Jump to content

Cowboys cut Dan Bailey

Pool

By Pool
in NFL News

Recommended Posts

matt79511

matt79511

Posted
Posted

I choose to believe this is more cap-related than anything... although we already had plenty of room...

If the plan is to roll over like $10M into next year to help pay for extensions to Dak and D-Law, then I guess that makes sense, but it's also infuriating to see us fail to capitalize on Prescott's rookie contract window. The alternative might be that we're just tanking Garrett's last year, but that seems unlikely as hell given how long he's survived here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
matt79511

matt79511

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, goldfishwars said:

Kicking historically accurate kickers to save a bit of cash has always worked out well. 

He fell from 93% in '15 to 84% and 75% in the last two years, respectively. They have to have felt that was a trend, not a coincidence.

There's no sense in employing a freaking kicker at any rate above the minimum if he's liable to miss a month with a pulled hammy, groin, or back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matts4313

Matts4313

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, matt79511 said:

I choose to believe this is more cap-related than anything... although we already had plenty of room...

If the plan is to roll over like $10M into next year to help pay for extensions to Dak and D-Law, then I guess that makes sense, but it's also infuriating to see us fail to capitalize on Prescott's rookie contract window. The alternative might be that we're just tanking Garrett's last year, but that seems unlikely as hell given how long he's survived here.

Or option 2. He was beat out in camp?

 

We didnt really have a rookie QB window like the Hawks or Eagles. We were already at max cap due to Romo/Witten/Dez/Etc. The plus side is they are all off the books this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
matt79511

matt79511

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

Or option 2. He was beat out in camp? We didnt really have a rookie QB window like the Hawks or Eagles. We were already at max cap due to Romo/Witten/Dez/Etc.

The plus side is they are all off the books this year.

Regardless of how much dead $ we have on the books (Witten isn't costing us anything), we still have ~$15M in cap room, and even after practice squad and in-season signings, figure to roll over 8 figures into next year, barring some sort of trade acquisition.

So maybe Bailey got beat out by Maher, but we still seem to be optimizing our chances down the road at the expense of this year. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

And I know some teams have WAY more cap room than we do, and I'm not saying having rollover $ is a bad thing. It's just kind of weird to see a $5 billion franchise not spending up to the limit, especially given the trend of teams being aggressive while QBs are on their rookie deals.

 

Obviously, a trade for Earl Thomas makes this all moot. But my skepticism that that will happen is growing. SEA probably doesn't want to establish a precedent that their best players can demand trades to wherever they want and have their wishes granted, especially when that team is Dallas- you bet your arse Goodell and his good friends Mara and Blank don't want that precedent established either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broncofan

Broncofan

Posted
Posted
On 9/2/2018 at 10:46 AM, matt79511 said:

He fell from 93% in '15 to 84% and 75% in the last two years, respectively. They have to have felt that was a trend, not a coincidence.

There's no sense in employing a freaking kicker at any rate above the minimum if he's liable to miss a month with a pulled hammy, groin, or back.

That stat is incredibly misleading, since he was 8 for 8 pre-injury - and then returned from the injury and went 7-12, with the 5 missed FG's in the last 4 weeks.   The eye test says he wasn't even close to 100 percent in December 2017.

It's fine if they want to cut him and save 3M, but pointing to 2017 is incredibly flawed logic on their part.  If they think the injury has robbed him of his range, OK.  If they think the injury has affected his accuracy, OK.   Most injuries though don't linger beyond the same season.     Given that, while it's perfectly fine to say you're doing it to save 3M - that decision is very much worth scrutiny if a team fancies itself a playoff contender.  In the NFC, 1-2 games is all that separates the playoff teams from 10th-11th place in the conference.    You only need to ask the Chargers last year what having a different K would have done for them (tie Week 1 with all the momentum on their side, and win week 2 - both of us wins the AFCW outright, and the 3 seed, vs looking out the window come WC weekend).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Soko

Soko

Posted
Posted
On 9/2/2018 at 3:04 PM, tom cody said:

He's after losing a step over the past few yrs. but maybe with a new team it could turn his career around, have to see what happens and where he ends up.

I’m not sure if that’s the only factor with his injury last season, but if it really is only age/losing a step, it’s pretty crazy to think about Adam Vinatieri.

Bailey’s only 30. Adam’s like, 90.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calvert28

Calvert28

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Broncofan said:

That stat is incredibly misleading, since he was 8 for 8 pre-injury - and then returned from the injury and went 7-12, with the 5 missed FG's in the last 4 weeks.   The eye test says he wasn't even close to 100 percent in December 2017.

It's fine if they want to cut him and save 3M, but pointing to 2017 is incredibly flawed logic on their part.  If they think the injury has robbed him of his range, OK.  If they think the injury has affected his accuracy, OK.   Most injuries though don't linger beyond the same season.     Given that, while it's perfectly fine to say you're doing it to save 3M - that decision is very much worth scrutiny if a team fancies itself a playoff contender.  In the NFC, 1-2 games is all that separates the playoff teams from 10th-11th place in the conference.    You only need to ask the Chargers last year what having a different K would have done for them (tie Week 1 with all the momentum on their side, and win week 2 - both of us wins the AFCW outright, and the 3 seed, vs looking out the window come WC weekend).

Yea I don't get this at all because a pull hamstring isn't exactly what Jaylon went through.

Jerruh: "Listen Dan, you were pretty mediocre last season and we're gunning for a SB this year after cutting half our team from last season so we're gonna have to cut you."

Dan: "Well your Head Coach has been pretty mediocre for the last 10 years so why haven't you cut him?"

Jerruh: *System failure/Message not Received/ Reboot/ Load Standard Farewell Message* "Glad we had this talk, best of luck to you on your future endeavors." */End Task*

Seems like we are constantly improving on a team that can never get over the hump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matts4313

Matts4313

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, WizardHawk said:

per someone in the know via Twitter....Bailey was 42 of 47 (89%) in training camp. Not sure what his long was, but the accuracy is still very much there. 

 

I read in the practices not open to the media, he had missed 6 field goals in two practices recently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...