Would you bring DLaw back for 2024?

[J-man]

This is a debate, really?

 

[glimmerman]

He got a good contract but didn’t like him holding out shoulder surgery to get it. But with Parsons here D-Law is having a good year. Lets see what he wants for money.. We have other contracts to get.

 

[1942willys]

Now I for one always spit on PFF so called grades and he was over paid for a very long time but no longer and he is having a very good season so the question is kind of stupid

 

[DuncanIso]

No, he's not a free agent but I doubt he will play 2024 w/o new G'teed money. For me, yes w/o a doubt if he's willing to play for the $10M range. He is still a valuable piece of this D even w/o the sexy stats.




This is his contract........he restructured in 2022 ( $40M 30m G'teed) In other words, this is his final year of G'teed money.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/demarcus-lawrence-14443/

I think he stays.

His 2024 dead cap is $20.8 million.

It's close.

 

[LovinItAll]

Hasn't the Mahomes' contract been restructured to benefit the Chiefs salary cap? The team initiated, as was always the plan, the restructures.

Dak has accumulated generational wealth already. He has earned $162 million in NFL salary. Cut that in half for taxes, agents,... and that is plenty to care for his family for years to come. That doesn't even include anything he has made with endorsement deals. They guy is set right now and his next contract will be huge.

$80MM isn’t generational wealth. Yes, it’s enough money for him to do whatever he wants for the rest of his life, made certain his kids have the best, etc. It’s not enough for his great grandchildren to be able to say the same necessarily. My grandfather had the equivalent of that in 1960. 4 kids and 12 grandchildren later and most of the grandkids aren’t millionaires, and it isn’t because we didn’t inherit nice tidy piles, but we’re didn’t get a million each.

The numbers I quoted for Maines Mahomes are accurate. Yes, he’s been restructured, but he’s also gotten a ‘raise’.

 

[TwentyOne]

No, never.

But his dead money hit is too high to let him go.

 

[JayFord]

yes

i mean why are we so focused on splash plays?

Dlaw is a set up guy on defense...he sets containment, he stalemates his guy if needed he takes on a double team to get the other guys in one on ones and he pressures the qb

whats the issue?

 

[Whiskey Cowboy]

Imagine our run defense without him. Keeping him around needs to be a priority.

 

[ATXSRT]

We bring him back, and Sam Williams year 3 + a 2nd or 3rd draft pick at DE should be good to go. Probably bring back Fowler too.

 

[Cmac]

I don't get the question? He's having a great year and he's under contract.......you bring him back.

agree.....too much Fantasy Football mindset going on.

 

[krs1bro]

Always been a huge fan of D law. Yes bring this man back!

 

[AbeBeta]

No, he's not a free agent but I doubt he will play 2024 w/o new G'teed money. For me, yes w/o a doubt if he's willing to play for the $10M range. He is still a valuable piece of this D even w/o the sexy stats.




This is his contract........he restructured in 2022 ( $40M 30m G'teed) In other words, this is his final year of G'teed money.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/demarcus-lawrence-14443/

Why on earth would he not play without guaranteed money. He'll be 32 next season with a decent salary 10 mill. That 10 mill is all but guaranteed -- he'd certainly make the team. After that, we'd be on the hook for the whole 10mill.

The way he has lead recently -- both with his words and his play -- is absolutely what you want to keep around.

 

[joseephuss]

$80MM isn’t generational wealth. Yes, it’s enough money for him to do whatever he wants for the rest of his life, made certain his kids have the best, etc. It’s not enough for his great grandchildren to be able to say the same necessarily. My grandfather had the equivalent of that in 1960. 4 kids and 12 grandchildren later and most of the grandkids aren’t millionaires, and it isn’t because we didn’t inherit nice tidy piles, but we’re didn’t get a million each.

The numbers I quoted for Maines Mahomes are accurate. Yes, he’s been restructured, but he’s also gotten a ‘raise’.

I didn't question the accuracy of the numbers you provided about Mahomes contract. Just stating that the Chiefs are the ones that initiated the contract restructures. Everyone predicted that would be the outcome when he signed his deal. It wasn't as if Mahomes decided he needed to rework his deal.

I disagree that $80 million isn't generational wealth and he may actually have more depending on what he got in endorsements and his assets. He invests that money wisely now and in 20 to 25 years when he has grandkids, there will be even a lot more money to spread around. He is in a good spot for himself and his family and of course he is still going to get paid even more the next contract.

