Andy Dalton now a Cowboy

[Matts4313]

1 hour ago, The_Slamman said:

BS.  While it’s true the cap can be manipulated, the end always comes.  To this day, I still don’t think Matts understands that signing bonuses apply to future caps... or that a signing bonus is prorated over the length of a contract (up to 5 years).  You restructure a guy to convert base salary into signing bonus... it applies to future caps.  And, YES, we have been in cap hell several times over the years.  The last couple of years have been nice.  we havent had to constantly play the restructure game.  Our cap is pretty clean because of it.  That all changes, though, when you pay QB over $35 per year.

lmao. Are you actually questioning if I understand the cap? Really? 

[Dallas94Ware]

8 hours ago, TheGame316 said:

Whoa

Is that Matts making a reference to a players Value? As in terms of Cap Value? As in the level of play of the player relative to the value of his cap charge?

Dalton @ 3 Million >>> Dak @ 35 Million

Boom - He finally gets it?

See this is the same childish form of debate I keep mentioning from you. You completely ignore what Matt's is saying and explaining to you, even though he actually replies to your childish request to tell you how to do it to prove it to you (manipulate the cap) and you resort instead to nitpicking one word, taking it out of context and then using that to bolster your ridiculous point. Are you like 13 or something?

Does this forum have a block feature? Im done here with you

[Northland]

Can't we all just get along?  (sarcasm)

[TheGame316]

1 hour ago, Dallas94Ware said:

See this is the same childish form of debate I keep mentioning from you. You completely ignore what Matt's is saying and explaining to you, even though he actually replies to your childish request to tell you how to do it to prove it to you (manipulate the cap) and you resort instead to nitpicking one word, taking it out of context and then using that to bolster your ridiculous point. Are you like 13 or something?

Does this forum have a block feature? Im done here with you

Please do. I've grown tired of your replies under the guise of being some "expert coach" as you spout nonsense about a salary cap that you don't even understand

Yes, you can manipulate the cap slightly. At it's extreme you may even be able to get a year 1 cap number from 35 million down to 20, incredibly hard to do in a 4 year deal, but it does catch up with you. It's called "Cap Hell"

No amount of manipulation is going to get you from a 35 Million dollar salary down to 3 Million, None

Why don't you put down the Madden, which you admit you play, and read up on it

[DaBoys]

Guys, Madden contracts are not evenly distributed throughout the term. If you sign a guy in madden for 4 years $75M in franchise mode the contract looks something like this. 
 

10, 15, 20, 30
 

But you are correct that you can’t go back in and move money to the front or back like irl

[canadaluvsdallas]

Not trying to be a mod here but lets not get so personal fellas.

[Tony7188]

On 5/9/2020 at 8:07 PM, Dallas94Ware said:

And Tua, herbert and the rest of those guys are playing for peanuts because they have not EARNED a cent beyond those peanuts. Dak has.

Just because these young passers in the draft look like they will be stars now doesnt mean they will ever come close to what Dak has done. Dak has earned that money. Tua and co. Have not.

And again, as has been stated, expecting to win on a rookie deal is a moot point. Silly. It takes 2 or 3 years fora QB to get the NFL mentally. Some faster, some slower, but still. And it's a moot point now, because the rookie deal is done. You want your franchise passer now you have to pay him. This roster, this D especially, didnt help Dak enough to elevate the team to a championship. Now he has to get paid. And you know what, 12% of the cap on your QB is not.a big deal when the majority of your team, 30 or more players, are late round guys, cheap FAs, and guys who's careers end in 4 years or less, and not at all your core guys. You can pay out 15% even to your top guy, pay out another 35% to the rest of your top roster, and still have 50% of the cap to pay guys making bottom dollar money. Even if you splurge, right, and pay our 20% to Dak, 40% to your next tier players, you still have 40% or even 30% of the cap to pay guys on rookie deals, vet minimums, and small scale contracts. 

I think you are worrying far too much about what Dak may make and overlooking how important he is to the team. You cannot easily replace him, he has earned the money, he is only getting g better, and expecting some rookie to come in and have a rookie year the way Dak himself  did is silly (to be nice about it). For every rookie year like Daks you have 10 rookie years like Peytons or Goffs and anywhere between. And for every Mahomes in the draft you have 10 Mariotas or Bradford's. 

And even if your peyton caliber rookie year of 28 picks ends up a hall of fame peyton manning, you have now wasted 2, 3, possibly even 4 years of a great young roster before that young passer is ready or capable of winning the big one. And dont say "but Mahomes but Mahomes!" Because he is a rarity and an exception, not the rational, logical, usual, commonality of the reality of the NFL world. This isn't madden.

