Why are we still in salary cap hell?

[revospeed]

Take off, eh. Don't be a knob

Hey who you calling a knob, eh? Ya hoser...

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Leary's closer to a Pro Bowl player than Crawford is. An argument could be made that he was deserving of a nomination this year. I think the myth of OG's being easy to find has been greatly diminished, especially as of late. Most of the Pro Bowl guys were higher draft picks and it's not uncommon enough for them to be drafted in round one. And I'm not at all suggesting this team drafting a guard high in the draft so I'm not sure why we're discussing it.



Only if one was trying to make the argument that one player made all the difference in the two games. I'm sure not.




Yeah, but they also chose some other players that I'd disagree with too. I think it was an obvious advantage to the team and its cap to go with Collins. And when they made that call, it's very likely that that version of Leary wasn't better. But, in fact, the guy worked his tail off, reinvented himself, and came back a better player in his contract year. And a guy who gave a better performance than he had before and better than the guy he replaced.

Your fixation on Crawford is amusing at this point, man.

Leary is not a pro bowler so it is a good thing we don't need one to replace him. NEvermind we have Collins who was slated to be a top 50 pick by every scouting service you can find waiting in the wings.

I never said that Collins/Leary was the only player that made a difference. I talked about Zeke too. Still doesn't mean that Leary did not struggle against Hankins and co too when we faced the Giants.

Paying a guy top dollar after a contract year seems like a pretty awful idea to me, stash.

Leary is one of the best OG to hit FA in recent years. Spotrac has his market at over $9m.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/ron-leary-10312/market-value/

That is how much TFred makes and he is no TFred. It's an overpay where he is making top dollar at the position. Crawford makes about half of what the top DL make for comparison since you seem to think he is the overpay of all overpays.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Only in theory.

It's not theory that we can free up $19m by 3 restructures that recent history has shown that the Cowboys will do. From there we can pay him yearly salaries of that much or even front load it.

 

[Nightman]

5/50m 20m guar......15m sb

year one cap hit 5m
y2 6m
y3 10m.........cut after
y4 12m......dead money 9m
y5 14m........dm 6m
void 3m

 

[Stash]

Your fixation on Crawford is amusing at this point, man.

I call it like I see it my friend. I see no need to sugar coat things.

Leary is not a pro bowler so it is a good thing we don't need one to replace him. NEvermind we have Collins who was slated to be a top 50 pick by every scouting service you can find waiting in the wings.

I think he played at or near that level, but if you don't, we can agree to disagree. The fact that he's about to leave doesn't force me to minimize the quality of his work while he was here. And I know about Collins' pedigree and remain hopeful, but he hasn't been as good as hoped for to this point. Hopefully this is the year.

I never said that Collins/Leary was the only player that made a difference. I talked about Zeke too. Still doesn't mean that Leary did not struggle against Hankins and co too when we faced the Giants.

So Leary was no worse than anyone else.

Paying a guy top dollar after a contract year seems like a pretty awful idea to me, stash.

Leary is one of the best OG to hit FA in recent years. Spotrac has his market at over $9m.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/ron-leary-10312/market-value/

It only goes back to my point on Crawford, based on both guy's level of play vs cost. Leary's "top dollar" cost is less than the $10 million-plus they're spending on Crawford, a guy without a real starting role. That's how they're connected, and that's why it stings.

That is how much TFred makes and he is no TFred. It's an overpay where he is making top dollar at the position. Crawford makes about half of what the top DL make for comparison since you seem to think he is the overpay of all overpays.

Comparing the return on investment to any of the other guys mentioned? He absolutely, positively is. Fans can't even come up with a starting job for a player with a $10 million cost. The contract was and is a disaster. And I'm capable of acknowledging that fact.

 

[Stash]

It's not theory that we can free up $19m by 3 restructures that recent history has shown that the Cowboys will do. From there we can pay him yearly salaries of that much or even front load it.

It's theory because we all know that there's no chance of it happening. And if one of those three restructures involves Dez Bryant, it should be stricken from the list.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I call it like I see it my friend. I see no need to sugar coat things.



I think he played at or near that level, but if you don't, we can agree to disagree. The fact that he's about to leave doesn't force me to minimize the quality of his work while he was here. And I know about Collins' pedigree and remain hopeful, but he hasn't been as good as hoped for to this point. Hopefully this is the year.



So Leary was no worse than anyone else.



It only goes back to my point on Crawford, based on both guy's level of play vs cost. Leary's "top dollar" cost is less than the $10 million-plus they're spending on Crawford, a guy without a real starting role. That's how they're connected, and that's why it stings.



Comparing the return on investment to any of the other guys mentioned? He absolutely, positively is. Fans can't even come up with a starting job for a player with a $10 million cost. The contract was and is a disaster. And I'm capable of acknowledging that fact.

It's a bad contract but a disaster would mean that it would create a problem. You have yet to make a compelling argument that Leary is appreciably better than Collins. I don't see the problem.

A disaster is signing Troy and Michael to lucrative deals gutting the defensive roster so you lose guys like Jones, Norton, Casillas, and Maryland so you can do so and then have both Troy and Michael get hurt in consecutive years early in their contracts.

Most every team in the NFL has their own overpaid Crawford and many have more than one. We only have 98 to complain about.

As it is we are have all of our pro bowlers signed through 2018 and when Romo clears we will still have at least $50m in room.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's theory because we all know that there's no chance of it happening. And if one of those three restructures involves Dez Bryant, it should be stricken from the list.

I don't put anything past the Joneses from happening. Low probability sure but not impossible.

