Cowboys Have Cap Woes Coming in 2014

Cowboysrock55 said:
Most teams with a big contract sunk into a franchise QB aren't spending big bucks in free agency. If you want to have lot of money under your cap get a stud QB on a rookie contract.
Click to expand...

It is not the franchise QB deal that is the albatross.

Contracts like Ratliff and Austin are.
 
boozeman said:
It is not the franchise QB deal that is the albatross.

Contracts like Ratliff and Austin are.
Click to expand...

They are bad contracts. That happens with lots of teams and players though. Any time you spend big money in free agency, or spend money on your own players, you're going to get locked into some bad contracts. It's part of the game.
 
right having one player take up 20% of your cap isn't the reason you have to keep doing magic accounting to field the rest of your team. Who was bitching about extending Rat and Miles when we did? Seemed like the right move at the time, a 7th rounder and a UDFA making it big, keeping them with the team. Overwhelming support for the deals. It didn't work out. Thanks captain hindsight.
 
superpunk said:
right having one player take up 20% of your cap isn't the reason you have to keep doing magic accounting to field the rest of your team. Who was bitching about extending Rat and Miles when we did? Seemed like the right move at the time, a 7th rounder and a UDFA making it big, keeping them with the team. Overwhelming support for the deals. It didn't work out. Thanks captain hindsight.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was just impossible to know!

I wonder why other teams with smart GMs aren't in that predicament. It's just our bad luck!
 
mschmidt64 said:
Yeah, it was just impossible to know!

I wonder why other teams with smart GMs aren't in that predicament. It's just our bad luck!
Click to expand...

What teams are these? the Giants are in the same predicament as well as the Patriots and Packers.
 
And Chargers

And Broncos

And Lions

(teams who restructured their starting QB last season)

And the Saints will have to.

And so will every fucking team in the league who has a premier QB who is on their second deal. Sorry you guys don't pay attention to anyone else, but welcome to NFL reality.
 
superpunk said:
right having one player take up 20% of your cap isn't the reason you have to keep doing magic accounting to field the rest of your team. Who was bitching about extending Rat and Miles when we did? Seemed like the right move at the time, a 7th rounder and a UDFA making it big, keeping them with the team. Overwhelming support for the deals. It didn't work out. Thanks captain hindsight.
Click to expand...

I don't think there was overwhelming support for the Ratliff deal anywhere but maybe the Zone where they overwhelmingly support anything and everything.

Extending a 30 year old guy who has 2 years left on his deal was pretty dumb even at the time.
 
mschmidt64 said:
I think I'd like to see an NBA type system implemented where you can go over if, say, you are resigning a player you drafted.
Click to expand...

This is actually a good idea.

The problem is the players and agents know what kind of money the NFL generates. Merchandise, tickets, DirecTV, PSLs etc have the league and owners simply rolling in the money. Agents push big money. The players want a chunk of all that revenue.

So why do the owners agree to an unrealistic cap? Its obvious they want to have leverage in the player salaries and want to be able to have an argument for "outrageous" pay days. But the truth is, that doesn't stop the teams from signing players to astronomical salaries and contracts, especially when compared to deals just 5-6 years ago.

Its like a double edged sword.
 
Last edited:
UncleMilti said:
This is actually a good idea.

The problem is the players and agents know what kind of money the NFL generates. Merchandise, tickets, DirecTV, PSLs etc have the league and owners simply rolling in the money. Agents push big money. The players want a chunk of all that revenue.

So why do the owners agree to an unrealistic cap? Its obvious they want to have leverage in the player salaries and want to be able to have an argument for "outrageous" pay days. But the truth is, that doesn't stop the teams from signing players to astronomical salaries and contracts, especially when compared to deals just 5-6 years ago.

Its like a double edged sword.
Click to expand...

Eh, with the new CBA, you aren't going to see quite the exorbitant salaries anymore. Draft picks get a fraction of what they used to. Vets like Avril got small dollar deals on the FA market and guys like Seymour can't find a job for their salary demands. Even though profits are going through the roof, the cap isn't going to rise all that quickly......which is what the owners wanted.

Unfortunately for the teams that have deals structured towards an ever rising cap, they are getting pinched.

But, really, the owners don't care. They'll take the pinch and the decline on performance on the field for that bigger piece of the pie. You know they were practically going broke under the old deal, right? :unsure
 
superpunk said:
right having one player take up 20% of your cap isn't the reason you have to keep doing magic accounting to field the rest of your team. Who was bitching about extending Rat and Miles when we did? Seemed like the right move at the time, a 7th rounder and a UDFA making it big, keeping them with the team. Overwhelming support for the deals. It didn't work out. Thanks captain hindsight.
Click to expand...

junk said:
I don't think there was overwhelming support for the Ratliff deal anywhere but maybe the Zone where they overwhelmingly support anything and everything.

Extending a 30 year old guy who has 2 years left on his deal was pretty dumb even at the time.
Click to expand...

Seriously, and Ratliff's performance was already on a steep decline. Who is this idiot?

You want to say people supported the Doug Free deal? Sure, lots of people did and didn't expect him fall apart. Everyone but Jerry, this punk guy, and Hostile thought Ratliff was an injury prone guy who had played out of position too long.
 
ok well nice, you've identified one bad deal that people thought might be a bad deal at the time. bravo cap experts, you're all retarded.

You hated the Oscan and Church deals (which now look great), loved Free and Miles (which now look....I don't know/and terrible), and are wrong about nearly everything.
 
:lol
 
superpunk said:
ok well nice, you've identified one bad deal that people thought might be a bad deal at the time. bravo cap experts, you're all retarded.

You hated the Oscan and Church deals (which now look great), loved Free and Miles (which now look....I don't know/and terrible), and are wrong about nearly everything.
Click to expand...

Who is Oscan? And people were mostly meh, though somewhat concerned, about the Church deal considering some people never recover from an Achilles injury. It's not like that one was a lot of money or anyone thought we'd be cap strapped over it. Stop trying to impose your sick imaginary reality on everyone else. We know our own opinions here and we've all been posting here long enough to throw each other's ACTUAL opinions in each other's faces.
 
How does he know what we thought about those signings?
 
Obviously "we" is theoretical, as in "the overwhelming majority of Cowboys fans" - which I know because I don't live in a bubble.
 
superpunk said:
Obviously "we" is theoretical, as in "the overwhelming majority of Cowboys fans" - which I know because I don't live in a bubble.
Click to expand...

Well, we on this board aren't your typical finger-foam waving fans, so be more specific and you won't get responses like that.
 
superpunk said:
ok well nice, you've identified one bad deal that people thought might be a bad deal at the time. bravo cap experts, you're all retarded.

You hated the Oscan and Church deals (which now look great), loved Free and Miles (which now look....I don't know/and terrible), and are wrong about nearly everything.
Click to expand...

And, that said you not we, so you actually were being specific which is even more retarded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom