Why are we still in salary cap hell?

[Verdict]

without Romo DAL is 77m under the cap next year......how relevant is that chucko

You keep saying the cap is irrelevant, so why are you talking about cap room?

 

[Verdict]

Cash money homie........8m is 8m in real money......I would rather pay 600k for a better player than 8m just on principle alone

Just admit your analogy was one of the worst evah....it made no sense

I think it is super ironic that you refer to yourself as a "capologist" and yet you think that the cap is irrelevant. Ha Ha Ha Ha. That's irony for you!!!! Brilliant!

 

[Nightman]

I agree with everything you have said. We have some degree of fluidity when it comes to the cap. I acknowledge that. But the contracts of the upcoming guys like Martin and Collins must be considered going forward too. The cap is a hard cap. It can be manipulated to some degree to shift monies from one year to the other, but it cannot be exceeded. So every contract has to be factored in. The same people who are saying that the cap is irrelevant fail to acknowledge the hard cap.

We could, within reason sign a few free agents, but this doesn't look like the year to do that (other than our own) because here isn't that much available that we would want for the price, and quite frankly if we went very deep into the free agency pool it would put us back behind the salary cap 8 ball again, and the team appears to be trying to avoid that.

It is not a hard cap......you just have never heard of 'cash over cap' spending or don't understand it

 

[Nightman]

You keep saying the cap is irrelevant, so why are you talking about cap room?

what a weak argument.......hang em up

 

[xwalker]

The posters who say we have enough salary cap space to "do whatever we want" in free agency are misguided. I have seen post after post of we can do whatever we want and then say we can clear 50 million of cap space to do it, etc.

I'm not disputing the fact that cap space can be created, but there is obviously a reason why we are not doing it. Think of it like this ..... let's say you have $250,000 in the bank and it's all the money you have in the world. There is a super nice sports car that you would love to have that costs $250,000.

Technically you could buy it but you probably wouldn't because it would wipe you out. You could go around telling people that you can do it, but you don't, because there is an opportunity cost.

In truth and in fact the only people who buy cars like that are people who have far more money than the $250,000 to buy the car. It is ludicrous to say you have $250,000 and can buy it any time you want when you KNOW even though you can technically pay for the car, really can't afford it if you are making sound financial decisions.

The point is that they could do whatever they want in regards to the current year's cap. The issue is that they don't sign or not sign free agents based on this year's cap. They do it based on a long term plan.

People sometimes post that "they can do whatever they want" in response to people that constantly post about issues like June 1st cuts an how they affect this year's cap.

The long term cap issues become complicated and generally very difficult for fans/media to analyze. It's really difficult to know what they can afford when you consider the long term cap implications.

It would be much easier if people could realize that as long they are not tight against the cap, that June 1st cuts, dead-money, etc. is really not important.

For current players, their base salary is the important number. That number hits the cap at some point if the player stays and that number is zero if the player is gone (assuming the base is not guaranteed).

For free agents, it's two numbers. The average salary is important for players that meet expectations and the guaranteed money is important for players that don't meet expectations.

 

[Nightman]

I think it is super ironic that you refer to yourself as a "capologist" and yet you think that the cap is irrelevant. Ha Ha Ha Ha. That's irony for you!!!! Brilliant!

Here is a homework assignment....look up these words

Literal
Hyperbole
Ironic
Irrelevant
Obtuse
Strawman

 

[Stash]

You can't reason with him or use facts to persuade him, because he isn't willing to listen to you with any sort of open mind. It is absolutely incredulous to argue that the cap is irrelevant and then bring up the cost of the player relative to the cap. He is like arguing with a post. Save your breath.

I got lucky. I'll never have to hear his nonsense again.

 

[gimmesix]

I agree with everything you have said. We have some degree of fluidity when it comes to the cap. I acknowledge that. But the contracts of the upcoming guys like Martin and Collins must be considered going forward too. The cap is a hard cap. It can be manipulated to some degree to shift monies from one year to the other, but it cannot be exceeded. So every contract has to be factored in. The same people who are saying that the cap is irrelevant fail to acknowledge the hard cap.

We could, within reason sign a few free agents, but this doesn't look like the year to do that (other than our own) because here isn't that much available that we would want for the price, and quite frankly if we went very deep into the free agency pool it would put us back behind the salary cap 8 ball again, and the team appears to be trying to avoid that.

I think Martin is already accounted for by the restructures built into Frederick's contract, just like Collins will be accounted for by the inevitable restructure of Martin's contract. Who we want to sign beyond that will depend on how much restructuring we want to do. Restructuring Tyron Smith again will possibly create enough room to bring back our own free agents. Restructuring Dez will probably create enough room to sign outside FAs. (Whether Frederick's restructure alone will be enough for the first year of Martin's contract likely depends on what we do with Romo. It also might not work exactly like I've laid out above, but the plan is similar to that based on how Dallas has been doing business.)

