Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Wow- Dallas is cap broke...Like fire sale cap broke.

cowboys cap

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
55 replies to this topic

#1 eagle-mike

eagle-mike

    Backup

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1980

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:16 PM

Currently $20 million over the cap. :roll:

They are restructuring Ware's deal to push money into later years.
And trying to change Ratliff, Scandrick and Connor's contracts.
And trying to extend Romo and lower his $16.8 million cap hit for this year.

I'll sleep well tonight. Thanks ESPN.


http://espn.go.com/d...ctures-contract

#2 Malfeasance

Malfeasance

    Starter

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,974 posts
  • Location:PA
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:33 PM

Dan Connor makes $3 million this year and they want to restructure him. They say if he doesn't agree they are going to cut him.

If we are going to the 3-4 defense, we should sign Anthony Spencer as a free agent. No way they have the money to resign him.

#3 VaBeach_Eagle

VaBeach_Eagle

    EMB Fossil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,202 posts
  • Location:Chesapeake, Va
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1976

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:36 PM

Cap room? They don't need no stinking cap room... they've got Jerry!

#4 gibsonplyer

gibsonplyer

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,198 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:55 PM

Dan Connor makes $3 million this year and they want to restructure him. They say if he doesn't agree they are going to cut him.

If we are going to the 3-4 defense, we should sign Anthony Spencer as a free agent. No way they have the money to resign him.

Meh do not want. He's never been that impressive and he's played opposite Ware his whole career(got a Ray Edwards vibe but not as bad). Rather go younger for SAM.

#5 SinCityEaglesFan

SinCityEaglesFan

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,390 posts
  • Location:Afghanistan
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1979

Posted 28 February 2013 - 02:06 AM

holy ish ...

#6 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 09:58 AM

oh no!!!!!!!!

oh wait, last year this time we were 18 million over, then got hit with a 5 million cap penalty pushing it to $23 million over and still were able to go out and drop $45 mil on the Brandon Carr, sign Dan Conner and a couple other mid level-FA's, and easily sign all of our draft picks, one being a top 10 pick which are sometimes hard to sign.

you guys have been brainwashed by Joe Banner for the past decade. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have some serious room under cap, but the way the NFL is structured...teams can get under the cap fairly easily and get out from under bad contracts (such as Doug Free and Miles Austin's) if they want. This is no biggie.

As far as Spencer, the guy is a good OLB in the 3-4, he has consistantly graded out in the top 3 as an OLB vs the run, I think he was even #1 this year, he just isn't a great pass rusher...just average at best so I certainly would not break the bank or overpay to keep him if I were Dallas or sign him as a FA if I were Philly, but the guy is a good NFL player.

#7 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:15 AM

oh no!!!!!!!!

oh wait, last year this time we were 18 million over, then got hit with a 5 million cap penalty pushing it to $23 million over and still were able to go out and drop $45 mil on the Brandon Carr, sign Dan Conner and a couple other mid level-FA's, and easily sign all of our draft picks, one being a top 10 pick which are sometimes hard to sign.

you guys have been brainwashed by Joe Banner for the past decade. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have some serious room under cap, but the way the NFL is structured...teams can get under the cap fairly easily and get out from under bad contracts (such as Doug Free and Miles Austin's) if they want. This is no biggie.

As far as Spencer, the guy is a good OLB in the 3-4, he has consistantly graded out in the top 3 as an OLB vs the run, I think he was even #1 this year, he just isn't a great pass rusher...just average at best so I certainly would not break the bank or overpay to keep him if I were Dallas or sign him as a FA if I were Philly, but the guy is a good NFL player.


Here's the thing though Stephen, they were only able to do those moves because of the way they structured the contracts:

- Carr's 1st year base salary was on 1.2M but jumps to 14.3M (highest on the team) this year and his total CAP# with bonuses is 16.3M (second only to Romo). Carr is a solid player but not 16.3M worth.

- Conner: 800K base in 12', jumps to 3M, total CAP# 4.35M this year.

- Romo: because of his restructure his 12' base was only 825K, jumps to 11.5M/16.8M total Cap hit (highest on the team) this year.

There has never been a team since the advent of the salary CAP that was able to circumvent the system forever. There are only so many times you can restructure deals and/or backload contracts before you eventually have to pay the piper.

