55 replies to this topic

[Pegger]

Stephen1, on 28 February 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

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.

They just screwed the pooch from a cap sense. They are asking guys to restructure that they only signed last year (Carr, Conner, etc..). That shows an extremely short term view when it comes to managing the cap.

Also when you mention Robinson and Spencer that's only 1/2 the equation. When you can't keep your own players you also can't get any free agents. Needless to say things are going to be pretty quite in Dallas come the FA frenzy.

[fearthereaper]

Just imagine what a mess it would be if they had enough good players to field a playoff quality team. I bet a lot of people would still take the deal the Cowboys have with Jones. By that I mean 3 early Super Bowls followed by 20 plus year of waiting for him to die to reach another.

[cowboy_ron]

fearthereaper, on 01 March 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

Just imagine what a mess it would be if they had enough good players to field a playoff quality team. I bet a lot of people would still take the deal the Cowboys have with Jones. By that I mean 3 early Super Bowls followed by 20 plus year of waiting for him to die to reach another.

And Luries awesome collection of Lombardis since he bought the team in 1994 is? Math in Texas says 3 Lombardis > 0 Lombardis regardless of when they were won

[Stephen1]

Pegger, on 28 February 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

They just screwed the pooch from a cap sense. They are asking guys to restructure that they only signed last year (Carr, Conner, etc..). That shows an extremely short term view when it comes to managing the cap.
Also when you mention Robinson and Spencer that's only 1/2 the equation. When you can't keep your own players you also can't get any free agents. Needless to say things are going to be pretty quite in Dallas come the FA frenzy.

Just one guy they signed last year (Carr) is restructuring, if you look back at previous posts you will see how it's easily done. It was also planned from the day he signed, last year Dallas was 23 million over the cap at this point, they got under the cap and then signed Carr to a deal that had him at a cap # of only 1.7 million last year, and then a baloon the 2nd year, which they knew they'd redo this year. As far as Connor, they are making him take a paycut, in part because he was signed to start, but Bruce Carter beat him out, no way you pay a backup 3+million a year.

Again, look at Dallas's history, except for 1 year when Bill Parcells went on a spending spree Dallas has NEVER been a big FA spender. But they are 3 million under the cap now, they are going to restrcture Ratliff and Scandrick, and then once they sign Romo to an extension they could be about $13 million UNDER the cap, which is enough to sign a big name FA and a few mid level guys if they want. They will wait for the smoke to clear and teams like Philly go drop huge contracts on the big name guys, then Dallas will sign some mid level FA.....and both teams will likely get about the same result.

[fearthereaper]

cowboy_ron, on 01 March 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

And Luries awesome collection of Lombardis since he bought the team in 1994 is? Math in Texas says 3 Lombardis > 0 Lombardis regardless of when they were won

Exactly why I said most people would still take the deal the Cowboys have with Jones. Good reading comprehension.

[bumpy93]

Put it this way. I would love for the Eagles to be in cap hell for a year or so AFTER WE win atleast 1 SuperBowl.

I want them to pull off something like the 2000 Ravens. Win the Superbowl that year then say screw the cap and potential cap problems for the following season just so they could load up like the 2001 Ravens tried but failed when on the 1st day of TC Kelly Gregg hit Jamal Lewis low and tore his ACL and Leon Searcy (who was really good back then) was signed to have a tremendous set of OTs with Searcy and Odgen but Searcy got hurt in TC also and was out for the year. Elvis Grabac (sp?) was an upgrade over Trent Dilfer b/c in the 2000 season Elvis had over 4,000yds passing and was a pro-bowler but he played worse the Dilfer IMO

I could live with us being in cap hell for a year or maybe even 2 if we had a SuperBowl to show for it IMO

[Stephen1]

bumpy93, on 01 March 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

Put it this way. I would love for the Eagles to be in cap hell for a year or so AFTER WE win atleast 1 SuperBowl.

