Why does Dallas not have a lot of cap space?

[Nightman]

lol Never fails. Insults start flying when someone gets backed down.

It's one thing to support restructuring. Knowing you are taking a risk.

You don't even acknowledge the risk, or somehow the risk isn't even a risk, that it's actually a good thing.

It's called Dead Money. Not Bonus Money.

Wasn't backed down

You guys are just incapable of learning....keep believing the Earth is flat

There is no risk to restructures........YOU NEVER PAY BACK MORE THAN YOU TAKE......only less years later

 

[Captain43Crash]

Romo dead money is huge.

Normally you would see restructures of big contracts but that pushes cap back and/or adds years to the deal. You do not want to restructure players who you may not want to keep much longer so guys like Dez (production dip) and Tyron (injuries) who would normally have the contracts restructured to gain cap room will not be restructured. Crawford is just not good and has a huge contract.

Franchising Lawrence instead of signing him longterm gives him a large cap number for this year.

Franchising Lawrence this year also gives him a large CAP # next year if he plays the way we all hope he does. I think the risk reward is worth it with Tank. Sign him to a long term deal now, so we lower his Cap # this year and in the future. There is always the injury risk, but I think Tank will be a top DE for many years. I’m not worried about any more suspensions.

 

[ksg811]

lol Never fails. Insults start flying when someone gets backed down.

It's one thing to support restructuring. Knowing you are taking a risk.

You don't even acknowledge the risk, or somehow the risk isn't even a risk, that it's actually a good thing.

It's called Dead Money. Not Bonus Money.

The Eagles right now are showing how it can work. They’re defending Super Bowl championships and have further improved their team by restructuring contracts and eating dead money for savings, because the savings helped them win a SB and then spend more to remain odds on favorites.

The Eagles have $8 million in dead money this with a SB ring and an even better team by restructuring key cogs and replacing duds, regardless of dead money. The Cowboys have $14 million in dead money and are twiddling their thumbs sitting on $40 million in cap savings going thrift shopping.

 

[BlindFaith]

Wasn't backed down

You guys are just incapable of learning....keep believing the Earth is flat

There is no risk to restructures........YOU NEVER PAY BACK MORE THAN YOU TAKE......only less years later

I never once said you pay back more. But risking paying for a player not on the roster seems to be a point that eludes you.

 

[BlindFaith]

The Eagles right now are showing how it can work. They’re defending Super Bowl championships and have further improved their team by restructuring contracts and eating dead money for savings, because the savings helped them win a SB and then spend more to remain odds on favorites.

The Eagles have $8 million in dead money this with a SB ring and an even better team by restructuring key cogs and replacing duds, regardless of dead money. The Cowboys have $14 million in dead money and are twiddling their thumbs sitting on $40 million in cap savings going thrift shopping.

We shall see. Names don't play games.

So much hype with who did what. Who's going to be good or not. And we haven't even had the draft yet.

 

[Nightman]

I never once said you pay back more. But risking paying for a player not on the roster seems to be a point that eludes you.

That is how debt works

You still pay for college years after you stop going
You pay for your House for decades after it is built
You pay for meals you already ate...... vacations you already took

Whether the player is on the team or not is irrelevant to how much money was saved

You just can't deal with the optics of an account ledger that says Dead Money......it is just an IOU for savings already enjoyed when the cap was smaller and impact was bigger

NO RISK

If the bill/loan is called in early it is offset by the loss of a large base salary for several years

The Dolphins are better cap wise this year and in the future taking a 22m Dead Money cap hit for Suh this year..... they instantly save 4m this year and 27m next year and 24m the following year

 

[BlindFaith]

That is how debt works

You still pay for college years after you stop going
You pay for your House for decades after it is built
You pay for meals you already ate...... vacations you already took

Whether the player is on the team or not is irrelevant to how much money was saved

You just can't deal with the optics of an account ledger that says Dead Money......it is just an IOU for savings already enjoyed when the cap was smaller and impact was bigger

NO RISK

If the bill/loan is called in early it is offset by the loss of a large base salary for several years

The Dolphins are better cap wise this year and in the future taking a 22m Dead Money cap hit for Suh this year..... they instantly save 4m this year and 27m next year and 24m the following year

OK Capologist. You're not worth my time to debate this.

 

[Nightman]

OK Capologist. You're not worth my time to debate this.

This was from yesterday BTW

First of all, I'm not a "self-proclaimed" anything. One of the mods created that title, not me.

