Ware Watch 2014

boozeman · Mar 9, 2014

Iamtdg said:

Can't say I disagree. If healthy, Ware is better than what we are likely to get in the draft. And Hatcher is very overrated.

I cannot begin to describe how retarded it would be to cut Ware and then turn around and give Hatcher his money.

Cotton · Mar 9, 2014

boozeman said:
Can't say I disagree. If healthy, Ware is better than what we are likely to get in the draft. And Hatcher is very overrated.

Yep, replied that the only answer to that question is Ware, but only under the condition that he drop down to at least 8 mill per.

boozeman · Mar 9, 2014

Iamtdg said:
Yep, replied that the only answer to that question is Ware, but only under the condition that he drop down to at least 8 mill per.

And this stage, they better have a real plan for the money if he tells Jerry to go eff himself. And if that includes Hatcher, they should have just kept him and paid him.

Cotton · Mar 9, 2014

boozeman said:
And this stage, they better have a real plan for the money if he tells Jerry to go eff himself. And if that includes Hatcher, they should have just kept him and paid him.

~prop~

Cotton · Mar 10, 2014

Sources: Ware decision could come quickly
March, 10, 2014

By Todd Archer | ESPNDallas.com

IRVING, Texas -- The working relationship between the Dallas Cowboys and DeMarcus Ware could be decided by the time free agency begins on Tuesday, according to sources.

According to a source, the Cowboys have had consistent negotiations with Ware on a reworked contract after the team let the seven-time Pro Bowler know last week they want him back in 2014 but not with a $12.25 million base salary.

The free-agent market opens on Tuesday at 3 p.m. CT. Teams and agents have been able to talk about interest and parameters since Saturday but players have not been able to talk directly to clubs or set up visits.

Whether the Cowboys release Ware or reach an agreement on a new contract, they will gain salary-cap space. By cutting Ware, the Cowboys would gain $7.4 million in cap space.

The Cowboys do not need to cut Ware to get under the cap. After restructuring three deals (Tony Romo, Sean Lee, Orlando Scandrick), reducing one (Mackenzy Bernadeau) and releasing Phil Costa last week, the Cowboys are roughly $2 million under the cap.

While that is enough to sign a player to a reasonable deal, it is not enough to help fill multiple holes on a defense that finished last in the NFL in 2013. It would not be enough to keep last year's sack leader, Jason Hatcher, who is expected to receive heavy interest from teams in free agency.

Ware's camp would like a quick decision so if he is cut he would be able to hit the open market when teams have the most money to spend.

Ware's 117 career sacks are the most in franchise history, and he earned Pro Bowl honors from 2006-12 before posting a career-low six sacks in 2013. Ware, who turns 32 in July, missed three games with a quadriceps strain and was bothered by a nerve issue in his elbow that required surgery after the season.

At the NFL scouting combine executive vice president Stephen Jones said the Cowboys would be efficient spenders in free agency. In the past they have set the markets on players, like cornerback Brandon Carr, who received a five-year, $50 million deal in 2012, only to not get enough pay off on the deals.

With Dez Bryant and Tyron Smith nearing the end of their deals, the Cowboys want to have enough cap room to keep their two young Pro Bowl performers.

Cowboysrock55 · Mar 10, 2014

boozeman said:
And this stage, they better have a real plan for the money if he tells Jerry to go eff himself. And if that includes Hatcher, they should have just kept him and paid him.

I don't get the hatred for Hatcher. Depending on what he signs for he was far more a leader last year and the better player. I guess is just depends on the money but if you save the 12 mil base salary on Ware I doubt that the deal you sign Hatcher to will sign for 12 per year. That means ultimately there is some cap savings there even if you don't see it this year.

Cotton · Mar 10, 2014

Cowboysrock55 said:
I don't get the hatred for Hatcher. Depending on what he signs for he was far more a leader last year and the better player. I guess is just depends on the money but if you save the 12 mil base salary on Ware I doubt that the deal you sign Hatcher to will sign for 12 per year. That means ultimately there is some cap savings there even if you don't see it this year.

We only save like 7 mill against the cap by cutting him, I think. So there would be some cap savings after signing Hatcher, but not a ton.

Cowboysrock55 · Mar 10, 2014

Iamtdg said:
We only save like 7 mill against the cap by cutting him, I think. So there would be some cap savings after signing Hatcher, but not a ton.

