What are the ramifications of the Non Exclusive Tag for Pickens?

Coogiguy03 said:
well do you want pickens here, or would a trade make you happy?
Click to expand...
I would prefer to keep Pickens. If he isn't a Cowboy, you just created another hole to fill. So have to sign one or draft one. And will that WR be anywhere close to as good as Pickens? Very unlikely.
 
big dog cowboy said:
I would prefer to keep Pickens. If he isn't a Cowboy, you just created another hole to fill. So have to sign one or draft one. And will that WR be anywhere close to as good as Pickens? Very unlikely.
Click to expand...
He probably won't, but can he make plays for us, let's not rule that out. I'm sure time at the Dak yard will make him much better :(
 
SymphonySteve said:
'Can' create and 'will' create are two different things. Plus, now you have $28 mill sitting in limbo, meaning, unless a contract is reached with Pickens before free agency starts, that's money that can't be spent on free agents. Plus, are we talking an additional $7 mill for Aubrey on a tag? That's an additional $35 mill unavailable to you during free agency.
Click to expand...
That's a separate argument then. Whether they "will" or not does not change the fact that they have indeed set it up that they have the potential to create the most space in the league which would indeed imply a good setup of contracts. The Aubrey tag is already factored in. We still have a ton of options available to make space to sign free agents
 
SymphonySteve said:
'Can' create and 'will' create are two different things. Plus, now you have $28 mill sitting in limbo, meaning, unless a contract is reached with Pickens before free agency starts, that's money that can't be spent on free agents. Plus, are we talking an additional $7 mill for Aubrey on a tag? That's an additional $35 mill unavailable to you during free agency.
Click to expand...
That's silly. Either they are willing to spend it or they aren't. They have plenty if they want it.
 
speedkilz88 said:
That's silly. Either they are willing to spend it or they aren't. They have plenty if they want it.
Click to expand...
How much do they really have? They start out $56 mill over. We now have tags on both Pickens and Aubrey, something like another $35 mill. They have to have cap money to spend by the time free agency starts. If they don't sign Pickens or Aubrey, those tags count against the cap Around $90 mill.

So, before you can sign your first free agent, you have to address that $90 mill deficit.

When it comes to restructuring, it takes two to tango, right? I'm sure that several players and agents are amenable to restructuring--but with future guarantees and bennies to the players.

So, how is it silly when the Cowboys have to refinance $90 mill to just make it back to zero? Oh, and make these deals in time to actually sign free agents? Seriously, I'm all ears.
 
SymphonySteve said:
How much do they really have? They start out $56 mill over. We now have tags on both Pickens and Aubrey, something like another $35 mill. They have to have cap money to spend by the time free agency starts. If they don't sign Pickens or Aubrey, those tags count against the cap Around $90 mill.

So, before you can sign your first free agent, you have to address that $90 mill deficit.

When it comes to restructuring, it takes two to tango, right? I'm sure that several players and agents are amenable to restructuring--but with future guarantees and bennies to the players.

So, how is it silly when the Cowboys have to refinance $90 mill to just make it back to zero? Oh, and make these deals in time to actually sign free agents? Seriously, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...
The -$56 million number included the Pickens tag. Also restructuring is different than an extension or pay cut. Restucturing is built into the contract already and just pays the player immediately by converting salary to bonus. An extension or pay cut requires negotiating with the player.
 
Jstopper said:
That's a separate argument then. Whether they "will" or not does not change the fact that they have indeed set it up that they have the potential to create the most space in the league which would indeed imply a good setup of contracts. The Aubrey tag is already factored in. We still have a ton of options available to make space to sign free agents
Click to expand...
Did they have the potential last year?
 
Coogiguy03 said:
Wanting to get more knowledge on this from you all.

1. Teams can see where the market value is by bidding on him?

2. We have the right to refuse it, if we do we AREN'T paying him more than Lamb?

3. If we tag him, we tag him at market value or at the 28 million??

4. Does it have to be (2) 1st round picks we'd receive, could we accept something a little less than that to facilitate a GOOD trade compensation for him??

5. We have 5 days to match any offer??
Click to expand...
One pissed off football player! Some how the Boys have to get a deal done with Pickens, he's too value to be treated like this.
 
TwentyOne said:
I dont like it at all. NET are not used in todays NFL. Only if you want ro get rid of a player because youdont want him on your team. NET are usually seen as an (little) affront against the player.

I get it the two dumbos have no clue about contract negotiation or player evaluation. So they think hey lets be smart and let others set the market. I doubt anybody will hand them 2 firsts for Pickens though.

But lets see. Maybe i am wrong.
Click to expand...
Really? when is the last time they did this? PLEASE, I beg of you, PLEASE tell me why this is such a horrible thing to do on the part of Dallas?
 
Coogiguy03 said:
It is A PROBLEM and I don't want them to have that problem, work out some kind of deal, if not trade him. 28 guaranteed when we have other needs, and could free up more space by extending him if that's the plan isn't good!!! DO what's best for the team
Click to expand...
And how so is this not good? How is it a problem.
If he gets a new contract, his cap hit can drop from $28 milllion, to probably less than $10 million.
So how is that a problem. And it doesn’t involve future cap hits. As all of that eventually gets worked out.

Best for the team is to keep him. Unless a contract offer is over $32 to $35 million, then take the 2 1st round picks.

If a team wants to negotiate picks, all Dallas needs to do is say no. Then the other team, if they want him that bad, gives up the picks. Or the rescind the contract. Then he is still here for the tag. I believe that is the way it works.

Dallas holds all the cards. Unless he wants to hold out. Which I do not see him doing.
 
jazzcat22 said:
And how so is this not good? How is it a problem.
If he gets a new contract, his cap hit can drop from $28 milllion, to probably less than $10 million.
So how is that a problem. And it doesn’t involve future cap hits. As all of that eventually gets worked out.

Best for the team is to keep him. Unless a contract offer is over $32 to $35 million, then take the 2 1st round picks.

If a team wants to negotiate picks, all Dallas needs to do is say no. Then the other team, if they want him that bad, gives up the picks. Or the rescind the contract. Then he is still here for the tag. I believe that is the way it works.

Dallas holds all the cards. Unless he wants to hold out. Which I do not see him doing.
Click to expand...
My issue again isn't the numbers so much it's just the point of going through being tagged. Don't players want long term security etc instead of betting on themselves??
 
Reid1boys said:
Really? when is the last time they did this? PLEASE, I beg of you, PLEASE tell me why this is such a horrible thing to do on the part of Dallas?
Click to expand...
The horrible thing is they should have started negotiations a long time ago. It will be used as an excuse as why we won't be active early in FA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 252 more.
Total: 2,058 (members: 352, guests: 1,706)
Robots: 1,527

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
472,742
Messages
14,430,664
Members
24,198
Latest member
Boys-fan
Back
Top