Why does Dallas not have a lot of cap space?

[LACowboysFan1]

T. Will is the second receiver. As such, he's not going to have sparkling stats unless he's in a high-volume passing offense, which he hasn't been most of his time here.
We all remember the glory years of the early 90's, and our second receiver Alvin Harper. But look at the average for both:

Catches TDs Yards Average per catch
Harper 31 4.5 621 19.7
Williams 46 4.0 671 14.6

Harper was faster, but even so, and with Emmitt and Irvin for defenses to worry about, he didn't have the huge numbers, but the team went to 2 SBs and an NFC championship game in his time at Dallas.

We expect too much from Williams, imho, and I think his lack of production, IF that is a concern, is more likely due to how the offense is run more than his ability. Could Dallas do better? Probably, but at this point I think a better no. 1 receiver is much more a need than replacing the no. 2 receiver..

 

[LACowboysFan1]

not worth their contract which is the reason why we have to release players instead of trading them for something instead of releasing them for nothing.

Scandrick is the 43rd highest paid cornerback for 2018, according to Sportrac. You can't get experienced corners for pocket change. He makes less than the household name cornerbacks huh Nevin Lawson, Nickell Coleman, Jamar Taylor and Buster Skrine. I would agree he should be traded, because his cost is much more than Awuzie, Lewis and B. Jones, and the young guys should play. But for what he gives you and for what he can do, he's not overpaid...

 

[Cowboysfan917]

In my opinion, the cap has never been right since at least 2006. Once Romo gave the team a spark, Jerry tried to keep breathing on it.

Barber had a good year;big contract. Ken Hamlin had a good year; another big contract... this went on for a little while and those players flamed out.

Then we gave up a first for Roy Williams back in 2008...
The entire 2009 draft class was a flop...

We gave big contracts to several players who hadn’t done enough to earn them, we held onto those players too long, paid them too much and then failed to replace them via the draft, then we changed our defense to a 4-3 and had to start all over.

So we had to sign players to replace the players we failed to replace cheaply through the draft and also had to replace the 3-4 players we had with low level free agents. Then the constant restructures of big contracts just to field a team every year...

The front office really has mishandled some rosters with potential over the last decade.

We have had one top 5 defense since 2006. I think that says a lot.

 

[BlindFaith]

His big contract was $108 million for 6 years, or $18 million a year.

Drew Brees just signed a two year deal for $50 million, or $25 million a year. In 2015, Philip Rivers signed a four-year, $83.25 million contract, which is $20.81 million.

Had Romo not had to retire, his $18 million a year wouldn't have been excessive. Nobody knew in 2013 he'd have more collarbone injuries and back injuries, to complain about his cap hit now is silly, there's always a risk in long term deals. This time it didn't work out...

Continuing to restructure his deal was an issue though.

 

[Nightman]

In my opinion, the cap has never been right since at least 2006. Once Romo gave the team a spark, Jerry tried to keep breathing on it.

Barber had a good year;big contract. Ken Hamlin had a good year; another big contract... this went on for a little while and those players flamed out.

Then we gave up a first for Roy Williams back in 2008...
The entire 2009 draft class was a flop...

We gave big contracts to several players who hadn’t done enough to earn them, we held onto those players too long, paid them too much and then failed to replace them via the draft, then we changed our defense to a 4-3 and had to start all over.

So we had to sign players to replace the players we failed to replace cheaply through the draft and also had to replace the 3-4 players we had with low level free agents.

The front office really has mishandled some rosters with potential over the last decade.

I just don't think the cap connects like that

It is reset and rises every year

Stuff that happened in 2013 has no bearing today so stuff from 2006 is not even close to relevant
I have seen people blame supposed cap problems last year on Troy Aikman

And I have yet to hear from a person that tells me specifically what players we have ever lost to lack of cap space

 

[Nightman]

Continuing to restructure his deal was an issue though.

How was it an issue?
The team saved 34m the last 2 years with Romo's sudden retirement

 

[Cowboysfan917]

I just don't think the cap connects like that

It is reset and rises every year

Stuff that happened in 2013 has no bearing today so stuff from 2006 is not even close to relevant
I have seen people blame supposed cap problems last year on Troy Aikman

And I have yet to hear from a person that tells me specifically what players we have ever lost to lack of cap space

I don’t think it’s any different than running a business. You still lose the money and it affects what you’re able to do the next year. Money from 2006 affected 2007, sometimes 2008 which affected 2009 which affected 2010. Every little bit adds up.

If my boss gave me $100 and I blow 50 of it and then he gives me $150 the next day, it would’ve been $250 had I not blown that $50. I could’ve bought something nicer with $250 than I could have for $200. I think that’s how the cap connects. Kind of like turning the light off every time you leave a room.

 

[BlindFaith]

How was it an issue?
The team saved 34m the last 2 years with Romo's sudden retirement

And we paid 6 mill last year, just as part of the restructure bonus.
And will pay 9 mill this year.

Two years the player isn't even on the team and yet we are paying 15 million. And the only reason we "saved" 34 million is because we didn't have to replace Romo with another market value QB. We got Dak. So we didn't save money, we basically just got a QB for free.

 

[Cowboysheelsreds053]

They got rid of Wade Wilson and other coaches this year, brought in other successful position coaches, again, at least they're trying to do things differently.

Keep the faith brother!

LLLOOLLL, will do but it is Very Hard my friend!

 

[Nightman]

And we paid 6 mill last year, just as part of the restructure bonus.
And will pay 9 mill this year.

Two years the player isn't even on the team and yet we are paying 15 million. And the only reason we "saved" 34 million is because we didn't have to replace Romo with another market value QB. We got Dak. So we didn't save money, we basically just got a QB for free.