Not when you consider the savings next year and into the future. People need to stop looking at the cap on a year to year basis. You can carry cap savings from one year to the next and you can barrow from future cap years to create cap in the present year. It's silly to look at the cap in terms of the cap savings of just this year.

Cotton · Mar 10, 2014

Cowboysrock55 said:
Not when you consider the savings next year and into the future. People need to stop looking at the cap on a year to year basis. You can carry cap savings from one year to the next and you can barrow from future cap years to create cap in the present year. It's silly to look at the cap in terms of the cap savings of just this year.

Sure there are future savings, but it doesn't help us a bit this year.

Cowboysrock55 · Mar 10, 2014

Iamtdg said:
Sure there are future savings, but it doesn't help us a bit this year.

I don't think you are understanding me then. The point is if you save money against future caps, you can then afford to push more money into the future if you need to (More restructuring). Allowing you to create more cap savings this year. This is the point I'm trying to make. Cap savings this year, cap savings next year, it doesn't matter at all.

I don't think people in general understand this concept and writers definitely don't understand it. Restructuring to push money into future years is not as horrendous of a concept as people like to make it out to be.

Simpleton · Mar 10, 2014

Cowboysrock55 said:
I don't think you are understanding me then. The point is if you save money against future caps, you can then afford to push more money into the future if you need to (More restructuring). Allowing you to create more cap savings this year. This is the point I'm trying to make. Cap savings this year, cap savings next year, it doesn't matter at all.

I don't think people in general understand this concept and writers definitely don't understand it. Restructuring to push money into future years is not as horrendous of a concept as people like to make it out to be.

I agree, you can also structure deals to take advantage of the freed up space in future years, as opposed to just looking at it as a one year thing. If we cut Ware and have his 2015 hit completely off the books it gives us more flexibility in structuring deals now.

hstour · Mar 11, 2014

Simpleton said:
I agree, you can also structure deals to take advantage of the freed up space in future years, as opposed to just looking at it as a one year thing. If we cut Ware and have his 2015 hit completely off the books it gives us more flexibility in structuring deals now.

Or re-signing the players you do want to keep coming up to the end of their rookie deals, e.g. Tyron Smith, Dez Bryant

bbgun · Mar 11, 2014

boozeman · Mar 11, 2014

Just shit or get off the pot, Jer'.

Cotton · Mar 11, 2014

boozeman said:
Just shit or get off the pot, Jer'.

Clay_Allison · Mar 11, 2014

I'm always a proponent of making a clean break, quickly and with minimal drama (for instance if I was the Packers GM in the 2008 offseason I would have just cut Favre instead of dragging out the process forever before finally orchestrating a WGAS trade with the Jets).

In this case I think Jerry and Stephen want DeMarcus' options to dwindle prior to playing hardball with him because they want to keep him at a reduced pay rate rather than cut him. Technically that gives them better leverage, in reality that's just going to make Ware about as useful to the team as Ratliff was.

Deuce · Mar 11, 2014

Iamtdg said:

Good. Seeing the FA money start to dry up is the only leverage we got.

Cowboysrock55 · Mar 11, 2014

Clay_Allison said:
In this case I think Jerry and Stephen want DeMarcus' options to dwindle prior to playing hardball with him because they want to keep him at a reduced pay rate rather than cut him. Technically that gives them better leverage, in reality that's just going to make Ware about as useful to the team as Ratliff was.

The problem is you shoot yourself in the foot doing that. Once free agency has dried up what are you going to do with the cap room you create from Ware? It's a game of chicken and if neither side flinches then they both end up screwed.

Cotton · Mar 11, 2014

~headswing~

Booze?

UncleMilti · Mar 11, 2014

Does anyone else have that feeling this isn't going to end well...as in....nothing done with Ware until after all the FA's are signed?

Ware Watch 2014

28 Years And Counting...

One-armed Knife Sharpener

28 Years And Counting...

One-armed Knife Sharpener

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Super Moderator

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Super Moderator

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Super Moderator

DCC 4Life

Brand New Member

please don't "dur" me

28 Years And Counting...

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Old Bastard

Deuce

Guest

Super Moderator

One-armed Knife Sharpener

This seemed like a good idea at the time.