Salary Cap Management At Its Finest

[marionbarberthe4th]

Our cap situation is great, I'm sure Jerry loves the embarrassing realization that he may have to cut Demarcus ware at 32 years old.

And I wouldn't answer that question I posed either

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The premise was flawed so why bother? You not liking Boardwalk Empire?

Demarcus Ware has a spinal injury that has reoccurred for three years and his productivity has plummeted. From a production standpoint, he doesn't merit half of what his is scheduled to earn.

A pragmatist cuts him now. Jerry Jones probably won't.

 

[Hoofbite]

Fuck it.

http://overthecap.com/teamcash.php?Team=Cowboys&Year=2013

Last year the Cowboys cash spent $125m. The cap was $123m

Hoof's conclusions are wrong. That was difficult.

Further if the cap floor is 89% of the cap then that means the floor for last years was ~$110m. That gives us about $15m that we overspent that can make up for future years.

We are ahead of the floor game.

Actually they spent $137M so their overages amount to about $27M. You didn't count the "dead money" on that page which was actually cash payments to those players.

Try this page:

http://overthecap.com/nfl-cash-space.php?Year=2013

Now seeing how you've fucked up I could be a dickhead and immediately write off anything you've said and completely disregard the argument from here as you have done to me. Not only on this site but at CZ too when you clearly didn't even read what I had posted over there and then quoted me as saying "stuff". Since I'm more interested in the topic than I am in actually trying to come off as the "correct" party in a discussion that neither of us has a totally inclusive grasp on I'm going to post what I have been looking at.

$35M of their spending came from Romo and Lee getting a signing bonus. Doubt they give out bonuses like that every single year so getting ahead of the game on the back of bonuses given to a franchise QB and a top quality LB isn't really going to help out in the future.

Right now they're going to spend about $96M in cash in 2014. They're far over the cap so their restructuring will not be used to do anything but get under.

Cut Ware and Austin and the cash spending drops to about $79M for 2014. All $27M in overages gone. In fact, $7M under at this point.

They'll have $2M in cap space by restructuring Romo, Lee, and Carr. When June 1st hits they get another $10M.

All these moves puts Dallas at $7M under the 2015 cap. After subtracting Ware and Austin's base salaries, their cash spending is around $71M for the 2015 year. I don't know what the story for Free is but he's on 2015 so I guess it could be less cash spending and a little more space. Either way, they have bout $40M in cash they need to spend to get to the 89% for the 2015 year.

Overthecap's calculator is a salary cap calculator and doesn't keep cash spending versus proration as it should so it's been a bit difficult to work out the mismatches I've been coming across.

All these are hypotheticals and are subject to change but here's the most simplistic view because it's at this point in time.

Non-cash cap charges:

2014: $55M ($43.2 in prorated money, $11.8M in dead money)
2015: $38M
2016: $23M

That's $116M in non-cash cap charges. This number cannot be reduced by any means.

Cash Spending:

2014: $96M
2015: $92M
2016: $78M

All these numbers will drop significantly if Ware and Austin are cut. The net gain of prorated money would be about $2M over the 4 year span because you accelerate 2017 prorations on to 2014/2015 depending on the cut stats.

If you throw in their 2013 spending the total comes out to $403M before factoring in what cutting Austin and Ware would do.

Cap Space:

2014: -$23M
2015: -$4M
2016: $26M

Cap space will be worked out by restructuring and cutting Ware and Austin. They could have about $7M next year

In short, they are $60M over the 11% proration amount moving forward. They are about $50M short of the cash spending that will be required before even factoring in Ware or Austin not having a base salary for the years of 2014, 2015, and 2016. They have almost nothing to work with in terms of cap space and the moves they will make just to get under this year will increase the proration totals for 2015 and 2016 but won't increase the cash spending at all. They'll have about $12M to work with but that has come at the expense of adding about $12M in prorated money over the 2015 and 2016 seasons.