I want them to pull off something like the 2000 Ravens. Win the Superbowl that year then say screw the cap and potential cap problems for the following season just so they could load up like the 2001 Ravens tried but failed when on the 1st day of TC Kelly Gregg hit Jamal Lewis low and tore his ACL and Leon Searcy (who was really good back then) was signed to have a tremendous set of OTs with Searcy and Odgen but Searcy got hurt in TC also and was out for the year. Elvis Grabac (sp?) was an upgrade over Trent Dilfer b/c in the 2000 season Elvis had over 4,000yds passing and was a pro-bowler but he played worse the Dilfer IMO

I could live with us being in cap hell for a year or maybe even 2 if we had a SuperBowl to show for it IMO

well it would be understandable if Dallas was coming off a SB or something....not years of mediocrity. JJ's biggest problem is he overvalues his own players, the contracts given to both Roy Williams (SS and WR), Terrence Newman, Marc Columbo, Marion Barber and Jay Ratliff when they were past their prime are what's killing Dallas cap wise

[GA4M]

bumpy93, on 01 March 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

Put it this way. I would love for the Eagles to be in cap hell for a year or so AFTER WE win atleast 1 SuperBowl.

I want them to pull off something like the 2000 Ravens. Win the Superbowl that year then say screw the cap and potential cap problems for the following season just so they could load up like the 2001 Ravens tried but failed when on the 1st day of TC Kelly Gregg hit Jamal Lewis low and tore his ACL and Leon Searcy (who was really good back then) was signed to have a tremendous set of OTs with Searcy and Odgen but Searcy got hurt in TC also and was out for the year. Elvis Grabac (sp?) was an upgrade over Trent Dilfer b/c in the 2000 season Elvis had over 4,000yds passing and was a pro-bowler but he played worse the Dilfer IMO

I could live with us being in cap hell for a year or maybe even 2 if we had a SuperBowl to show for it IMO

Stephen1, on 01 March 2013 - 12:54 PM, said:

well it would be understandable if Dallas was coming off a SB or something....not years of mediocrity. JJ's biggest problem is he overvalues his own players, the contracts given to both Roy Williams (SS and WR), Terrence Newman, Marc Columbo, Marion Barber and Jay Ratliff when they were past their prime are what's killing Dallas cap wise

What's all the talk about Romo days numbered in Dallas, is it true?

[Stephen1]

GA4M, on 01 March 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

What's all the talk about Romo days numbered in Dallas, is it true?

there is no talk about his days being numbered in Dallas...he will get a 3-4 year extension (it will probably be longer but some of those years will be fake to spread the cap hit out), everyone in Dallas knows there is nobody better on the market

[Eagle Jeff]

Aren't they still paying Quincy Carter?

[Stephen1]

Eagle Jeff, on 04 March 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

Aren't they still paying Quincy Carter?

lol, would not surprise me at all

[MightyJNC]

Stephen1, on 04 March 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

lol, would not surprise me at all

They got just a hair under 2.6M in dead money on the CAP but not because of Carter.

[gibsonplyer]

Why did they just franchise Spencer again?  He's not a bad player but he doesn't strike me as special.  Plus does he even fit the defense anymore?

[sameoldsameold]

One of my fondest memories of the Eagles, besides Wilbert Montgomery breaking free for a big run in the NFC Championship Game vs Dallas, was in the Ray Rhodes era, Mike Mammula comes around the end to sack Troy Aikman at the 5 yard line of the Eagles, stopping a drive and winning the Eagles the game, (One of the few things Mike ever did right) which was then a rarity against the Cowboys. Now alls we got is Vick getting sacked by he Cowgirls Defense. Anyhu, my point is when Dallas is good, it's just a whole lot more fun rooting against them. Now Dallas sucks, but they still manage to take us out, because we're a disaster.

[Pegger]

Stephen1, on 01 March 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

Just one guy they signed last year (Carr) is restructuring, if you look back at previous posts you will see how it's easily done. It was also planned from the day he signed, last year Dallas was 23 million over the cap at this point, they got under the cap and then signed Carr to a deal that had him at a cap # of only 1.7 million last year, and then a baloon the 2nd year, which they knew they'd redo this year. As far as Connor, they are making him take a paycut, in part because he was signed to start, but Bruce Carter beat him out, no way you pay a backup 3+million a year.