#8 bumpy93

bumpy93

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,817 posts
  • Location:Baltimore,md
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1993

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:16 AM

Dan Connor makes $3 million this year and they want to restructure him. They say if he doesn't agree they are going to cut him.

If we are going to the 3-4 defense, we should sign Anthony Spencer as a free agent. No way they have the money to resign him.


Last year was his best season as a pro.

I still want to kick the Eagles person in charge of the 2007 draft when the Eagles traded a pick to the Cowboys and thats when the 'Boys selected Spencer. That was the 26th pick IIRC or the 27th, and the Eagles didnt have thier 1st pick until the 2nd round and thats when we drafted the legendary Kevin Kolb

#9 bumpy93

bumpy93

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,817 posts
  • Location:Baltimore,md
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1993

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:23 AM

Here's the thing though Stephen, they were only able to do those moves because of the way they structured the contracts:

- Carr's 1st year base salary was on 1.2M but jumps to 14.3M (highest on the team) this year and his total CAP# with bonuses is 16.3M (second only to Romo). Carr is a solid player but not 16.3M worth.

- Conner: 800K base in 12', jumps to 3M, total CAP# 4.35M this year.

- Romo: because of his restructure his 12' base was only 825K, jumps to 11.5M/16.8M total Cap hit (highest on the team) this year.

There has never been a team since the advent of the salary CAP that was able to circumvent the system forever. There are only so many times you can restructure deals and/or backload contracts before you eventually have to pay the piper.


Didnt the Redskins re-do deals every off-season when we thought that they were in cap hell??? It never seemed to hurt them until last year when the broke Godells rule about paying all Signing Bonuses in that year b/c there was no cap that year so they decided to take all bonuses for the upcoming years and used them in the uncapped season. Thats why they were fined the $36mil (or whatever the amount was). Thats how much money they shifted from the upcoming seasons to the uncapped year like I said. The Cowboys did the same thing and were fined just like the 'Skins.

#10 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:51 AM

Here's the thing though Stephen, they were only able to do those moves because of the way they structured the contracts:

- Carr's 1st year base salary was on 1.2M but jumps to 14.3M (highest on the team) this year and his total CAP# with bonuses is 16.3M (second only to Romo). Carr is a solid player but not 16.3M worth.

- Conner: 800K base in 12', jumps to 3M, total CAP# 4.35M this year.

- Romo: because of his restructure his 12' base was only 825K, jumps to 11.5M/16.8M total Cap hit (highest on the team) this year.

There has never been a team since the advent of the salary CAP that was able to circumvent the system forever. There are only so many times you can restructure deals and/or backload contracts before you eventually have to pay the piper.


Right, and Carr's deal is one that they are going to restructure, he is young enough (26) for them to restructure and he won't get paid close to 16 million this year......Dan Conner if he doesn't agree to a huge pay cut, they just release him save 3 million or so this year and have no cap charge going forward. The guy is a backup because of the emergence of Bruce Carter anyway...... Romo is in the last year of his deal, and that is almost always the highest salaried year. They sign him to a contract extension (which needs to be done anyway and they can have him relatively cheap for the next 3 years and greatly reduce that 16 million.



that's the thing, back when teams backloaded contracts and before (and this is where Joe Banner gets credit) teams realized you could restrucure the deals (convert money to signing bonuses) and carry money over from year to year teams would get into trouble more with the cap....now it seems teams have found a way around it.

I'm not saying Dallas is in great shape mind you, just saying that if/when Dallas does not suceed this year it won't be because of the salary cap or lack of money to spend in FA (as that has almost never corolated to wins anyway) it will be because they have simply drafted/coached poorly.

#11 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:07 AM

Right, and Carr's deal is one that they are going to restructure, he is young enough (26) for them to restructure and he won't get paid close to 16 million this year......Dan Conner if he doesn't agree to a huge pay cut, they just release him save 3 million or so this year and have no cap charge going forward. The guy is a backup because of the emergence of Bruce Carter anyway...... Romo is in the last year of his deal, and that is almost always the highest salaried year. They sign him to a contract extension (which needs to be done anyway and they can have him relatively cheap for the next 3 years and greatly reduce that 16 million.



that's the thing, back when teams backloaded contracts and before (and this is where Joe Banner gets credit) teams realized you could restrucure the deals (convert money to signing bonuses) and carry money over from year to year teams would get into trouble more with the cap....now it seems teams have found a way around it.