No we actually saved 14m last year on Romo and rolled over 8m

So the 8.9m Dead Money hit this year is wiped away....just like that

We actually and literally saved over 34m in cap space and cash with Romo's sudden worst case scenario retirement

 

[BlindFaith]

No we actually saved 14m last year on Romo and rolled over 8m

So the 8.9m Dead Money hit this year is wiped away....just like that

We actually and literally saved over 34m in cap space and cash with Romo's sudden worst case scenario retirement

You don't save anything when you pay for a player who isn't on the team. How would that "savings" look if we had to bring in a FA QB and pay him the same or even more? How would you feel about them savings? But we didn't. We got a QB for free.

 

[Nightman]

I don’t think it’s any different than running a business. You still lose the money and it affects what you’re able to do the next year. Money from 2006 affected 2007, sometimes 2008 which affected 2009 which affected 2010. Every little bit adds up.

If my boss gave me $100 and I blow 50 of it and then he gives me $150 the next day, it would’ve been $250 had I not blown that $50. I could’ve bought something nicer with $250 than I could have for $200. I think that’s how the cap connects. Kind of like turning the light off every time you leave a room.

Money doesn't have a name on it(besides the dead guy and the Tres Sec)..... it all goes in one pot......mistakes and great money saving draft picks and signings alike

Mistakes from years past are washed away but savings can be carried over

It only takes one year or two of not trying to accumulate 80-100m in cap space that would wipe away any bad contract in the history of the Franchise

DAL just tries to win every year instead of taking 2-4 seasons off like JAX, SF, CLE, BUF, MIN, HOU, TB and others

 

[TheFinisher]

No we actually saved 14m last year on Romo and rolled over 8m

So the 8.9m Dead Money hit this year is wiped away....just like that

We actually and literally saved over 34m in cap space and cash with Romo's sudden worst case scenario retirement

The dead money hit is not wiped away, it's still hitting the cap. You keep regurgitating this angle that our rollover effectively negates the sunken dead money cost of Romo's hit, but the hit is still there.

If that dead money wasn't hitting our cap we'd have an extra 8.9 million in space right now, no matter how you want to spin it.

 

[Nightman]

You don't save anything when you pay for a player who isn't on the team. How would that "savings" look if we had to bring in a FA QB and pay him the same or even more? How would you feel about them savings? But we didn't. We got a QB for free.

That is such a myopic look at the cap

The Dead Money was there whether Tony played or not.......it is a sunk cost..... it was savings from years ago when the cap was lower...... it is a net win.....it is like borrowing $1000 and having to pay back $900 over the next 4 years

Romo didn't play and DAL paid 34m less in cap space then they would have if he played
They would have paid 53m and instead they paid 19m....... that is 34m in savings in any language

 

[Nightman]

The dead money hit is not wiped away, it's still hitting the cap. You keep regurgitating this angle that our rollover effectively negates the sunken dead money cost of Romo's hit, but the hit is still there.

If that dead money wasn't hitting our cap we'd have an extra 8.9 million in space right now, no matter how you want to spin it.

It isn't there .....it is wiped away by the rollover

The rollover only happened because of Romo

 

[Nightman]

If someone offered you a $1000 loan and told you that you only had to pay back $900 and you could do it over the next 4 years would you do it?

If you wouldn't then I would have to question your intelligence

Restructuring works the exact same way....... pay back less years later....... oh yeah and you are guaranteed 10% raises the next 5-8 years

AND

Would you only do it once or would you do it as often as possible for as many years as possible? It is FREE MONEY

 

[garyv]

Millions in dead money for Romo and others. Bad contracts, overpaying marginal players and sticking with players
past the age of 30. Now you have older players like Dez, Witten, and Scandrick sucking money off the cap for
less than optimum play. Until the FO manages the team more like NE, the Cowboys will continue to struggle.

What does NE do different than the Cowboys other than win more ?

 

[BlindFaith]

That is such a myopic look at the cap

The Dead Money was there whether Tony played or not.......it is a sunk cost..... it was savings from years ago when the cap was lower...... it is a net win.....it is like borrowing $1000 and having to pay back $900 over the next 4 years

Romo didn't play and DAL paid 34m less in cap space then they would have if he played
They would have paid 53m and instead they paid 19m....... that is 34m in savings in any language

Yes, that's the point. If he were still here. And then he would ideally still be playing up to what his contract was.

But we rolled the dice, restructured and got burned.

Look at it this way. Players are consumable goods. Every year you need them. There is a fixed cost to those players. You can choose to have more of those players now at the cost of having less later. Or hope the cap goes up. But the bottom line, you have to pay them.

If the players that you pushed money out on either get hurt and retire or simply stop playing at a level comeserat with the amount you paid for them, it hurts your cap situation.

 

[BlindFaith]

What does NE do different than the Cowboys other than win more ?

Hardly any dead money.
Move on from players before they require big paydays.
Have a balanced allocation of salaries across all positions. Meaning not having top paid guys. With the exception of Brady, who actually signed a pretty team friendly deal, and Gronk.
Coaching is pretty evident as well.

 

[Nightman]

Yes, that's the point. If he were still here. And then he would ideally still be playing up to what his contract was.

But we rolled the dice, restructured and got burned.

Look at it this way. Players are consumable goods. Every year you need them. There is a fixed cost to those players. You can choose to have more of those players now at the cost of having less later. Or hope the cap goes up. But the bottom line, you have to pay them.

If the players that you pushed money out on either get hurt and retire or simply stop playing at a level comeserat with the amount you paid for them, it hurts your cap situation.

No one gambled and No one got burned

Dead Money is only the receipt for savings already banked .....you never pay more than what you took and many many times pay a lot less

It is simple math that you simply don't understand