Hey Twist

[cdumler7]

That's the issue though. The Cowboys can't get under the cap without reworking Ware. It's really either push money back or release

I did not know that...Well it is decisions like this that define a Front Office. If it was up to me then I would say cut him. Yes he might have another couple of good years left in him but if keeping him is going to keep the Cowboys from signing the young talent down the road and from making any kind of signings to actually help the team then he needs to go. The best teams in the league know that it is better to cut talent a year or two before they start going downhill rather than have to sign them and keep them well past their prime.

 

[PDay8810]

Lee, Romo, & Carr

 

[jarntt]

That's the issue though. The Cowboys can't get under the cap without reworking Ware. It's really either push money back or release

I think they can get under without reworking Ware, but it will of course be easier if they decide what they want to do with him

 

[UK Cowboy]

I think they can get under without reworking Ware, but it will of course be easier if they decide what they want to do with him

You may be right in that they can get under the number by redoing Romo and Carr and releasing Austin and others. The thing is, in addition to the players they let go, the $25 million over doesn't reflect losing Hatcher and Spencer as well, as they are UFA. We are going to need some money to fill out the roster, and I haven't seen anyone work it out without lowering Ware's number. I hope you're right

 

[Schmoopy1000]

BJJ you go on any thread Twist or whoever you have a vendetta against & just start trash talking attempting to hijack or ruin the thread. Why dont you just make a thread of your own for the two of you to talk shit to each other at & leave all the other threads alone? One thing to get in aan argument over what ever the subject is. its a whole other thing when you are just trying to ruin conversations needing attention.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Dead money counts against the Cap so this past year Oakland because of so many bad contracts pretty much had to have a year where they couldn't hardly sign anybody and cut some of their biggest contracts. Because of this they had $49 million in dead money. This is money that is paid out to the players even though they are not on the team so Oakland still had to spend the money they just didn't actually have the players on the field. That then allowed them this year to have a huge amount of cap space. Pretty much it boiled down to Oakland's ownership kept pushing contracts back to the point at some point they all had to count against the Cap and Oakland just decided to forfeit one season pretty much so that they could get back on the right track.

now I was told we can only have about 25 mil. of dead money without penalty. So is this true? & if so why wouldnt the Raiders have a penaty for 49 mil of dead money?

 

[cdumler7]

now I was told we can only have about 25 mil. of dead money without penalty. So is this true? & if so why wouldnt the Raiders have a penaty for 49 mil of dead money?

I don't think there is a penalty for too much dead money. At least I have never seen that. Pretty much every team wants to avoid it as it is money actually paid to players so you kind of like to see that money actually on the field instead of the players sitting at home cashing a pay check. To me that is penalty enough for teams to try and avoid any and all dead money.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

This is actually where having an owner who's willing to spend money like Jerry could be a tremendous advantage, if he ever got his cap under control. If your squad were $30-$40 million under the cap, you could resign all your good young players a year before they hit FA. But instead of giving them a huge signing bonus, which would have to be prorated as dead money over the remainder of the deal, you could simply give them a huge first year salary, and actually lower your cap figure in the future as the player got older. An example would be T.Smith. Just using a hypothetical number, lets say Dallas wanted to resign him for 5 years/$50 million. They would probably give him a $10 million signing bonus, but instead of paying him $8 million for each years salary, they'd probably give him a first year salary of $2 million, making the first year cap hit $4 million, meaning after year one we still owe him $38 million for 4 years, but cap wise, $46 million for 4 years, $11.5/year. If you had the space under the cap, the same $12 million you gave him in year one($2 million salary plus $10 million SB) could just be his first year salary, meaning your cap hit for the next four years would be $9.5 million a year instead of $11.5 million

I think this is how it would be. Either front load a contract or even, space it out evenly. The problem is the Player has to much power with holding out.
You front load a contract & give him all his money up front & as soon as that portion of the contract is done & he is gonna get paid less. He holds out to get his salary back up to where he thinks it belongs. Even though technically he is being paid properly. That is why (well one of the reasons) everything is back loaded.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

I don't think there is a penalty for too much dead money. At least I have never seen that. Pretty much every team wants to avoid it as it is money actually paid to players so you kind of like to see that money actually on the field instead of the players sitting at home cashing a pay check. To me that is penalty enough for teams to try and avoid any and all dead money.

yeah I get why teams dont like to have a ton of dead money. But believe it was twist (I never read official cap rules LOL) told us when we were trying to figure out what we can & cant do to get under the cap, said we can only have 25 mil. of dead money. (having something to do with the 85% rule)
So I cant debate it with you or him. I am just asking questions trying to clarify what is allowed or not. (I am cap rule stupid)

 

[cdumler7]

yeah I get why teams dont like to have a ton of dead money. But believe it was twist (I never read official cap rules LOL) told us when we were trying to figure out what we can & cant do to get under the cap, said we can only have 25 mil. of dead money. (having something to do with the 85% rule)
So I cant debate it with you or him. I am just asking questions trying to clarify what is allowed or not. (I am cap rule stupid)

Everything I have read has said you just have to spend 89% of the cap on average over the next 4-5 years if I remember right. So you can actually be under that number for a year or two but there is a major penalty if you don't over the time period plus have to pay the difference to the NFLPA anyway so might as well spend it on players.