 

On 5/9/2020 at 9:05 PM, TheGame316 said:

Goff made it to a Superbowl, Wentz's team made it to a Superbowl. Both teams are now in the same boat as the Cowboys. Having to pay their QB's, but at least they got there

I've been over this for a million posts, and I'm sorry if you like "competitive 10-6 seasons" with a solid QB who makes 15% of your cap, where you're close but you end up getting beat by the next team that has a balls out guy on a rookie deal and has surrounded him with all the saved capspace at other positions

For the last 10 seasons, not the Superbowl winner, nor the Superbowl runner up has had sustained success (meaning Superbowl appearances and Wins) with a QB that they have paid top dollar to. It's been guys on Rookie deals (Wilson x 2, Mahomes, Flacco, Goff, Wentz/Foles, Kaepernick, guys playing below market value (Brady x 5) , or guys making big money who's teams were 1 and done after they started losing players due to the cap (Ryan, Newton). The lone exception was (Peyton Manning x 2) who was the final piece to an already loaded roster that also fell of the map but did actually win the game when Manning was merely a game manager, because the roster around him was that good. That team burned hot for 3 seasons before they were cap strapped from fitting in Mannings contract with all the other guys that had to get paid

The jury is out on Jimmy G making 27 Million riding an underpaid defense

Eli Manning won making 11% of his teams cap but that was a 9-7 team that got hot with unreal DLine play.

Which category does Dak fit into?

-His window is over for the Rookie Contract

-He doesn't want a below Market deal like Brady

-We don't have a balls out underpaid defence like the 49ers had with JimmyG and that was only 27 Million

-Are we a loaded roster that is 1 piece away? Is Dak our Peyton Manning?

-We banking on 1 unbelievable run like Eli, or are we hoping for the 1 shot and done route the Falcons and Panthers had?

I'm not saying we can draft and new guy and plug him in there and he's going to be Mahomes 2.0 (or even Dak 2.0) but it isn't working out for any other team that has paid "Their guy".. Not in the last decade anyways

This is a good debate, where I can see both sides of the argument. @Dallas94Ware any ideas as to why the Dak contract hasn't been done yet? I mean, surely the JJ and co. have tried to sign Dak for a while now but have been unsuccessful. 

[Tony7188]

13 hours ago, Matts4313 said:

Its not that complicated really. It will be ~$100m/4 = $25m per year for the signing bonus. That leaves the other $40m to hide in any way you want to. $10m/yr... $40m all in 1 year. Bonuses/roster/workout/whatever. 

Ideally though Dallas would do what the Pats/Saints have been doing and add a ghost 5th year (player voidable). That lowers it to $20m/yr for the signing bonus and allows a lot more flexibility. 

There is a million ways to do it. 

People in the media have speculated that this is the reason why Dak isn't signed yet. The Cowboys want that 5th year option, while Dak doesn't.  So he would like to be the highest paid with only a 4 year contract (to get another big payday). At some point, I feel as though the F.O. needs to make a stand against players constantly holding out. There are ways to pay Dak what he wants, but based on what Stephen Jones has repeatedly said to the media, it seems like the FO does not want to do it.

We know if they make Dak the highest paid QB, we will lose a few of our star players. I just wish they would make a decision on whether to pay Dak what he wants or trade him for draft capital. There should be no reason to drag this out until the July tag deadline (like they did with Dez).

[Matts4313]

40 minutes ago, Tony7188 said:

People in the media have speculated that this is the reason why Dak isn't signed yet. The Cowboys want that 5th year option, while Dak doesn't.  So he would like to be the highest paid with only a 4 year contract (to get another big payday). At some point, I feel as though the F.O. needs to make a stand against players constantly holding out. There are ways to pay Dak what he wants, but based on what Stephen Jones has repeatedly said to the media, it seems like the FO does not want to do it.

We know if they make Dak the highest paid QB, we will lose a few of our star players. I just wish they would make a decision on whether to pay Dak what he wants or trade him for draft capital. There should be no reason to drag this out until the July tag deadline (like they did with Dez).

Thats incorrect. The Cowboys want a 5th year period. They want a 5 year contract, Dak wants a 4 year deal. 

A ghost 5th year *is* a 4 year contract. 

Also, I am not sure any "star players" we will lost anytime soon because of signing Dak. Probably Tank/Cooper are the next to go; but thats more to do with us drafting replacements (Cooper) and being overpaid (both). 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Matts4313

[Dallas94Ware]

9 hours ago, Tony7188 said:

 

This is a good debate, where I can see both sides of the argument. @Dallas94Ware any ideas as to why the Dak contract hasn't been done yet? I mean, surely the JJ and co. have tried to sign Dak for a while now but have been unsuccessful. 

Dak wants shorter years, so he gets more per year, and is up for a new payout earlier. The team wants.more years to lessen the cap hit and not have to go through negotiations again so soon. It is not a matter of wanting to or not wanting to, but rather both sides only wanting to do what is better for their side.

[Dallas94Ware]

Anyway, where has this notion come from that it hasn't worked out for teams after paying their QB? Are you forgetting about Pats/Brady? Their several SB appearances are a big reason why many teams didnt get to the big game. They have been a roadblock to all the AFC teams who paid their guy and got stopped short in the playoffs. Should be less of a problem now lol

But reality is, all those young guys who made.it there on a rookie deal didnt win. You can say Wentz, but that is a technicality. Mahomes is an exception, a once in a generation player. 

Brees, even Cousins to a point, Luck before his injury and retirement, Wilson, Eli, Alex Smith before Mahomes, Cam Newton, our own Romo, and all the other guys who got paid big bucks in recent years/decade, have only elevated their team and have kept their teams competitive, in the pursuit of a ring, and simply got beaten by other good QBed teams or had dumb luck (the Minnesota miracle for example, or Dez's no catch-catch). You can not tell me any of those teams feel handicapped by paying their QB but rather feel they have a chance every year because of they paid that QB