| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 41594
Location: Dallas, TX
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:48 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| plan9misfit wrote: | | Desperado82 wrote: | http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-NickEatman/Jones-Said-Cowboys-Can-Get-Under-Cap-Without-Romo-Deal-/a0ffd2d6-50a7-4d1c-aa30-62c68d82bcd1
| Quote: | However, Jerry Jones said this weekend the Cowboys could still get under the cap without getting Romo’s deal finalized before the March 12 deadline.
“It’s not necessarily you have to have Romo done before you make these other decisions,” Jones said. “It’s not necessarily so but it is what you want to do. But it’s not what you have to do. It’s not all one in the same. But immediately for the March 12th time, we don’t have to have any one (player) signed or redone.” |
Interesting. I suppose this is hinting we'll be reworking a few deals. |
To hell with reworking deals (i.e., restructuring contracts and thus giving more years and more guaranteed money to players as a means of lowing their current year's cap number). Either rip up their old deal for a new one or release the players and let them squander their careers elsewhere. We can't keep kicking the salary cap can down the road. Just take the lumps for one year and move on.
It's a simple approach, really. You call the player with the albatross contract into the office, tell him what his new contract will be, hand it to him, and tell him to sign it or be cut. |
Many of our recent contracts were designed with built-in restructures that let the team essentially give the player a 2nd signing bonus. Brandon Carr would be a prime example.
_________________
Ware Stat Tracker: 27 Pressures, 9 Hits, 10 sacks, 4 FF, 7 TFL (thru 8 games) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Northland
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 3138
Location: Ajax, Ontario
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Once again I leave it to Sturm to asses the situation. Let me throw in one quote from the attached article:
"Offensive line and defensive line. I know that they say you should take the best player available, but when a team like Dallas has major needs up front, you better not talk yourself into Tavon Austin. You just need the best 300 pounder available in my estimation."
http://sturminator.blogspot.ca/
_________________
Northland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rtnldave
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2354
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Once again, it appears all of the logic, wishful thinking and thinking outside the box from all of us on this site was an exercise in futility.
We all know the REAL issues on this team and yet they want to ignore them. Doh!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 41594
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Also of note - Jerry said during the same interview he could definitely see the team taking an OT in the draft. Continually cherry picking statements though is only going to get you what you want to see/hear and not the whole truth. Jerry is never going to show his hand and is going to try and remain as vague and uncommitted as he can.
_________________
Ware Stat Tracker: 27 Pressures, 9 Hits, 10 sacks, 4 FF, 7 TFL (thru 8 games) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spends
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 914
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| MaddHatter wrote: | | Also of note - Jerry said during the same interview he could definitely see the team taking an OT in the draft. Continually cherry picking statements though is only going to get you what you want to see/hear and not the whole truth. Jerry is never going to show his hand and is going to try and remain as vague and uncommitted as he can. |
Personally, I am completely fine with the bolded statement. I can't tell if you are saying it is as a negative, but I would prefer our GM/Owner to be tight-lipped on our strategy. Same reason we are using code names in the FFMD thread and PMing free agent/trade discussions.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Slamman
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 11669
Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
for the guys saying this is a smoke screen... Think about 2 things:
1). How effective of a smoke screen is it to tell the world we are looking for an interior OLman if we are really looking for multiple OLmen? A smoke screen would divert others from the OL altogether. If anything, Jerry would be encouraging teams to jump in front of us in the first round to grab OL in hopes that a certain other player fell to us. That's a smoke screen.
2). How many teams really have invested heavily into QB, OL, and weapons? The only team that I can think of is the Saints (and their defense is terrible). The Pats invested heavily in their QB and to a lesser extent the weapons. But their OL isn't ridiculous. The only substantial financial investment on the OL was at guard. Now, Welker probably won't be resigned and Vollmer is questionable. when you pay a QB Brady type money, there is going to be a deficiency somewhere. Or, think about the Ravens... If they Pay Flacco elite QB money, there will be fallout. Its simple economics.
Last edited by The_Slamman on Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:30 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Slamman
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 11669
Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| MaddHatter wrote: | | Also of note - Jerry said during the same interview he could definitely see the team taking an OT in the draft. Continually cherry picking statements though is only going to get you what you want to see/hear and not the whole truth. Jerry is never going to show his hand and is going to try and remain as vague and uncommitted as he can. |
Jerry quite often shows his hand before the draft. Anybody who says otherwise has no clue what he is talking about. I can think of numerous instances where Jerry more than tipped his hand before the draft. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
plan9misfit
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 18100
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| MaddHatter wrote: | | plan9misfit wrote: | | Desperado82 wrote: | http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-NickEatman/Jones-Said-Cowboys-Can-Get-Under-Cap-Without-Romo-Deal-/a0ffd2d6-50a7-4d1c-aa30-62c68d82bcd1
| Quote: | However, Jerry Jones said this weekend the Cowboys could still get under the cap without getting Romo’s deal finalized before the March 12 deadline.