The cap comes into play that once you start using the restructures, you essentially have to continue doing them each year or pay the piper. Getting Romo off the books will put Dallas is good shape to catch some of those contracts up next year ... unless the team sees the need to go big in FA or restructures Prescott, in which case, it will continue pushing money back on these long-term contracts.

The idea is that eventually you're going to have to pay for all the restructuring, but if you set the contracts up right, you can afford to do that and not have to destroy the integrity of the team. In fact, if you do it right, restructuring will allow you to keep absorbing those cap hits and essentially push them down the line. It's like using one credit card to pay off another ... as long as no one comes along and says you can't have another credit card, you can keep doing it perpetually.

 

[Verdict]

It is not a hard cap......you just have never heard of 'cash over cap' spending or don't understand it

Now you are really stepping in it. The NFL is a hard cap. If you don't meet the cap they start cutting your players for you until you are under the cap. It doesn't get any harder than that. It is flexible only in that you can shift it from one year to the other, but it all eventually falls into your cap.

 

[Verdict]

The point is that they could do whatever they want in regards to the current year's cap. The issue is that they don't sign or not sign free agents based on this year's cap. They do it based on a long term plan.

People sometimes post that "they can do whatever they want" in response to people that constantly post about issues like June 1st cuts an how they affect this year's cap.

The long term cap issues become complicated and generally very difficult for fans/media to analyze. It's really difficult to know what they can afford when you consider the long term cap implications.

It would be much easier if people could realize that as long they are not tight against the cap, that June 1st cuts, dead-money, etc. is really not important.

For current players, their base salary is the important number. That number hits the cap at some point if the player stays and that number is zero if the player is gone (assuming the base is not guaranteed).

For free agents, it's two numbers. The average salary is important for players that meet expectations and the guaranteed money is important for players that don't meet expectations.

I understand all of that. The accounting gets technical, but the overall concept isn't all that difficult to understand. I have never said, or implied anything contrary to anything contained in your post. The biggest thing relative to the cap is that its management isn't a one year thing. You have to look at it from a macro and a micro perspective.

You and I see eye to eye on this issue. It is possible that some of the people who seem to want to argue with me about it see it the same way as you have explained it here, but I doubt it. I think these guys, specifically including bkight13 really believe the cap is irrelevant. Whatever, there is no point in discussing an issue with someone who sticks their fingers in their ears when you talk to them. It is a waste of breath.

 

[Verdict]

I got lucky. I'll never have to hear his nonsense again.

Me either. LOL.

 

[Stash]

Me either. LOL.

Welcome to 'the Club'!

 

[Verdict]

I think Martin is already accounted for by the restructures built into Frederick's contract, just like Collins will be accounted for by the inevitable restructure of Martin's contract. Who we want to sign beyond that will depend on how much restructuring we want to do. Restructuring Tyron Smith again will possibly create enough room to bring back our own free agents. Restructuring Dez will probably create enough room to sign outside FAs. (Whether Frederick's restructure alone will be enough for the first year of Martin's contract likely depends on what we do with Romo. It also might not work exactly like I've laid out above, but the plan is similar to that based on how Dallas has been doing business.)

The cap comes into play that once you start using the restructures, you essentially have to continue doing them each year or pay the piper. Getting Romo off the books will put Dallas is good shape to catch some of those contracts up next year ... unless the team sees the need to go big in FA or restructures Prescott, in which case, it will continue pushing money back on these long-term contracts.

The idea is that eventually you're going to have to pay for all the restructuring, but if you set the contracts up right, you can afford to do that and not have to destroy the integrity of the team. In fact, if you do it right, restructuring will allow you to keep absorbing those cap hits and essentially push them down the line. It's like using one credit card to pay off another ... as long as no one comes along and says you can't have another credit card, you can keep doing it perpetually.

That's mostly true. There is more than one way to manipulate the cap. Butt eventually all of the real money paid actually hits the cap. You can structure it to hit when you want it to, but cannot avoid the hit for money actually paid.

 

[gimmesix]

That's mostly true. There is more than one way to manipulate the cap. Butt eventually all of the real money paid actually hits the cap. You can structure it to hit when you want it to, but cannot avoid the hit for money actually paid.

Yes, but it's the non-guaranteed money some fans sometimes don't understand. They look at how much the team has accounted for on the cap and even at dead cap hits, but don't realize that a lot of the money is not guaranteed.

For example. Jason Witten has a cap hit of $12,262,000 this year, but if for some reason the team had to cut him, it would actually save $7.5 million even though it takes a dead cap hit of nearly $5 million. This is all about how the contract is structured. The money actually paid will hit, but the money theoretically owed opens up cap space.

This is why players really only worry about the guaranteed money and why teams want those non-guaranteed base salary numbers to be higher than the guaranteed numbers. It's all a shell game that Dallas has learned to play well, which is why I don't worry about the cap.

 

[Verdict]

Welcome to 'the Club'!

 

[Verdict]

Yes, but it's the non-guaranteed money some fans sometimes don't understand. They look at how much the team has accounted for on the cap and even at dead cap hits, but don't realize that a lot of the money is not guaranteed.