I'm not saying Dallas is in great shape mind you, just saying that if/when Dallas does not suceed this year it won't be because of the salary cap or lack of money to spend in FA (as that has almost never corolated to wins anyway) it will be because they have simply drafted/coached poorly.


Carr's just base right now (no bonuses included):
13' - 14.3M
14' - 7.5M
15' - 8M
16' - 9.1M
17' - 10M

So how much of his 13' comp can they move to another year without that year's # jumping to 12 - 15M range and even if by some miraculous turn of events they were able to reduce this year's base by 50% (to 7.15M), with his guaranteed bonuses his total CAP for this year would still be 9.15M netting only a 5.15M savings this year. ?

However and more importantly it's also not like a player has to accept the request to restructure, yes a team can cut him if he refuses but if they were to cut Carr the total CAP hit because of the original contract concessions he made (low 1st year base) would be a staggering 22.3M, how would you like to have almost 20% of the available CAP tied up in dead money to a player that's no longer on the team?

#12 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:21 AM

Carr's just base right now (no bonuses included):
13' - 14.3M
14' - 7.5M
15' - 8M
16' - 9.1M
17' - 10M

So how much of his 13' comp can they move to another year without that year's # jumping to 12 - 15M range and even if by some miraculous turn of events they were able to reduce this year's base by 50% (to 7.15M), with his guaranteed bonuses his total CAP for this year would still be 9.15M netting only a 5.15M savings this year. ?

However and more importantly it's also not like a player has to accept the request to restructure, yes a team can cut him if he refuses but if they were to cut Carr the total CAP hit because of the original contract concessions he made (low 1st year base) would be a staggering 22.3M, how would you like to have almost 20% of the available CAP tied up in dead money to a player that's no longer on the team?


It's easy, you convert a good portion of this years salary into a signing bonus, and spread that out over the rest of the contract....say bump 2014, 15 and maybe 16 up a million or so, and you can even backload that a little into 2017, and usually teams add a year or so onto it as well to ease the burden....so they make 2017-2018 pretty big high dollar years, then when you get to 2017-2018 or so you either redo the deal if the guy is playing well, or maybe the caop has increased a good amount by then..... or you cut him, and if you cut him the base slaries you listed are worless, only a pro-rated portion of the signing bonus hit's your books as dead money, and the way the cap rules are set up you can spread that out over 2 season which makes it all the less painful.

And no player ever turns down a restructure because it's not a pay cut at all. Carr got a big signing bonus last year, and then all you get from then until the end of your contract on are game checks every week during the regular season, so if a team comes to you and says instead of getting your $14million in 16 game checks starting in september how bout we just give you a check now for 7 or 8 million dollars and then pay you the remaining 7 million as planned.....why would a player turn that down?

#13 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:28 AM

It's easy, you convert a good portion of this years salary into a signing bonus, and spread that out over the rest of the contract....say bump 2014, 15 and maybe 16 up a million or so, and you can even backload that a little into 2017, and usually teams add a year or so onto it as well to ease the burden....so they make 2017-2018 pretty big high dollar years, then when you get to 2017-2018 or so you either redo the deal if the guy is playing well, or maybe the caop has increased a good amount by then..... or you cut him, and if you cut him the base slaries you listed are worless, only a pro-rated portion of the signing bonus hit's your books as dead money, and the way the cap rules are set up you can spread that out over 2 season which makes it all the less painful.

And no player ever turns down a restructure because it's not a pay cut at all. Carr got a big signing bonus last year, and then all you get from then until the end of your contract on are game checks every week during the regular season, so if a team comes to you and says instead of getting your $14million in 16 game checks starting in september how bout we just give you a check now for 7 or 8 million dollars and then pay you the remaining 7 million as planned.....why would a player turn that down?


What do you consider "a good portion of this year's base to be", 30%, 40%, 50%? How much do you realistically think he's agree too?

Don't know where you're getting the part I bolded but the fact is the dead money CAP hit for cutting Carr would be 22.3M, even spread over 2 years that's 11.1.5M per or roughly 10% of the CAP, so yes "less painful" than all in 1 year but hardly insignificant.

So I guess we'll be able to gauge "how easy" it was when we see the moves they make between now and 4pm on 3/12.