Dead money because it is actual money paid out I don't know if a team could be penalized as all the NFLPA cares about is that players are being paid whether that is actual on the field play or sitting at home.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Everything I have read has said you just have to spend 89% of the cap on average over the next 4-5 years if I remember right. So you can actually be under that number for a year or two but there is a major penalty if you don't over the time period plus have to pay the difference to the NFLPA anyway so might as well spend it on players.

Dead money because it is actual money paid out I don't know if a team could be penalized as all the NFLPA cares about is that players are being paid whether that is actual on the field play or sitting at home.

Hmmm.... well that might change some of the strategies on what we do with our cap this year then. Think we might have a year of a lot of dead money coming up.

 

[jarntt]

You may be right in that they can get under the number by redoing Romo and Carr and releasing Austin and others. The thing is, in addition to the players they let go, the $25 million over doesn't reflect losing Hatcher and Spencer as well, as they are UFA. We are going to need some money to fill out the roster, and I haven't seen anyone work it out without lowering Ware's number. I hope you're right

Our ability to fill out the roster with anything other than cheaper type FAs went out the window a few bad contracts ago. Better hope we draft well this year.

 

[Sharkinva]

Just a friendly info byte on the whole 89% thing. That goes into effect this year. So every team must spend atleast $114 million in cap dollars this year. There is no official limit on how much dead money you can have and dead money counts in that minimum $114 spent. So if a team has a dead money pool of $12 million, they must still spend atleast $102 million on active roster players. The Bucs didnt get tacked because they didnt violate anything as far as minimum spending as the old rule off 85% was met. They carried $15 million in dead money last year.

 

[cdumler7]

Just a friendly info byte on the whole 89% thing. That goes into effect this year. So every team must spend atleast $114 million in cap dollars this year. There is no official limit on how much dead money you can have and dead money counts in that minimum $114 spent. So if a team has a dead money pool of $12 million, they must still spend atleast $102 million on active roster players. The Bucs didnt get tacked because they didnt violate anything as far as minimum spending as the old rule off 85% was met. They carried $15 million in dead money last year.

The Salary Cap floor actually started this past season. A team does not have to spend the 89% every single year. The way the CBA is written it is just that a team has to average that over a 4 year period (2013-2016). So a team could spend 80% of the cap figure and still be fine and within the legal rules as long as they average out to 89% after that.

 

[PDay8810]

The Salary Cap floor actually started this past season. A team does not have to spend the 89% every single year. The way the CBA is written it is just that a team has to average that over a 4 year period (2013-2016). So a team could spend 80% of the cap figure and still be fine and within the legal rules as long as they average out to 89% after that.

THIS^^^^^^^

 

[tw1st3d]

The year Tampa was under was the year the NFL played without a contract. Not last year.

I havent seen where it has to be spread out over 4 years either.... but even if that is the case it's not a major amount of money.

And the floor cap has been there for years. It's to keep football from turning into baseball. Where you have a 40 million roster playing against a 120 million roster

 

[ArlingtonCowboys100]

The salary cap will wreck the Seahawks roster in a few years. By then the Cowboys should be under again. Not sure of the complete details of Romos contract though. Romo has maybe two good seasons left before his skills erode. I think Carr,Ware and Lee will all be gone by the 2016 season

 

[cdumler7]

The salary cap will wreck the Seahawks roster in a few years. By then the Cowboys should be under again. Not sure of the complete details of Romos contract though. Romo has maybe two good seasons left before his skills erode. I think Carr,Ware and Lee will all be gone by the 2016 season

For the Seahawks it will all depend if they have a couple of nice drafts or not. Pretty much if they draft well then they should be able to stay near the top with very affordable young talent. If they mess up the next couple of draft then yes they will fall back down to earth and be a middle of the pack type team.

 

[tw1st3d]

For the Seahawks it will all depend if they have a couple of nice drafts or not. Pretty much if they draft well then they should be able to stay near the top with very affordable young talent. If they mess up the next couple of draft then yes they will fall back down to earth and be a middle of the pack type team.

^^^^^^^ This

This is the key for any good team in the NFL. Drafting well.

Free Agency will kill you. Maybe if you are one player away .... but the way the league is now you can't go out and buy a team and expect to keep it together nor expect it not to cripple you in the future.

Right now the Seahawks are the youngest team in the league. But if they draft well..... They wont have to give mega contracts to a guy like Sherman or some of the others.

 

[UK Cowboy]

The salary cap will wreck the Seahawks roster in a few years. By then the Cowboys should be under again. Not sure of the complete details of Romos contract though. Romo has maybe two good seasons left before his skills erode. I think Carr,Ware and Lee will all be gone by the 2016 season

I have to disagree. If you look at the way they've drafted the last few years, there's no reason to think they won't continue to draft well. If they do that, they may actually get better