 

[Tussinman]

I disagree that $80 million isn't generational wealth and he may actually have more depending on what he got in endorsements and his assets. He invests that money wisely now and in 20 to 25 years when he has grandkids, there will be even a lot more money to spread around. He is in a good spot for himself and his family and of course he is still going to get paid even more the next contract.

Yeah 80 million post tax (net) is insane. If he hypothetically gave each of his kids 10 million each they would essentially have a doctor's salary for the rest of their lives on just interest alone.......

That type of wealth is 100% getting passed down 3 or 4 generations

 

[Flamma]

2. I'm so tired of players threatening to/actually holding out while they have a contract in place (not that Tank has done this). When it happens, it means that, aside from the first years of the deal, the contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. They sign a deal. A deal is a deal. I'd be okay with a league-wide policy that any player under contract who refuses to play sits out a year, can't play for another team, and the money they would've made is returned to their team's cap. As for the circumstances where the player suddenly sustains phantom injuries, let the NFLPA assemble a team of doctors that essentially act as arbitrators of the player's fitness. If they say he's gtg and he still claims a fitness-related issue, he doesn't get paid.

I'm certainly no expert on hold outs, but doesn't he already not get paid if he refuses to play?

 

[Jay]

Two comments:

1. Of course Tank plays for Dallas next year.

2. I'm so tired of players threatening to/actually holding out while they have a contract in place (not that Tank has done this). When it happens, it means that, aside from the first years of the deal, the contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. They sign a deal. A deal is a deal. I'd be okay with a league-wide policy that any player under contract who refuses to play sits out a year, can't play for another team, and the money they would've made is returned to their team's cap. As for the circumstances where the player suddenly sustains phantom injuries, let the NFLPA assemble a team of doctors that essentially act as arbitrators of the player's fitness. If they say he's gtg and he still claims a fitness-related issue, he doesn't get paid.

The only players that ever take this position have already made a bunch of money. We never see a backup or some marginal player threatening to sit out unless they male more money.

Mahomes signed a 10 year deal in 2020 worth $450MM. They've already restructured it and given him more money. I'm not saying he isn't worth it, but he inked the deal and should be playing for an average of $45MM for 10 years. Instead, the restructured deal has him potentially making $218MM for 2023-2026, or $54MM/yr., $9MM/yr (or $36MM) more than he otherwise would've made.

I don't begrudge players making bank. Unless he gets injured, Dak will probably sign the richest QB deal in history next year. He has a no-tag clause, so the Cowboys have to get a deal done with him. Look for it to be in the 4 year, $60MM per range. Would I like to see Dak take a discount to ensure that we have money left for other players? Of course. Do I expect him to do that? Heck no. If he inks a 4 year deal, I think he does take a discount at age 35, not because of 'declining age' (probably not a thing at 35 for QBs now), but he will have already made generational money, something he hasn't made yet.

And for all the people who point to Brady and his team-friendly deals during the dynasty, you'll never convince me that Kraft didn't take care of Brady in ways that will never be discovered. Yeah, he had an uber rich wife, but idc, I think he was getting paid.

I hate the salary cap. Yes, it makes more teams relevant, but I'm a Cowboy fan, so I only care about how Jerry would spend his tail off to buy the best team in the NFL.

The TB12 company was literally in the building and the Patriots paid them. It’s clear as day.

 

[conner01]

I don't get the question? He's having a great year and he's under contract.......you bring him back.

he’s not going anywhere. Armstrong is but Fowler will probably be back and we will draft someone and play Sam more

 

[conner01]

Yes, he would but it's not guaranteed......I'm 100% certain he will ask for his release or refuse to report w/o a restructuring.

Why do you think that?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

he’s not going anywhere. Armstrong is but Fowler will probably be back and we will draft someone and play Sam more

Time to unleash Sam. Armstrong is underrated but replaceable.

 

[LovinItAll]

I'm certainly no expert on hold outs, but doesn't he already not get paid if he refuses to play?

I think ‘refusing’ can be cloaked in ‘My ankle is acting up’ or a million other things, but yes, if they hold out with, ‘No cheddar, no play’, they don’t get paid or they get fined a game check or whatever.