Secondly, just because a hypothetical situation has never happened in practice doesn't mean prove or disprove anything. Every person in my neighborhood would save money by paying off their mortgage today. But none of them have done that, so it must not be true, right? Of course not.

As Nightman already mentioned, that argument is nothing but a strawman. The fact remains that cap-wise, there is absolutely no downside to restructuring a contract that is going to be paid either way. How many times it happens or doesn't happen in practice is completely irrelevant.

He knows more about this stuff than all of us combined

 

[BlindFaith]

This was from yesterday BTW



He knows more about this stuff than all of us combined

Figuring out the cap is not rocket science. And I debated him and others on this very topic years ago.

I'm just glad Stephen looked at it like most of the NFL does now.

 

[Nightman]

Figuring out the cap is not rocket science. And I debated him and others on this very topic years ago.

I'm just glad Stephen looked at it like most of the NFL does now.

Flat Earth Society

 

[BlindFaith]

This was from yesterday BTW



He knows more about this stuff than all of us combined

And again, I'm not arguing that restructuring for certain players doesn't make sense. Fredrick is a good example. Tyron would not be.

What you are failing to conceptualize is if the player is no longer on the team. Or if he just decides to stop playing hard. They get more guaranteed money.

And stop with these idiotic examples of the CONSUMERS. This is nothing like getting a loan. Look at it from the banks perspective. You know, the ones lending the money.

Football is a high risk sport. Injuries can cut players careers short.

If you keep pushing money further and further out and that player can no longer play, you not only are still paying for a player not on the roster, but you have to pay for his replacement.

Sure, if the player never gets hurt and continues to play at the level that warrented the contract, you're fine.

But let's say he just starts coasting. You can't cut him because you eat his cap number.

We had been in the business of just pushing and pushing for whatever player we could. And we started racking up huge dead money dollars.

We are much more diligent now. Romo being the exception.

 

[BlindFaith]

Flat Earth Society

Tell that to the Patriots. And 3 quarters of the NFL, Capologist.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

How are we still paying for Romo? He retired. It's bad enough that we didn't get anything for losing an elite QB. But now we're stuck paying for him too. Eagles flip Sam Bradford for a Super Bowl. We flip Romo for more mediocrity.

 

[Nightman]

And again, I'm not arguing that restructuring for certain players doesn't make sense. Fredrick is a good example. Tyron would not be.

What you are failing to conceptualize is if the player is no longer on the team. Or if he just decides to stop playing hard. They get more guaranteed money.

And stop with these idiotic examples of the CONSUMERS. This is nothing like getting a loan. Look at it from the banks perspective. You know, the ones lending the money.

Football is a high risk sport. Injuries can cut players careers short.

If you keep pushing money further and further out and that player can no longer play, you not only are still paying for a player not on the roster, but you have to pay for his replacement.

Sure, if the player never gets hurt and continues to play at the level that warrented the contract, you're fine.

But let's say he just starts coasting. You can't cut him because you eat his cap number.

We had been in the business of just pushing and pushing for whatever player we could. And we started racking up huge dead money dollars.

We are much more diligent now. Romo being the exception.

Flat wrong...... no other way to put it....

you can always cut someone...... if they have guaranteed money then trade them like PHI did with DMurray and BMaxwell

 

[Nightman]

Tell that to the Patriots. And 3 quarters of the NFL, Capologist.

Cap Space Denier

 

[BlindFaith]

Flat wrong...... no other way to put it....

you can always cut someone...... if they have guaranteed money then trade them like PHI did with DMurray and BMaxwell

You do understand that the team is still responsible for all guaranteed money, right Capologist?

 

[BlindFaith]

Cap Space Denier

You're the self proclaimed Capologist here. I don't have any fancy smancy titles.

You can call me Dude...

 

[Bardley1985]

How are we still paying for Romo? He retired. It's bad enough that we didn't get anything for losing an elite QB. But now we're stuck paying for him too. Eagles flip Sam Bradford for a Super Bowl. We flip Romo for more mediocrity.

When we restructured his contracts....

 

[BlindFaith]

How are we still paying for Romo? He retired. It's bad enough that we didn't get anything for losing an elite QB. But now we're stuck paying for him too. Eagles flip Sam Bradford for a Super Bowl. We flip Romo for more mediocrity.

Because we kept restructuring his contract and kicking the can.

But the local Capologist insists this is a good thing. And we actually saved money. So don't let silly things like dead money worry you.

 

[Nightman]

You do understand that the team is still responsible for all guaranteed money, right Capologist?

Not if they trade them Dude