#14 PHeagles36

PHeagles36

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,636 posts
  • Location:CT
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:2000

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:43 AM

oh no!!!!!!!!

oh wait, last year this time we were 18 million over, then got hit with a 5 million cap penalty pushing it to $23 million over and still were able to go out and drop $45 mil on the Brandon Carr, sign Dan Conner and a couple other mid level-FA's, and easily sign all of our draft picks, one being a top 10 pick which are sometimes hard to sign.

you guys have been brainwashed by Joe Banner for the past decade. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have some serious room under cap, but the way the NFL is structured...teams can get under the cap fairly easily and get out from under bad contracts (such as Doug Free and Miles Austin's) if they want. This is no biggie.

As far as Spencer, the guy is a good OLB in the 3-4, he has consistantly graded out in the top 3 as an OLB vs the run, I think he was even #1 this year, he just isn't a great pass rusher...just average at best so I certainly would not break the bank or overpay to keep him if I were Dallas or sign him as a FA if I were Philly, but the guy is a good NFL player.




right, the cap matters for everyone except dallas because they structured last years problem into this years problem. :roll:

just so you know that makes it progressively worse. thats why the entire league tries to stay under it rather than over it.

#15 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:32 PM

What do you consider "a good portion of this year's base to be", 30%, 40%, 50%? How much do you realistically think he's agree too?

Don't know where you're getting the part I bolded but the fact is the dead money CAP hit for cutting Carr would be 22.3M, even spread over 2 years that's 11.1.5M per or roughly 10% of the CAP, so yes "less painful" than all in 1 year but hardly insignificant.

So I guess we'll be able to gauge "how easy" it was when we see the moves they make between now and 4pm on 3/12.


heck, he'd probably agree to 100%, not that Dallas would do it. If you make 70K at your job would it matter to you rather they paid you all at once or installments over the year....most would tke the lump sum and the rest probably would care either way.

Carr got a total of 26 million guaranteed in his contract (5yr deal)...which is basically like 5 million per year when talking about the cap, so if they cut him now after 1 year, they'd owe him 20 million, after next year it would be 15, the year after 10, and so on and so on.

So say right now they take 7 of the 14 mill he is owed this year and turn it into a bonus, and extend him 1 year, His cap # this year is dropped to 7 million freeing up 7 million this year for Dallas.

Then they spread that 7 million bonus over the rest of the contract (from a cap standpoint) (5 more years if they bump it out to 2017 or 18)...which is about 1.6 mill or so.

So then basically his cap # would still be at about 10 million per year for the next 3 season, which is fine for a good CB and then if you want to look at cutting him the equation would be something like this 20mill bonus left over from 1st contract + 7 mill from the rework over 5 season, so it would be like 5.4 million per year left on his contract if/when you ever want to cut him.

Dallas would be unable to cut him for about 3 seasons...which is another reason the players agree to this, because it essentially gives them a few guaranteed years

It would cost

2013 - 27mill to cut him this year, but could be spread out over 2 years, so his cap # this and next year would be 13 mill, not gonna do that
2014- 22Mill to cut him, over 2 years that would be 11mil....not gonna do that
2015- 17 million to cut him.....8.5 over 2 seasons...which would only save you 1.5 over his likely cap #, so really you could cut him this year and save a little money though not enough to make it worth it
2016- 12 million to cut him....6 million over 2 seasns, so now you could cut him and save 4 million per season
2017- 7 million to cut him, 3.5 million over two seasons, savings you easily 6 million per season

#16 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:43 PM

right, the cap matters for everyone except dallas because they structured last years problem into this years problem. :roll:

just so you know that makes it progressively worse. thats why the entire league tries to stay under it rather than over it.


no, it really doesn't matter for anyone per say. I mean sure it matters where you might lose a decent player or two that you wanted to keep, or can't go hog wild like the eagles do in FA, but there are teams they spend far more money and have been in far worse shape than Dallas capwise and you never see them unable to sign draft picks, or unable to keep a blue chip players they want, and what has being able to go out and drop tons of FA like the Eagles or some other team do ever gottent them.

look at the best teams last year, the year before....the year before and name their big FA aquisitions...there aren't many.

like I said if Dallas sucks this year (which is likely) it won't be because of the cap, it will because they have simply drafted poorly and have lousy coaches

#17 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 01:22 PM

heck, he'd probably agree to 100%, not that Dallas would do it. If you make 70K at your job would it matter to you rather they paid you all at once or installments over the year....most would tke the lump sum and the rest probably would care either way.