Again, look at Dallas's history, except for 1 year when Bill Parcells went on a spending spree Dallas has NEVER been a big FA spender. But they are 3 million under the cap now, they are going to restrcture Ratliff and Scandrick, and then once they sign Romo to an extension they could be about $13 million UNDER the cap, which is enough to sign a big name FA and a few mid level guys if they want. They will wait for the smoke to clear and teams like Philly go drop huge contracts on the big name guys, then Dallas will sign some mid level FA.....and both teams will likely get about the same result.

Here's who they have restructured:

Miles Austin - 2010 extended
Brandon Carr - 2012 contract
Ryan Cook - 2012 extended
DeMarcus Ware - 2009 extended
Jason Witten - 2011 extended

So Carr and Cook are the only two a year removed from signing their last deal, but Witten was just two years removed.

The larger issue is that these restructures involve giving the players money up from in the form of a signing bonus and being able to take that dollar amount and spread it over 2-4 years for the cap. Looking at that same list:

Miles Austin - 29 this season
Brandon Carr - 27 this season
Ryan Cook - 30 this season
DeMarcus Ware - 31 this season
Jason Witten - 31 this season

If any of those older players get hurt or natrually decline before their cap years are up it will turn into dead cap space.

Add in that they are trying to restructure Romo, who's going to be 33 this year and they could be setting themselves up for some hard years ahead.


Also to your typical Cowboy spending comments it's not all about getting new players, but also keeping your own. Spencer will be a huge, $10.627M one-year deal. Next year the best way to create cap flexibitliy will be to let him walk. I guess what I'm saying is that all these restructurings are out of necessity because the planning was to short sighted. I have no issues with asking Conner to take a cut because like you said he's a backup earning starter money, but they are currently cash strapped and both starting LBs in Sean Lee and Bruce Carter are still on their rookie deals. Ultimately guys you know you want will end up having a huge one year deal that only creates a budget problem for the following year.


*Late Edit* - I should add to sign Spencer they cut Sensenbaugh, a safety they signed to a 5 year deal 15 months ago. In that there was a $4M signing bonus. Granted they still created cap space, but they also added dead cap space to do so.

[Pegger]

gibsonplyer, on 04 March 2013 - 03:57 PM, said:

Why did they just franchise Spencer again?  He's not a bad player but he doesn't strike me as special.  Plus does he even fit the defense anymore?

He lead their team in sacks (11.5) last year while only playing 14 games. He also stepped up and called the D when both Lee and Carter went down. He's also 6'3, 260. That's pretty much a 4-3 DE to me.

This was a good signing, but for the Cowboys it puts them in a tough spot. If he has a good year next year they can't franchise him and don't have much cap room to work out a deal without giving him a lot of long term guarantees. They could give him a massive signing bonus with a tiny salary, but he'll be 30 years old and ultimately if he gets hurt or starts to decline they have really screwed themselves.

[MightyJNC]

Pegger, on 04 March 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

He lead their team in sacks (11.5) last year while only playing 14 games. He also stepped up and called the D when both Lee and Carter went down. He's also 6'3, 260. That's pretty much a 4-3 DE to me.

This was a good signing, but for the Cowboys it puts them in a tough spot. If he has a good year next year they can't franchise him and don't have much cap room to work out a deal without giving him a lot of long term guarantees. They could give him a massive signing bonus with a tiny salary, but he'll be 30 years old and ultimately if he gets hurt or starts to decline they have really screwed themselves.

Under the new CBA a team can tag the same player a maximium of 3 times so they could tag him again next offseason if they wanted to but then they would have to give him  144% of what he'll earn this year (10.6M)which would be roughly 15.2M.

[Pegger]

MightyJNC, on 04 March 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

Under the new CBA a team can tag the same player a maximium of 3 times so they could tag him again next offseason if they wanted to but then they would have to give him  144% of what he'll earn this year (10.6M)which would be roughly 15.2M.

I didn't know that.

All the same that's the point I'm trying to make. They are setting themselves up for a horrible situation. He'll be 30 years old and will cost them ~$15M to resign. The cleaper alternative is to give him a longer deal with a big signing bonus. If he declines in this 30s then they will have to eat the dead cap space.