Restructuring Lee, Romo, Carr and cutting Ware and Austin on June 1st would give Dallas about $7M in cap space for 2015 and $47M in cap space for 2016 but they've only got about 16 players under contract in that year so the vast majority of that money will be spoken for just by getting enough players on the roster.

Will Dallas definitely be short? Who knows. That's why I have been asking.

I just think it's hard to imagine how being on the wrong side of all the important numbers would play out in Dallas favor without some ridiculous shit happening.

The only real way you can increase cash spending without an equal increase in cap spending is to give giant signing bonuses because you can spread them. A couple giant signing bonuses in 2015 and 2016 may do it because the majority of those bonuses would fall in future years.

Either way, I think it's hard to say that the outlook is all that favorable.

They're well over the 11% cutoff which by itself doesn't mean they can't get to the floor. But, when paired with being projected to be short of the cash floor by quite a bit and not a lot of salary cap space to work with, it's just hard to see where the cash spending comes from.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. I really wish overthecap had a multi-year calculator and you could carry out the data much further.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

There's dem venn diagrams and pie charts

 

[Hoofbite]

Well it seems you do not know what a spreadsheet is because I see none in this thread or the one linked or the one from the zone.

This thread he basically said he hasked the question in another thread got no satisfactory answer, listed total cap space of other teams in future years, threw in the baseless assertion that restructures don't matter and then goes into hyperbole about how fucked we are.

I have been watching him throw a t tantrum about the cap for months now. He was firmly rebuffed regarding our cap situation from AdamJT and has since moved onto this. He is very obviously arguing for a conclusion and not just letting the conclusion be based on facts come as they may. He jumped the gun with shit like:

Sure seems like a tempered openminded conclusion to a post.

And the reason why I say the dismissal of restructures is baseless its because its stupid. If you can restructure to get under the cap then that means you can use the cap space to sign new players or extend your own.

Then you have the nature of how signing bonuses are accounted over 5 year periods and there are only three years left of the floor window. That allows you to balloon the hell out of SB which only count 1/5 of their total from year to year. A $5m SB only counts $1m against the cap in a given year and will only count $3m during the floor accounting period total. Next year that last part will be even less and so on.

He ignores what we did the first year and fearmongers based on the unknown. He has been doing it regarding our cap circumstance and he just moved on to this after Adam demonstrated how he was wrong.

I really wish Adam would chime in on this aspect. Also, I haven't "moved on to" anything because I brought this up at both this site and CZ a long ass time ago.

Me and Adam disagree and I have really tried to avoid the obvious low-hanging fruit that kind of pisses in the face of his argument, but I'll pose the questions to you.

1. If Adam is correct, why isn't every team in the NFL in the exact same situation seeing how there's a benefit to "money now"?

2. If Adam is correct, why hasn't it paid off for Dallas?

These are really easy questions and I'm just going to take a stab that the response will be that Dallas is in the position they are in because they have signed bad contracts, not because they have restructured.

Well here's my preemptive rebuttal to that. If being able to read the future in knowing which players will work out and which players will not is a prerequisite to making all the restructuring Dallas does a good idea there's nothing more to even discuss.

If you're going to grant me that kind of ability in the first place then I don't need all the damn cap space because I'll be picking up every soon-to-be breakout player before he blows up. I'll be drafting every single Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, Russell Wilson, Tom Brady, and whoever else.

Contracts go bad and it's unavoidable at times. Having the entire argument hinge on whether or not a team can perfectly project into the future is just bullshit.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

I have that kind of ability I liked Russell Wilson in the draft

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I really wish Adam would chime in on this aspect. Also, I haven't "moved on to" anything because I brought this up at both this site and CZ a long ass time ago.

Me and Adam disagree and I have really tried to avoid the obvious low-hanging fruit that kind of pisses in the face of his argument, but I'll pose the questions to you.

1. If Adam is correct, why isn't every team in the NFL in the exact same situation seeing how there's a benefit to "money now"?