Carr got a total of 26 million guaranteed in his contract (5yr deal)...which is basically like 5 million per year when talking about the cap, so if they cut him now after 1 year, they'd owe him 20 million, after next year it would be 15, the year after 10, and so on and so on.

So say right now they take 7 of the 14 mill he is owed this year and turn it into a bonus, and extend him 1 year, His cap # this year is dropped to 7 million freeing up 7 million this year for Dallas.

Then they spread that 7 million bonus over the rest of the contract (from a cap standpoint) (5 more years if they bump it out to 2017 or 18)...which is about 1.6 mill or so.

So then basically his cap # would still be at about 10 million per year for the next 3 season, which is fine for a good CB and then if you want to look at cutting him the equation would be something like this 20mill bonus left over from 1st contract + 7 mill from the rework over 5 season, so it would be like 5.4 million per year left on his contract if/when you ever want to cut him.

Dallas would be unable to cut him for about 3 seasons...which is another reason the players agree to this, because it essentially gives them a few guaranteed years

It would cost

2013 - 27mill to cut him this year, but could be spread out over 2 years, so his cap # this and next year would be 13 mill, not gonna do that
2014- 22Mill to cut him, over 2 years that would be 11mil....not gonna do that
2015- 17 million to cut him.....8.5 over 2 seasons...which would only save you 1.5 over his likely cap #, so really you could cut him this year and save a little money though not enough to make it worth it
2016- 12 million to cut him....6 million over 2 seasns, so now you could cut him and save 4 million per season
2017- 7 million to cut him, 3.5 million over two seasons, savings you easily 6 million per season


(see bolded) only his BASE would then drop from 14.3M to 7.3M, he already has a 2M signing bomus due this year so that would make it 9.3M less whatever additional bonus (increased signing, roster, reporting, easily achievable incentives, etc) they would owe him for agreeing to convert the 7M in base you're proposing into a bounus (a restructuring after only 1 season), so anyway you slice it his 2013 CAP # is going to be around 10M, netting at best roughly 4.3M in savings this year.

Like I said there has never been a team since the implementation of the NFL salary CAP that has been able to play the "rob Peter to pay Paul" game perpetually without eventually ending up with so much dead money that it didn't seriously hamstring the organization and the new CBA makes it even more difficult to continue playing the game for as long as it used to be possible.

#18 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 01:56 PM

(see bolded) only his BASE would then drop from 14.3M to 7.3M, he already has a 2M signing bomus due this year so that would make it 9.3M less whatever additional bonus (increased signing, roster, reporting, easily achievable incentives, etc) they would owe him for agreeing to convert the 7M in base you're proposing into a bounus (a restructuring after only 1 season), so anyway you slice it his 2013 CAP # is going to be around 10M, netting at best roughly 4.3M in savings this year.

Like I said there has never been a team since the implementation of the NFL salary CAP that has been able to play the "rob Peter to pay Paul" game perpetually without eventually ending up with so much dead money that it didn't seriously hamstring the organization and the new CBA makes it even more difficult to continue playing the game for as long as it used to be possible.


absent a new tv deal in a few years or a jump in the cap, it will hamstring them in the future, it will hamsting them a little now, but my point is that won't be why they win or lose. The skins, baltimore and a few other teams have been worse before, and none had to cut good players or not sign draft picks. If Dallas drafts well and signs the right mid level FA's they will be better, if they draft poor and invest money in the wrong mid level FA's they will suck.

Keep in mind they also aren't restructuring everyone like they are with Carr and Ware, Doug Free will just be asked to take a pay cut, so will Austin and Ratliff and a couple other guys and they will do it because being older players even with a paycut they will make more in Dallas than they will anywhere else if cut. Free couldn't get more than a million dollars on the open market, if Dallas makes him take a pay cut from 7 million to 3 he will take it because it's his only option.

I also see it like this, if in the next 2-3 seasons they don't get much better they will have to start over, at that point you cut the older expensive players, eat the cap money then the next year from a cap standpoint you are good.