[Stephen1]

Pegger, on 04 March 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

I didn't know that.

All the same that's the point I'm trying to make. They are setting themselves up for a horrible situation. He'll be 30 years old and will cost them ~$15M to resign. The cleaper alternative is to give him a longer deal with a big signing bonus. If he declines in this 30s then they will have to eat the dead cap space.

I think this is the deal with Spencer....

Spencer is a good player...he is very good vs the run and adequate as a pass rusher. Dallas has huge needs along the OL and at RB,  and I think they need to hit that in this years draft, they think if they let Spencer walk it opens up a huge hole at DE that they would need to address early in the draft, then when you consider this draft doesn't appear deep at all DE is not the way to go. I think they are just renting Spencer for the year. Now next year they either would have to ish or get off the pot, long term contract or let him walk....and they will let him walk.

[Pegger]

Stephen1, on 05 March 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

I think this is the deal with Spencer....

Spencer is a good player...he is very good vs the run and adequate as a pass rusher. Dallas has huge needs along the OL and at RB,  and I think they need to hit that in this years draft, they think if they let Spencer walk it opens up a huge hole at DE that they would need to address early in the draft, then when you consider this draft doesn't appear deep at all DE is not the way to go. I think they are just renting Spencer for the year. Now next year they either would have to ish or get off the pot, long term contract or let him walk....and they will let him walk.

I understand that, but the restructurings are just buying time, not solving the problem. If the end solution is to let Spencer walk because they can't cut any of the guys they restructured then are they really in a better place? At the end of the day the Cowboys will have paid Spencer how much over the past 2-3 years? $22-35M? Does that make any sense for a non-probowl talent?

When looking at all the restructuring going on let's take the Bears restructured Peppers' contract back in 2011. Granted there are a few ways of doing it, but it all has the same underlying logic.

The Bears reworked the contract for the Pro Bowl defensive end in 2011 and doing so again would create huge cap figures for Peppers in the final two years of his contract in 2014 and '15. Peppers’ 2013 cap figure is $16,383,333 and he has a base salary of $12.9 million with a $100,000 workout bonus.

Here are the numbers in play for Peppers right now:

2013 Base salary $12.9 million, $100,000 workout bonus, cap figure $16,383,333, proration $3,183,333.
2014 Base salary $13.9 million, $100,000 workout bonus, cap figure $17,383,333, proration $3,183,333.
2015 Base salary $16.5 million, cap figure $19,683,335, proration $3,183,335.

Restructuring Peppers’ contract now would enable the Bears to create the most cap savings with a single transaction, short of releasing a player with a big ’13 cap number, something that will not happen. But restructuring Peppers again will create even larger cap figures in the final two years of the contract.

So his remaining cap numbers would look like this:
2014 cap figure $21,049,999.
2015 cap figure $23,350,001.


This type of cap management is long term cap suicide. What's compounding the Cowboys problem is one of the assets they want to keep is Spencer, who's only a one year solution at this point. The worst case situation is 1-2 years down the road. They will have players who don't warrant their future salary and there's some large dead money associated with cutting them. Essentially they might let Spencer walk and make a few cuts and they won't free up enough money to replace the players that walked away.

[Stephen1]

Pegger, on 05 March 2013 - 03:52 PM, said:

I understand that, but the restructurings are just buying time, not solving the problem. If the end solution is to let Spencer walk because they can't cut any of the guys they restructured then are they really in a better place? At the end of the day the Cowboys will have paid Spencer how much over the past 2-3 years? $22-35M? Does that make any sense for a non-probowl talent?

When looking at all the restructuring going on let's take the Bears restructured Peppers' contract back in 2011. Granted there are a few ways of doing it, but it all has the same underlying logic.

The Bears reworked the contract for the Pro Bowl defensive end in 2011 and doing so again would create huge cap figures for Peppers in the final two years of his contract in 2014 and '15. Peppers’ 2013 cap figure is $16,383,333 and he has a base salary of $12.9 million with a $100,000 workout bonus.