You sure like being mad at players.

 

[AzorAhai]

Don't kid yourself...the day Romo signed that 100 million dollar deal...for winning nothing....we were screwed.

Look around the league...If you got a 100 mil QB on your roster....the bottom 1/3 of your roster is junk.

The bottom 3rd of nearly every team is going to be junk. That's why it's the bottom 3rd...............

 

[Stash]

It's a bad contract but a disaster would mean that it would create a problem. You have yet to make a compelling argument that Leary is appreciably better than Collins. I don't see the problem.

That's a battle I have no interest in trying to win. It's a tough position to grade accurately as it is, and it's not like the difference in level of play was huge. But it was noticeable for me while it may have been closer for you.

A disaster is signing Troy and Michael to lucrative deals gutting the defensive roster so you lose guys like Jones, Norton, Casillas, and Maryland so you can do so and then have both Troy and Michael get hurt in consecutive years early in their contracts.

While having backup special teams drafts like 1995, don't forget that part of it.

Most every team in the NFL has their own overpaid Crawford and many have more than one. We only have 98 to complain about.

Other team's misfortunes don't make me feel any better when I see my favorite team making them. We're not the Browns, but we're not the Patriots either.

As it is we are have all of our pro bowlers signed through 2018 and when Romo clears we will still have at least $50m in room.

But we still have plenty of holes on the current roster as well.

 

[Stash]

I don't put anything past the Joneses from happening. Low probability sure but not impossible.

You sure like being mad at players.

I'm not "mad at players", I'm mad at bad contracts and continuing to pay for them.

I've noted on several occasions that it's not all Crawford's fault. He's done everything asked of him and been dealt a bad hand being a round peg in a square hole. But that doesn't change the reality of the situation.

 

[Verdict]

Few teams, if any, would want to pay every one of their offensive linemen a lot of money. It's usually better to spread the wealth and strengthen other parts of the team that need more help -- especially when you have his replacement already on the team.

Few, if any have the best offensive line in football. That would be the Cowboys. Few if any have Tyron Smith, Fred Beard and Martin. Wait, that zero other than us.

 

[Verdict]

[QUOTE="AdamJT13, post: 7212880, member: 20"]So, you place zero value on the opinion of actual NFL coaches and scouts. Makes sense.

Not doing something that we said we would not do is not proof that we couldn't do it if we wanted to do it, when it can be easily proved that we could do it if we wanted to do it.[/QUOTE]

I know this wasn't directed at me, but anyone who has eyesight can tell that Free is far and away the weakest link on the line. The coaches can spin that any way they want, but all the spin in the world will not change that fact.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

It only goes back to my point on Crawford, based on both guy's level of play vs cost. Leary's "top dollar" cost is less than the $10 million-plus they're spending on Crawford, a guy without a real starting role. That's how they're connected, and that's why it stings.

Comparing the return on investment to any of the other guys mentioned? He absolutely, positively is. Fans can't even come up with a starting job for a player with a $10 million cost. The contract was and is a disaster. And I'm capable of acknowledging that fact.

Why in the world are you saying that Crawford costs $10mm? He costs $7.25mm to keep him.

If you're going to try and talk in specifics on contracts please understand the basics of the Cap.

 

[Stash]

Why in the world are you saying that Crawford costs $10mm? He costs $7.25mm to keep him.

Because $10 million is his true, overall cost. Why are you trying to claim otherwise?

If you're going to try and talk in specifics on contracts please understand the basics of the Cap.

I know the basics just fine thanks. And unlike some people, I can admit them rather than trying to hide from them.

Unlike some, I'll also admit that the difference between keeping Crawford this year and releasing him next year is a difference of $7 million, still more than a year of him is worth.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Because $10 million is his true, overall cost. Why are you trying to claim otherwise?



I know the basics just fine thanks. And unlike some people, I can admit them rather than trying to hide from them.

Unlike some, I'll also admit that the difference between keeping Crawford this year and releasing him next year is a difference of $7 million, still more than a year of him is worth.

If you knwo that the difference in another year of his service is $7mm then why do you talk about him costing us $10mm?

It is dishonest.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Because $10 million is his true, overall cost. Why are you trying to claim otherwise?



I know the basics just fine thanks. And unlike some people, I can admit them rather than trying to hide from them.

Unlike some, I'll also admit that the difference between keeping Crawford this year and releasing him next year is a difference of $7 million, still more than a year of him is worth.

Complaining about sunk costs is a waste of time.

 

[Stash]

If you knwo that the difference in another year of his service is $7mm then why do you talk about him costing us $10mm?

It is dishonest.

It's not dishonest at all. The total cost of the player is the total cost. In total, it's over $10 million.

 

[Stash]

Complaining about sunk costs is a waste of time.

Not as much as trying to defend them.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That's a battle I have no interest in trying to win. It's a tough position to grade accurately as it is, and it's not like the difference in level of play was huge. But it was noticeable for me while it may have been closer for you.



While having backup special teams drafts like 1995, don't forget that part of it.



Other team's misfortunes don't make me feel any better when I see my favorite team making them. We're not the Browns, but we're not the Patriots either.



But we still have plenty of holes on the current roster as well.

I mention other teams situation because that is who we have to beat. We only have to beat the competition, not your ideal.

Not as much as trying to defend them.

Who is trying to defend them?

I said he should make about $5m for his production as opposed to his $7m salary. I also pointed out that we are not in a position to do anything about it this offseason because the costs are sunk.

You're making a mountain out of a molehill and complaining about the **** you cannot change.