2. If Adam is correct, why hasn't it paid off for Dallas?

These are really easy questions and I'm just going to take a stab that the response will be that Dallas is in the position they are in because they have signed bad contracts, not because they have restructured.

Well here's my preemptive rebuttal to that. If being able to read the future in knowing which players will work out and which players will not is a prerequisite to making all the restructuring Dallas does a good idea there's nothing more to even discuss.

If you're going to grant me that kind of ability in the first place then I don't need all the damn cap space because I'll be picking up every soon-to-be breakout player before he blows up. I'll be drafting every single Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, Russell Wilson, Tom Brady, and whoever else.

Contracts go bad and it's unavoidable at times. Having the entire argument hinge on whether or not a team can perfectly project into the future is just bullshit.

Those aren't easy questions. They don't even speak to the question at hand as to the effectiveness of using SB and/or frontloading contracts.

1) Do other teams have to use SB and frontload contracts for it to be an effective strategy? No, as such your question doesn't say much either way. Also, other teams do use large SB and frontload contracts especially large market teams that have cash at hand year after year after year. Your question assumes that other teams indeed do/will not use similar trade practices. That is far from being established.

2) What does 'paid off' mean? There are a couple of ways to look at it. From a W-L perspective, it hasn't helped because SB rich contracts have gone to guys like Ware, Austin, and Ratliff who for whatever reason have not contributed much on the field. From a economic standpoint, you are able to pay all those guys however many millions they make and then pay another $40m to Romo, Lee, and the draft class. Now if you can somehow quantify it then how does it compare to other teams?



We paid about $15m over the floor last year. It should have been $20m but we got screwed by the league. It's an average so for estimations we can just apply it to this year or any other year that we are 'short.'

Even without Ware and Austin who are set to earn $20m this year, we would still have $72m payable which would rank us 14th or right above the median. Ware is also not guaranteed to be cut. If he is cut then we will have at $8m plus however much the cap expands quite easily to spend. We can use said money to balloon payments and replace Ware and Austin's contract with Smith and Bryant for example. If that happens we will be once again be well over the floor.

Now if the absolute worst happens and we are in 2015 and the team dies in a tragic logging accident so we are unable to IR them and we can only spend $30m on a team the next two years then the worst thing that can happen is the club is required to pay the difference back to the players who are on the roster. Oh noes!

You're wringing your hands over dead money still. You are determined for it to be a problem even if you have not yet determined how.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

You seriously need to work on your reading comprehension, oh erudite one. Hoof said at the very beginning that he was looking into the possibility that the floor *may* fuck us in the future. He never said it definitely would happen. He isn't throwing any tantrums or wringing his hands. The only person doing that and it's you.

Really, you aren't even being a very good troll.

 

[Hoofbite]

Those aren't easy questions. They don't even speak to the question at hand as to the effectiveness of using SB and/or frontloading contracts.

1) Do other teams have to use SB and frontload contracts for it to be an effective strategy? No, as such your question doesn't say much either way. Also, other teams do use large SB and frontload contracts especially large market teams that have cash at hand year after year after year. Your question assumes that other teams indeed do/will not use similar trade practices. That is far from being established.

I'm pretty confident that Dallas restructures more than other teams. Ware has restructured every year for like 3 straight years and I'm not sure there's example of another team doing that with one of the biggest contracts year-in and year-out.

Restructuring does happen across the league. My question was about why other teams don't follow Dallas' lead and have their highest contracts restructure on what is almost an annual basis? I can't think of another team that has their own Ware and then has restructuring similar to Romo and Austin as well.

If such teams exist, why are they not in the same position as Dallas?

2) What does 'paid off' mean? There are a couple of ways to look at it. From a W-L perspective, it hasn't helped because SB rich contracts have gone to guys like Ware, Austin, and Ratliff who for whatever reason have not contributed much on the field. From a economic standpoint, you are able to pay all those guys however many millions they make and then pay another $40m to Romo, Lee, and the draft class. Now if you can somehow quantify it then how does it compare to other teams?