#19 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 02:10 PM

absent a new tv deal in a few years or a jump in the cap, it will hamstring them in the future, it will hamsting them a little now, but my point is that won't be why they win or lose. The skins, baltimore and a few other teams have been worse before, and none had to cut good players or not sign draft picks. If Dallas drafts well and signs the right mid level FA's they will be better, if they draft poor and invest money in the wrong mid level FA's they will suck.

Keep in mind they also aren't restructuring everyone like they are with Carr and Ware, Doug Free will just be asked to take a pay cut, so will Austin and Ratliff and a couple other guys and they will do it because being older players even with a paycut they will make more in Dallas than they will anywhere else if cut. Free couldn't get more than a million dollars on the open market, if Dallas makes him take a pay cut from 7 million to 3 he will take it because it's his only option.

I also see it like this, if in the next 2-3 seasons they don't get much better they will have to start over, at that point you cut the older expensive players, eat the cap money then the next year from a cap standpoint you are good.


And in none of my posts did I say their 2013 cap situation would affect the W/L column, my original posts was completely about the "hows and whys of the contract structures" that enabled them to sign him and Conner last season, and then all subsequent posts were basically trying to counter balance your opinion of "how easy it is" to avoid having CAP issues, particularly under the new CBA. You should read it some time bo.

#20 IHateDemCowboys

IHateDemCowboys

    Backup

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • Location:Indiana
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 02:16 PM

I'm just excited that they are getting rid of Miles Austin.

#21 Dirty 30 Sucks

Dirty 30 Sucks

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,504 posts
  • Location:PHILA
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:egg

Posted 28 February 2013 - 02:31 PM

whenever a team is over the cap it doesnt EVER matter. Teams just get guys to restructure contracts slide bonus money and then they always get out of it.

#22 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 02:44 PM

whenever a team is over the cap it doesnt EVER matter. Teams just get guys to restructure contracts slide bonus money and then they always get out of it.


That's about the most overly-simplistic and uniformed opinion I've every read on this subject.

Teams have no choice but to be under by the start of every league year but if you actually think it's as simple as a little restructuring here and there and hasn't "EVER mattered" (resulted in the loss of key players, and multiple years of zero roster flexibity which by extention severly impacts their abilty to field a competitive team) then... :wacko:

#23 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 02:53 PM

And in none of my posts did I say their 2013 cap situation would affect the W/L column, my original posts was completely about the "hows and whys of the contract structures" that enabled them to sign him and Conner last season, and then all subsequent posts were basically trying to counter balance your opinion of "how easy it is" to avoid having CAP issues, particularly under the new CBA. You should read it some time bo.


well that was what I was replying to with the original poster...yeah, they have issues, but the way things are set up you can still get done what you need to get done and most of what you want to get done, and bottom line is it won't be the diffrence between winning and losing

#24 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 03:01 PM

well that was what I was replying to with the original poster...yeah, they have issues, but the way things are set up you can still get done what you need to get done and most of what you want to get done, and bottom line is it won't be the diffrence between winning and losing


I guess therein lies the rub between our positions, when you have no to limited CAP availability, or are significantly over as is the Poke's case then the ability to field the most competitive team possible/a legitmate contending team (retaining important pieces and/adding quality players to fill significant holes) more times than not becomes a fiscal impossibility, unless of course that's not what you believe a team's goal should be (what they "need or should want to get done").

#25 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 03:13 PM

I guess therein lies the rub between our positions, when you have no to limited CAP availability, or are significantly over as is the Poke's case then the ability to field a legitmate contending team (retaining important pieces and/adding quality players to fill significant holes) more times than not becomes a fiscal impossibility, unless of course that's not what you believe a team's goal should be (what they "need or should want to get done").


if you look at the "legit contending teams" by and large they draft well, don't go hog wild in FA, so i just think it hamstrings you less than you think. You can always sign your picks and keep the guys you really want to keep (needs) it keeps you from going after the blue chip FA's (wants), but again, that most often does not work out well anyway. And lastly once you've kicked the can down the road, if you get hemmed in, you suck it up one year and get out of cap hell.

#26 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 03:27 PM

if you look at the "legit contending teams" by and large they draft well, don't go hog wild in FA, so i just think it hamstrings you less than you think. You can always sign your picks and keep the guys you really want to keep (needs) it keeps you from going after the blue chip FA's (wants), but again, that most often does not work out well anyway. And lastly once you've kicked the can down the road, if you get hemmed in, you suck it up one year and get out of cap hell.