For example. Jason Witten has a cap hit of $12,262,000 this year, but if for some reason the team had to cut him, it would actually save $7.5 million even though it takes a dead cap hit of nearly $5 million. This is all about how the contract is structured. The money actually paid will hit, but the money theoretically owed opens up cap space.

This is why players really only worry about the guaranteed money and why teams want those non-guaranteed base salary numbers to be higher than the guaranteed numbers. It's all a shell game that Dallas has learned to play well, which is why I don't worry about the cap.

Everything you have said is absolutely correct, and I have no issue with any of it. Witten is a great example to bring up actually. His cap number is too high, but it is really irrelevant in deciding what you want to do with him this year, as the base salary is what you are really paying him to play this year. Where it is relevant is to when the cap hit is realized. As long as he plays for Dallas you can kick the can on down the road, at least to some degree, but once he is no longer playing the most you can spread the cap hit is two years depending on when the cut is made.

 

[gimmesix]

Everything you have said is absolutely correct, and I have no issue with any of it. Witten is a great example to bring up actually. His cap number is too high, but it is really irrelevant in deciding what you want to do with him this year, as the base salary is what you are really paying him to play this year. Where it is relevant is to when the cap hit is realized. As long as he plays for Dallas you can kick the can on down the road, at least to some degree, but once he is no longer playing the most you can spread the cap hit is two years depending on when the cut is made.

There is no doubt that care has to be used in the construction of contracts, who you extend, how long, etc. There are ways it could extend Witten, for example, and open up $3-plus million this year, but I'm not sure it would be the right thing to do because Witten could retire at any time.

Let's say the Cowboys converted $6 million of his $7.4 million base to bonus and extended him for another year. Dallas gets $3 million in cap savings this year, but has to eat $3 million next year if he resigns. To me, this would be a last resort move because of the likelihood of eating that $3 million (although whatever base he would agree to would be removed from the cap). Taking that dead cap hit can be done because of other contracts being built to absorb it, but I don't see much benefit in it at this point. If the Cowboys were to restructure Witten's deal, it's in their best interest to find a way to bring down his base without adding much guaranteed money, which would be more of a pay cut than better deal for Witten.

I would hope no one is saying Dallas doesn't have to be smart about those things, but there's a difference in having to be smart and being cap-strapped. The Cowboys are over the cap at this point, but they are nowhere close to being cap-strapped because of all the moving parts.

I will say that if Dallas did decide to extend Witten, it would be because the team would rather have that cap space this year and feels it is equipped to absorb the cap hit next year. Let's say it comes down to getting a FA corner the team wants and the team has used its other restructures. If moving some of Witten's salary makes that possible, I could see the team doing that knowing that the possible dead cap hit next year could be swallowed by another restructure for Frederick, for example.

 

[Nightman]

There is no doubt that care has to be used in the construction of contracts, who you extend, how long, etc. There are ways it could extend Witten, for example, and open up $3-plus million this year, but I'm not sure it would be the right thing to do because Witten could retire at any time.

Let's say the Cowboys converted $6 million of his $7.4 million base to bonus and extended him for another year. Dallas gets $3 million in cap savings this year, but has to eat $3 million next year if he resigns. To me, this would be a last resort move because of the likelihood of eating that $3 million (although whatever base he would agree to would be removed from the cap). Taking that dead cap hit can be done because of other contracts being built to absorb it, but I don't see much benefit in it at this point. If the Cowboys were to restructure Witten's deal, it's in their best interest to find a way to bring down his base without adding much guaranteed money, which would be more of a pay cut than better deal for Witten.

I would hope no one is saying Dallas doesn't have to be smart about those things, but there's a difference in having to be smart and being cap-strapped. The Cowboys are over the cap at this point, but they are nowhere close to being cap-strapped because of all the moving parts.

I will say that if Dallas did decide to extend Witten, it would be because the team would rather have that cap space this year and feels it is equipped to absorb the cap hit next year. Let's say it comes down to getting a FA corner the team wants and the team has used its other restructures. If moving some of Witten's salary makes that possible, I could see the team doing that knowing that the possible dead cap hit next year could be swallowed by another restructure for Frederick, for example.

I would tell Witten he has to take at least a 50% pay cut to 3.7m....no extension or restructure

I would keep him after that for 2.5m a year for as long as he wanted to keep playing

 

[fairviewfarmer]

For the lack of recent big free agent acquisitions, how is it that we still have no money to spend in free agency? Is it just the Romo, T smith, and Dez contracts? Anyone know?

Yes.

 

[gimmesix]

I would tell Witten he has to take at least a 50% pay cut to 3.7m....no extension or restructure

I would keep him after that for 2.5m a year for as long as he wanted to keep playing

I don't think I'd do a thing with him. Let him finish out the last year of his deal and see if he still wants to play. If he does, then we can start talking reduced rates.

There are other contracts of younger players we can touch if we want to create cap room.