Here are the numbers in play for Peppers right now:

2013 Base salary $12.9 million, $100,000 workout bonus, cap figure $16,383,333, proration $3,183,333.
2014 Base salary $13.9 million, $100,000 workout bonus, cap figure $17,383,333, proration $3,183,333.
2015 Base salary $16.5 million, cap figure $19,683,335, proration $3,183,335.

Restructuring Peppers’ contract now would enable the Bears to create the most cap savings with a single transaction, short of releasing a player with a big ’13 cap number, something that will not happen. But restructuring Peppers again will create even larger cap figures in the final two years of the contract.

So his remaining cap numbers would look like this:
2014 cap figure $21,049,999.
2015 cap figure $23,350,001.


This type of cap management is long term cap suicide. What's compounding the Cowboys problem is one of the assets they want to keep is Spencer, who's only a one year solution at this point. The worst case situation is 1-2 years down the road. They will have players who don't warrant their future salary and there's some large dead money associated with cutting them. Essentially they might let Spencer walk and make a few cuts and they won't free up enough money to replace the players that walked away.

oh yeah, I'm not defending Dallas's cap management...it's not good, as a matter of fact it sucks. I was just giving my opinion as to why they are renting Spencer for 1 year. I'd actually have liked to see them not restructure a few of the deals and just let Spencer walk, the Carr deal was the only deal it made sense to restructure and the only one that won't really cause them future cap problems.

that said, the ability to spread the cap hit over 2 seasons makes it easier to get out from these bad contracts.

for instance, Miles Austin restructured, if they cut him next season it would be a 5mil cap hit the following 2 years, they cut him the year after? a 3 million cap hit the next two years. If he makes it through two more season, they could cut him for a 1million cap hit, so bascially you have Ware, Witten and Austin in this situation, you could staggar it and in the future get by with relatively little pain I think. Now if all three take nose dives in the next two season, Dallas is hosed.

Like I said, it all comes down to drafting, if Dallas drafts well it won't matter because they will have relatively good young cheap players to replace them with, if they don't draft well, they are screwed,

[Pegger]

Stephen1, on 05 March 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

...
for instance, Miles Austin restructured, if they cut him next season it would be a 5mil cap hit the following 2 years, they cut him the year after? a 3 million cap hit the next two years. If he makes it through two more season, they could cut him for a 1million cap hit, so bascially you have Ware, Witten and Austin in this situation, you could staggar it and in the future get by with relatively little pain I think. Now if all three take nose dives in the next two season, Dallas is hosed.

Like I said, it all comes down to drafting, if Dallas drafts well it won't matter because they will have relatively good young cheap players to replace them with, if they don't draft well, they are screwed,

Talking about the cap number is just one side if the coin. You also have to look at the players cap numbers for each year and ultimately if they are worth it. Did a quick and it looks like Ware will be around a 17m cap hit with Witten and Austin being around 7-8m each. I think another overriding issue is they are doing a lot to keep together a team that hasn't been above .500 since 2009.

[Stephen1]

Pegger, on 05 March 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

Talking about the cap number is just one side if the coin. You also have to look at the players cap numbers for each year and ultimately if they are worth it. Did a quick and it looks like Ware will be around a 17m cap hit with Witten and Austin being around 7-8m each. I think another overriding issue is they are doing a lot to keep together a team that hasn't been above .500 since 2009.

Jerry's biggest problem has always been overvaluing his own players. He's the biggest homer there is.

[Asiragusa]

Stephen1, on 05 March 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

Jerry's biggest problem has always been overvaluing his own players. He's the biggest homer there is.

And he sucks at being a GM but thinks he's the greatest

[Pegger]

Asiragusa, on 05 March 2013 - 11:16 PM, said:

And he sucks at being a GM but thinks he's the greatest

actually he's gone on record saying that if someone else was the GM he would have fired them, but since he is that's just not going to happen.

As an Eagles fan it's awesome. He recognizes he is a big part of the problem and has just accepted that's the way it's going to be.

[Chipadelphia]

cowboy_ron, on 01 March 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

And Luries awesome collection of Lombardis since he bought the team in 1994 is? Math in Texas says 3 Lombardis > 0 Lombardis regardless of when they were won

lol 5 ringz fail