Underachievers happen for every team. Go look at Seattle and what Zach Miller, Sidney Rice, and Chris Clemons took up in cap space. Now see what happens when those guys are cut, compared to what happens when Dallas cuts Ware and Austin.

One team opens up about $20M in cap space to actually use. The other cuts it cap deficit in half and has to make more moves to remove the other $8M-$10M that is still needed to be cut just to get under the salary cap.

We paid about $15m over the floor last year. It should have been $20m but we got screwed by the league. It's an average so for estimations we can just apply it to this year or any other year that we are 'short.'

Even without Ware and Austin who are set to earn $20m this year, we would still have $72m payable which would rank us 14th or right above the median. Ware is also not guaranteed to be cut. If he is cut then we will have at $8m plus however much the cap expands quite easily to spend. We can use said money to balloon payments and replace Ware and Austin's contract with Smith and Bryant for example. If that happens we will be once again be well over the floor.

No, cutting Ware does not allow the team to spend more. They are $23M over the cap so cutting Ware doesn't even get even. Cutting Austin doesn't give them a dollar more either. They have to do these things just to get under the salary cap.

The cap has already been announced so Dallas $23M overage is set. There will be no additional money coming from an increase.

Lastly, as I pointed out cutting Ware and Austin and restructuring Lee, Romo, and Carr gives the team $12M in space. $10M does not come until June 1st however. So for the free agent period they will not have money to spend unless they continue further with restructuring.

Of that $12M, $5M will be dedicated to rookies which leaves $7-$8M to actually try and increase the cash spending number which will be at $83M once the rookie contracts come on board.

That's the entire point. They're under on the cash side but do not have the ability to make it up for the given year because they are over on the cap side.

Here's the cash spending number for each team. It includes however many contract each team has, which is why Dallas is set at $106 when they only have $101 (I said $96M above but was looking at base salaries by mistake). So Dallas would have $77M, and not the $72M I said earlier.

http://www.overthecap.com/nfl-cash-space.php?Year=2014

Even $83M is towards the bottom of the league. The difference between those teams and Dallas being many of the teams lower than Dallas can spend however much they want where as Dallas cannot.

Now if the absolute worst happens and we are in 2015 and the team dies in a tragic logging accident so we are unable to IR them and we can only spend $30m on a team the next two years then the worst thing that can happen is the club is required to pay the difference back to the players who are on the roster. Oh noes!

You're wringing your hands over dead money still. You are determined for it to be a problem even if you have not yet determined how.

Actually, nobody knows what the consequences might be. I've asked if they would be similar to other inabilities to get cap compliant which may include loss of draft picks but nobody knows.

I'll admit I don't know.

I've outlined exactly how it could be a problem. I'm just not sure you're following along because you seem to think that cutting Ware will open $8M in cash that could be spent and that's not even close to reality.

Here's the picture.

Cash spending: $101M
Salary cap overage: $23M

Cutting Ware and Austin will put the team at this:

Cash spending: $83M
Salary cap overage: $6.5M (much more until June 1st)

That's the problem. The moves the team MUST make to get cap compliant will also reduce their cash spending, but because they weren't under the salary cap in the first place they do not see any sort of surplus in cap space with which they can go out and spend more cash.

 

[Jon88]

Fuzzy and Hoofbite really burn the midnight oil around here.

 

[Hoofbite]

Fuzzy and Hoofbite really burn the midnight oil around here.

I prefer to lube myself up with it like Burt Reynolds in Striptease.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

This reeks of the Michael Vick defense. Doesn't it, fuzzy?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuzzy and Hoofbite really burn the midnight oil around here.

And you go to bed at 9PM with a glass of Geritol.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm pretty confident that Dallas restructures more than other teams. Ware has restructured every year for like 3 straight years and I'm not sure there's example of another team doing that with one of the biggest contracts year-in and year-out.

