you think it would have been written in stone if Prescott had signed the long term contract last season that after 2021 he would demand to renegotiate. Your opinions do not equal facts.
.
.

 

[Corso]

I don't know how many times I have to say the Cowboys, now today, are not in cap hell. They will end up there if they start renegotiating contracts again. AGAIN I can't help it if you think renegotiating and extending contracts are the same thing. I also can't help it if you think when a team initiates extending a players contract it's really the player demanding to renegotiate his contract. I also can't help it that you think it would have been written in stone if Prescott had signed the long term contract last season that after 2021 he would demand to renegotiate. Your opinions do not equal facts.
.
.

You're dodging his specific question.

Not that I really care...

 

[Verdict]

Zeke had to holdout to get paid. D Law had to play on the tag below he got paid (and delaying surgery was a de facto holdout). Amari had to get to free agency to get paid, and he ended up taking less money to stay in Dallas.

All of them were overpaid. What’s your point?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't know how many times I have to say the Cowboys, now today, are not in cap hell. They will end up there if they start renegotiating contracts again. AGAIN I can't help it if you think renegotiating and extending contracts are the same thing. I also can't help it if you think when a team initiates extending a players contract it's really the player demanding to renegotiate his contract. I also can't help it that you think it would have been written in stone if Prescott had signed the long term contract last season that after 2021 he would demand to renegotiate. Your opinions do not equal facts.
.
.

We disagree. What a shock. No you can't help it because it is the same thing. But you can help yourself by learning but that's up to you. Also, it helps if you try not to put words into peoples mouths. That would help a lot. But all the time I've known you, you have done this very thing. So it's probably something you won't change, which is fine. Lastly, I said that he would have never seen the last year of his contract and possibly would have renegotiated it after three years, not that it absolutely would have happened in 21. Again, it's that whole lying about what people say. My opinion is my own. You don't have to read it, you don't have to comment on it so if you want to cry about it, that's your problem. OK, I've wasted entirely to much time on you. We are done here. No reason to put up with this stuff so I won't. See ya around.