“It’s not necessarily you have to have Romo done before you make these other decisions,” Jones said. “It’s not necessarily so but it is what you want to do. But it’s not what you have to do. It’s not all one in the same. But immediately for the March 12th time, we don’t have to have any one (player) signed or redone.” |
Interesting. I suppose this is hinting we'll be reworking a few deals. |
To hell with reworking deals (i.e., restructuring contracts and thus giving more years and more guaranteed money to players as a means of lowing their current year's cap number). Either rip up their old deal for a new one or release the players and let them squander their careers elsewhere. We can't keep kicking the salary cap can down the road. Just take the lumps for one year and move on.
It's a simple approach, really. You call the player with the albatross contract into the office, tell him what his new contract will be, hand it to him, and tell him to sign it or be cut. |
Many of our recent contracts were designed with built-in restructures that let the team essentially give the player a 2nd signing bonus. Brandon Carr would be a prime example. |
Which proves my point. If Brandon Carr starts to tank a little bit, why would the team want to give him even more guaranteed money? You want to dump the bad deals for more reasonable ones.
_________________
Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
| The_Slamman wrote: | | It's like we are in a win now mentality with lose now personnel. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaddHatter
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 41594
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| plan9misfit wrote: | | MaddHatter wrote: | | plan9misfit wrote: | | Desperado82 wrote: | http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-NickEatman/Jones-Said-Cowboys-Can-Get-Under-Cap-Without-Romo-Deal-/a0ffd2d6-50a7-4d1c-aa30-62c68d82bcd1
| Quote: | However, Jerry Jones said this weekend the Cowboys could still get under the cap without getting Romo’s deal finalized before the March 12 deadline.
“It’s not necessarily you have to have Romo done before you make these other decisions,” Jones said. “It’s not necessarily so but it is what you want to do. But it’s not what you have to do. It’s not all one in the same. But immediately for the March 12th time, we don’t have to have any one (player) signed or redone.” |
Interesting. I suppose this is hinting we'll be reworking a few deals. |
To hell with reworking deals (i.e., restructuring contracts and thus giving more years and more guaranteed money to players as a means of lowing their current year's cap number). Either rip up their old deal for a new one or release the players and let them squander their careers elsewhere. We can't keep kicking the salary cap can down the road. Just take the lumps for one year and move on.
It's a simple approach, really. You call the player with the albatross contract into the office, tell him what his new contract will be, hand it to him, and tell him to sign it or be cut. |
Many of our recent contracts were designed with built-in restructures that let the team essentially give the player a 2nd signing bonus. Brandon Carr would be a prime example. |
Which proves my point. If Brandon Carr starts to tank a little bit, why would the team want to give him even more guaranteed money? You want to dump the bad deals for more reasonable ones. |
They're not giving him more "guaranteed" money - they're taking the salary of 2014 that he's going to get either way and giving it to him in a lump sum that they can spread the cap hit out over 5 years vs paying it in 16 installments through the season.
_________________
Ware Stat Tracker: 27 Pressures, 9 Hits, 10 sacks, 4 FF, 7 TFL (thru 8 games) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
plan9misfit
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 18100
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| MaddHatter wrote: | | plan9misfit wrote: | | MaddHatter wrote: | | plan9misfit wrote: | | Desperado82 wrote: | http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/article-NickEatman/Jones-Said-Cowboys-Can-Get-Under-Cap-Without-Romo-Deal-/a0ffd2d6-50a7-4d1c-aa30-62c68d82bcd1
| Quote: | However, Jerry Jones said this weekend the Cowboys could still get under the cap without getting Romo’s deal finalized before the March 12 deadline.
“It’s not necessarily you have to have Romo done before you make these other decisions,” Jones said. “It’s not necessarily so but it is what you want to do. But it’s not what you have to do. It’s not all one in the same. But immediately for the March 12th time, we don’t have to have any one (player) signed or redone.” |
Interesting. I suppose this is hinting we'll be reworking a few deals. |
To hell with reworking deals (i.e., restructuring contracts and thus giving more years and more guaranteed money to players as a means of lowing their current year's cap number). Either rip up their old deal for a new one or release the players and let them squander their careers elsewhere. We can't keep kicking the salary cap can down the road. Just take the lumps for one year and move on.
It's a simple approach, really. You call the player with the albatross contract into the office, tell him what his new contract will be, hand it to him, and tell him to sign it or be cut. |
Many of our recent contracts were designed with built-in restructures that let the team essentially give the player a 2nd signing bonus. Brandon Carr would be a prime example. |
Which proves my point. If Brandon Carr starts to tank a little bit, why would the team want to give him even more guaranteed money? You want to dump the bad deals for more reasonable ones. |
They're not giving him more "guaranteed" money - they're taking the salary of 2014 that he's going to get either way and giving it to him in a lump sum that they can spread the cap hit out over 5 years vs paying it in 16 installments through the season. |
Like I said. A bad deal. If a player starts to tank, there is no reason whatsoever to pay him even more money. You dump the player and the bad contract and take the lumps for that one year and have long term cap relief afterward rather than compounding future cap problems by prorating more money onto it for an extended period of time. This shouldn't be so hard to understand. You don't throw good money on top of bad money.