Restructuring does happen across the league. My question was about why other teams don't follow Dallas' lead and have their highest contracts restructure on what is almost an annual basis? I can't think of another team that has their own Ware and then has restructuring similar to Romo and Austin as well.

If such teams exist, why are they not in the same position as Dallas?



Underachievers happen for every team. Go look at Seattle and what Zach Miller, Sidney Rice, and Chris Clemons took up in cap space. Now see what happens when those guys are cut, compared to what happens when Dallas cuts Ware and Austin.

One team opens up about $20M in cap space to actually use. The other cuts it cap deficit in half and has to make more moves to remove the other $8M-$10M that is still needed to be cut just to get under the salary cap.



No, cutting Ware does not allow the team to spend more. They are $23M over the cap so cutting Ware doesn't even get even. Cutting Austin doesn't give them a dollar more either. They have to do these things just to get under the salary cap.

The cap has already been announced so Dallas $23M overage is set. There will be no additional money coming from an increase.

Lastly, as I pointed out cutting Ware and Austin and restructuring Lee, Romo, and Carr gives the team $12M in space. $10M does not come until June 1st however. So for the free agent period they will not have money to spend unless they continue further with restructuring.

Of that $12M, $5M will be dedicated to rookies which leaves $7-$8M to actually try and increase the cash spending number which will be at $83M once the rookie contracts come on board.

That's the entire point. They're under on the cash side but do not have the ability to make it up for the given year because they are over on the cap side.

Here's the cash spending number for each team. It includes however many contract each team has, which is why Dallas is set at $106 when they only have $101 (I said $96M above but was looking at base salaries by mistake). So Dallas would have $77M, and not the $72M I said earlier.

http://www.overthecap.com/nfl-cash-space.php?Year=2014

Even $83M is towards the bottom of the league. The difference between those teams and Dallas being many of the teams lower than Dallas can spend however much they want where as Dallas cannot.



Actually, nobody knows what the consequences might be. I've asked if they would be similar to other inabilities to get cap compliant which may include loss of draft picks but nobody knows.

I'll admit I don't know.

I've outlined exactly how it could be a problem. I'm just not sure you're following along because you seem to think that cutting Ware will open $8M in cash that could be spent and that's not even close to reality.

Here's the picture.

Cash spending: $101M
Salary cap overage: $23M

Cutting Ware and Austin will put the team at this:

Cash spending: $83M
Salary cap overage: $6.5M (much more until June 1st)

That's the problem. The moves the team MUST make to get cap compliant will also reduce their cash spending, but because they weren't under the salary cap in the first place they do not see any sort of surplus in cap space with which they can go out and spend more cash.

I'm pretty confident you do not have a good gauge on the trade practices of the other 31 NFL teams.

The rookie class is cash spending. You cannot just discount that. You still don't acknowledge the overage from last year. Even if the money is not extended until into next year then that is still in the window so who cares? We can extend Smith and Bryant then.

I went to overthecap.com. On their calculator I do the following.

cut outright ie no june 1 waiting for cap space: austin durant parnell costa
restructure: romo, carr, lee, witten, scandrick

I end up with:

2014 $124,057,586 $127,943,134 $3,885,548
2015 $127,872,873 $126,095,000 ($1,777,873)

 

[Hoofbite]

I'm pretty confident you do not have a good gauge on the trade practices of the other 31 NFL teams.

There's 1 team who has a greater sum of prorated money through the year 2016. It's Detroit and much of it ($45M of $110M) is because of Suh and Stafford.

Both signed deals with $40M guaranteed in back-to-back years under the old rookie scale and they've been moving dollars around ever since.

Dallas is currently at $104M but I'd bet Dallas overtakes Detroit by March 11th when teams have to be under the cap.

Ravens are a close #3 followed by the Saints($11M Less), Panthers ($12M Less), Patriots ($16M Less), and Cardinals ($82M Less).

Beyond that, Dallas is #1 it projected cap charges between now and the end of the period.