I understand your position but even teams that draft exceptionally well (drafted players consistently turn out to be quality starters) still have to be able to extend/retain those players when the time comes and years of CAP mismanagement can and has F'd teams for a lot longer than just 1 year.

Honestly stephen it almost sounds like you actually believe that every time a team gets outbid for a bluechip FA (one of their own or someone else's they covet) or is forced to cut a quality starter it's because that's what they really wanted/choose to do and not that they had no choice.

As far as the Pokes go, do actually think they'll be able to field a team as competitive as the one they could if they were 20M under instead of over this season?

#27 getch

getch

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,079 posts
  • Location:Denver, CO
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1968

Posted 28 February 2013 - 03:33 PM

Currently $20 million over the cap. :roll:

They are restructuring Ware's deal to push money into later years.
And trying to change Ratliff, Scandrick and Connor's contracts.
And trying to extend Romo and lower his $16.8 million cap hit for this year.

I'll sleep well tonight. Thanks ESPN.


http://espn.go.com/d...ctures-contract


This makes sense, since they are called America's team. Think of it as the sequester of America's team..... ;) :lol:

#28 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 03:42 PM

I understand your position but even teams that draft exceptionally well (drafted players consistently turn out to be quality starters) still have to be able to extend/retain those players when the time comes and years of CAP mismanagement can and has F'd teams for a lot longer than just 1 year.

Honestly stephen it almost sounds like you actually believe that every time a team gets outbid for a bluechip FA (one of their own or someone else's they covet) or is forced to cut a quality starter it's because that's what they really wanted/choose to do and not that they had no choice.

As far as the Pokes go, do actually think they'll be able to field a team as competitive as the one they could if they were 20M under instead of over this season?


right, in theroy, but who has been f'd that way? 99% of the time teams keep the players they really want to keep, and out of the 1% that leave because of the cap? half the time they aren't as good as advertised. And who has been forced to cut a quality starter? It just almost never happens

yes I do, they just finish restructuring Carr, Witten and a couple other guys and are now 2 million over the cap vs 20 at the start of the day, they are still set to make Free take a paycut, along with Ratliff and they looking to redo Scandrick's deal.......and this is all before they sign Romo to an extension, so when they resign Romo it will probably knock about 7-8 million off the cap.

Dallas will draft their players, sign a few mid-level FA guys and that's what they would do anyway, if you look at JJ's history, he has almost never been a big FA spender.

Last year Dallas' cap problems kept them from keeping Laurnt Robinson, who would have been a mistake to pay for.

this year it will keep them from resigning Anthony Spencer, which in my mind would be a mistake anyway.

#29 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,253 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 28 February 2013 - 03:52 PM

right, in theroy, but who has been f'd that way? 99% of the time teams keep the players they really want to keep, and out of the 1% that leave because of the cap? half the time they aren't as good as advertised. And who has been forced to cut a quality starter? It just almost never happens

yes I do, they just finish restructuring Carr, Witten and a couple other guys and are now 2 million over the cap vs 20 at the start of the day, they are still set to make Free take a paycut, along with Ratliff and they looking to redo Scandrick's deal.......and this is all before they sign Romo to an extension, so when they resign Romo it will probably knock about 7-8 million off the cap.

Dallas will draft their players, sign a few mid-level FA guys and that's what they would do anyway, if you look at JJ's history, he has almost never been a big FA spender.

Last year Dallas' cap problems kept them from keeping Laurnt Robinson, who would have been a mistake to pay for.

this year it will keep them from resigning Anthony Spencer, which in my mind would be a mistake anyway.


99%? :wacko: How can you possible look at not only the amount of FA movement but some of the marquee names and/or quality veteran players cut every year and even consider making a statement like that?

#30 Stephen1

Stephen1

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,694 posts
  • Location:Havertown, PA
  • Team:Cowboys
  • Fan Since:1982

Posted 28 February 2013 - 04:34 PM

99%? :wacko: How can you possible look at not only the amount of FA movement but some of the marquee names and/or quality veteran players cut every year and even consider making a statement like that?


because I like to generalize. I just don't see a team out there that was made or broke through FA. Again, which teams had to let marquee plays leave because they could not afford them? Which teams under the cap were able to go out and spend big money on FA's that allowed them to have a lot of success? It just rarely happens. now is 99% overstating it? yes but it's still the norm.