Think of it this way: Doug Free stinks and should be cut. Would you argue that he should be released or have his base salary converted into a signing bonus and spread over the remaining life of his contract to reduce his cap number even though he shouldn't be on the team anymore?
See the problem now? Bad decisions like that mean that you keep bad players or guys on bloated deals. You just can't do that. Dump the bad contracts; don't restructure them and keep giving guys more guaranteed money.
_________________
Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
| The_Slamman wrote: | | It's like we are in a win now mentality with lose now personnel. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Slamman
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 11669
Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I don't know how many of you saw this, but it is right on point with this thread. Tom Brady just massively reduced his cap hits for the next 3 years...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130225/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-contract/
| Quote: | Amazingly, according to the source, the deal is for an eye-poppingly conservative $27 million, which is less than half his worth by any measure.
The extension will pay Brady a $3 million signing bonus immediately, in addition to salaries of $7 million in 2015, $8 million in 2016 and $9 million in 2017. |
and
| Quote: | | The upshot of the deal is to give the Patriots massive cap relief in a flat-cap era. He was due to count $43.6 million on the New England salary cap in 2013 and 2014. Now, his cap numbers will add up to $28.6 million in the next two years, a savings of $15 million in cap dollars at a time the Patriots have free agents they want to sign to help keep the team atop the AFC East, which they have dominated since Brady took over at quarterback in 2001. |
Brady is greatly reducing his cap hit in an effort to keep Vollmer, Welker and maybe even add a weapon or 2. Good for Tom Brady.
That's the whole point of this thread. The economics dictate you can't have everything. Here, Brady reduced his salary. Is Romo willing to do the same? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matts4313
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 31227
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| The_Slamman wrote: | I don't know how many of you saw this, but it is right on point with this thread. Tom Brady just massively reduced his cap hits for the next 3 years...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130225/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-contract/
| Quote: | Amazingly, according to the source, the deal is for an eye-poppingly conservative $27 million, which is less than half his worth by any measure.
The extension will pay Brady a $3 million signing bonus immediately, in addition to salaries of $7 million in 2015, $8 million in 2016 and $9 million in 2017. |
and
| Quote: | | The upshot of the deal is to give the Patriots massive cap relief in a flat-cap era. He was due to count $43.6 million on the New England salary cap in 2013 and 2014. Now, his cap numbers will add up to $28.6 million in the next two years, a savings of $15 million in cap dollars at a time the Patriots have free agents they want to sign to help keep the team atop the AFC East, which they have dominated since Brady took over at quarterback in 2001. |
Brady is greatly reducing his cap hit in an effort to keep Vollmer, Welker and maybe even add a weapon or 2. Good for Tom Brady.
That's the whole point of this thread. The economics dictate you can't have everything. Here, Brady reduced his salary. Is Romo willing to do the same? |
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=15769796#15769796
Beat you by about 8 minutes 
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Slamman
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 11669
Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Matts4313 wrote: | | The_Slamman wrote: | I don't know how many of you saw this, but it is right on point with this thread. Tom Brady just massively reduced his cap hits for the next 3 years...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130225/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-contract/
| Quote: | Amazingly, according to the source, the deal is for an eye-poppingly conservative $27 million, which is less than half his worth by any measure.
The extension will pay Brady a $3 million signing bonus immediately, in addition to salaries of $7 million in 2015, $8 million in 2016 and $9 million in 2017. |
and
| Quote: | | The upshot of the deal is to give the Patriots massive cap relief in a flat-cap era. He was due to count $43.6 million on the New England salary cap in 2013 and 2014. Now, his cap numbers will add up to $28.6 million in the next two years, a savings of $15 million in cap dollars at a time the Patriots have free agents they want to sign to help keep the team atop the AFC East, which they have dominated since Brady took over at quarterback in 2001. |
Brady is greatly reducing his cap hit in an effort to keep Vollmer, Welker and maybe even add a weapon or 2. Good for Tom Brady.
That's the whole point of this thread. The economics dictate you can't have everything. Here, Brady reduced his salary. Is Romo willing to do the same? |
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=15769796#15769796
Beat you by about 8 minutes |
Haha. But you put it in the WRONG thread. But for what it's worth, I'm about to add another article to your thread...
I can't post back to back Jerry articles... people will begin to think I'm obsessed (even though I think I was very fair to Jerry in this thread). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matts4313
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 31227
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
If its the Jerry wants credit if they win a Superbowl statement, I pray it was said tongue in cheek. Either way, its cringe worthy.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Slamman
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 11669
Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Matts4313 wrote: | | If its the Jerry wants credit if they win a Superbowl statement, I pray it was said tongue in cheek. Either way, its cringe worthy. |
That's the one and I don't think it's tongue in cheek. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