The combination means lots of cap space already utilized, much of which cannot be moved or come off the books and will eat space no matter what, and significant amounts of the prorated money tied to a few guys with big base salaries.

The rookie class is cash spending. You cannot just discount that.

I didn't discount it. I included it.

Of that $12M, $5M will be dedicated to rookies which leaves $7-$8M to actually try and increase the cash spending number which will be at $83M once the rookie contracts come on board.

You still don't acknowledge the overage from last year.

I mentioned it earlier but had the number wrong. The result is similar. $83M in cashing spending would eat away all the excess and then some. The excess came on the back of $35M in signing bonuses and a franchise tag. Neither of which is going to happen this year. Well, I guess anything could happen but I don't foresee huge free agent signings and I don't believe you do either based on a couple of posts you've had at the zone.

Even if the money is not extended until into next year then that is still in the window so who cares? We can extend Smith and Bryant then.

I guess nobody cares if you're not planning on trying to sign free agents to better your team and instead are relying solely on the draft.

The team is losing Hatcher, possibly Ware, and 6 other players are free agents. It'd be nice to replace some guys lost with players with experience, even vet minimum types.

Extending those guys will help because of the signing bonuses. We'll have to see how much they get.

I went to overthecap.com. On their calculator I do the following.

cut outright ie no june 1 waiting for cap space: austin durant parnell costa
restructure: romo, carr, lee, witten, scandrick

I end up with:

2014 $124,057,586 $127,943,134 $3,885,548
2015 $127,872,873 $126,095,000 ($1,777,873)

Which isn't enough for the rookie pool. It'll likely take another $1M just based on last years #16 and #17 pools.

One kinda cool thing I noticed about the calculator is that it immediately shifts the next most expensive contract into the top 51 when cutting guys.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There's 1 team who has a greater sum of prorated money through the year 2016. It's Detroit and much of it ($45M of $110M) is because of Suh and Stafford.

Both signed deals with $40M guaranteed in back-to-back years under the old rookie scale and they've been moving dollars around ever since.

Dallas is currently at $104M but I'd bet Dallas overtakes Detroit by March 11th when teams have to be under the cap.

Ravens are a close #3 followed by the Saints($11M Less), Panthers ($12M Less), Patriots ($16M Less), and Cardinals ($82M Less).

Beyond that, Dallas is #1 it projected cap charges between now and the end of the period.

The combination means lots of cap space already utilized, much of which cannot be moved or come off the books and will eat space no matter what, and significant amounts of the prorated money tied to a few guys with big base salaries.



I didn't discount it. I included it.





I mentioned it earlier but had the number wrong. The result is similar. $83M in cashing spending would eat away all the excess and then some. The excess came on the back of $35M in signing bonuses and a franchise tag. Neither of which is going to happen this year. Well, I guess anything could happen but I don't foresee huge free agent signings and I don't believe you do either based on a couple of posts you've had at the zone.



I guess nobody cares if you're not planning on trying to sign free agents to better your team and instead are relying solely on the draft.

The team is losing Hatcher, possibly Ware, and 6 other players are free agents. It'd be nice to replace some guys lost with players with experience, even vet minimum types.

Extending those guys will help because of the signing bonuses. We'll have to see how much they get.



Which isn't enough for the rookie pool. It'll likely take another $1M just based on last years #16 and #17 pools.

One kinda cool thing I noticed about the calculator is that it immediately shifts the next most expensive contract into the top 51 when cutting guys.

last year the cowboys restructured everyone they possibly could. you can attribute that to whatever you like but I don't see them but I don't believe they would have done as much of that if not for the cap penalty.

and the cap by all accounts is going to go up to about $130m which will be more than enough to cover it. that or you restructure Bailey which really should be a an obvious candidate anyway.

all i am pointing out is that we are not required to get rid of Ware to be able to function. All I did before was make what I thought were sensible moves. Costa and Parnell making $1.9m is a travesty. Durant who was hurt and ineffective does not deserve to make the same as Bailey.

scandrick, lee, romo, witten, and carr are obvious restructures. you can free up more room by dipping into other players like Free or such. for the nutty drive hoof mad with restructures method i use teh same cuts but I restructure every veteran from LP Ladouceur on up, I can generate

2014 $110,401,503 $127,943,134 $17,541,631
2015 $133,726,790 $126,095,000 ($7,631,790)

at this point I am doing foolish things like giving free, berny and ware restructures but the point is there is still a ton of wiggle. once miles is off the books, the only 'bad' contract on the accounting is Ware's but that is only because they are at the tailend of what looking back has been a very good contract.

 

[junk]

I guess nobody cares if you're not planning on trying to sign free agents to better your team and instead are relying solely on the draft.

The team is losing Hatcher, possibly Ware, and 6 other players are free agents. It'd be nice to replace some guys lost with players with experience, even vet minimum types.

Extending those guys will help because of the signing bonuses. We'll have to see how much they get.

I think a combination of factors will probably mean Dallas meets the cap floor. The yearly restructures will will be an injection of cash (for that year anyway). Although it lowers the cash spend via salary, it still counts against the overall cash spend, correct? And they will extend Dez and Murray.

But, to your point, no they won't be signing much in free agents and will rely on the draft to improve their team. There is a reason why Stephen has been harping about having to play young guys a lot lately.

My guess is that they try to keep this core together, supplement via the draft and try to get cap healthy once the new TV money hits in 2016.

 

[Hoofbite]

I think a combination of factors will probably mean Dallas meets the cap floor. The yearly restructures will will be an injection of cash (for that year anyway). Although it lowers the cash spend via salary, it still counts against the overall cash spend, correct?

No, it's a neutral move for the year it's done.

Pay the player $15M in base salary over 16 games or pay him $15M in March. It's still the same.

The only way restructuring would help increase cash spending is if you took the freed up money to sign other players.

You have to basically add new money to add cash spending.

And they will extend Dez and Murray.

Dez and Tyron will help only to the extent that their SBs are large. I doubt Dallas has a lot of cap room in 2015 to take good sized base salaries for Dez or Tyron so it's going to have to be the bonus that drives the help from these two.

But, to your point, no they won't be signing much in free agents and will rely on the draft to improve their team. There is a reason why Stephen has been harping about having to play young guys a lot lately.

My guess is that they try to keep this core together, supplement via the draft and try to get cap healthy once the new TV money hits in 2016.

I think they're kinda stuck with not really being all that active. They have 2 big contracts on the horizon and no room right now so it's basically gonna be this team moving forward, warts and all.

Hope there's a bunch more George Selvies to be found.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No, it's a neutral move for the year it's done.

Pay the player $15M in base salary over 16 games or pay him $15M in March. It's still the same.

The only way restructuring would help increase cash spending is if you took the freed up money to sign other players.

You have to basically add new money to add cash spending.



Dez and Tyron will help only to the extent that their SBs are large. I doubt Dallas has a lot of cap room in 2015 to take good sized base salaries for Dez or Tyron so it's going to have to be the bonus that drives the help from these two.



I think they're kinda stuck with not really being all that active. They have 2 big contracts on the horizon and no room right now so it's basically gonna be this team moving forward, warts and all.

Hope there's a bunch more George Selvies to be found.

What basis do you have for saying they won't have cap room next year? The have Romo's built in restructure and cutting Ware will save them an additional $12m or something. That is without even looking to other contracts.

They are right at the cap as it is whereas recent years have seen them at numbers that have you guys screaming bloody murder. You be paranoid, holmes.

 

[Hoofbite]

What basis do you have for saying they won't have cap room next year? The have Romo's built in restructure and cutting Ware will save them an additional $12m or something. That is without even looking to other contracts.

They are right at the cap as it is whereas recent years have seen them at numbers that have you guys screaming bloody murder. You be paranoid, holmes.

They are at the cap now, will restructure this year and sign Dez an Tyron.

You think they'll be active next year beyond keeping their own?