Kirkendall Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 From the Dallas Morning Star...RB Hambrick's role in 2004 will most likely be as a backup RB and key special teams player. Parcells still thinks Hambrick adds value to the team, but not as a starter. He has displayed a good attitude all season, often saying that he would not mind playing on special teams. The only way Hambrick starts at RB next season is if Parcells and Jerry Jones strikeout in the off-season. Corey Dillon of the Bengals is a name frequently mentioned as someone the Cowboys could acquire, but the team's best hope may be for Michigan's Chris Perry to fall to them at the #22 pick in the 1st round of April's draft. Virginia Tech's Kevin Jones and Oregon State's Steven Jackson could also be options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevnz Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 I could easily see Dillon go to Dallas. There is no way Kevin Jones is gonna be there at 22, and for that matter any quality RB may be gone by that point and anything would be a reach. Dillons stock will rise greatly for a team like Dallas if all the other RB's are taken by the time they draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsfan2 Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 From the Dallas Morning Star...RB Hambrick's role in 2004 will most likely be as a backup RB and key special teams player. Parcells still thinks Hambrick adds value to the team, but not as a starter. He has displayed a good attitude all season, often saying that he would not mind playing on special teams. The only way Hambrick starts at RB next season is if Parcells and Jerry Jones strikeout in the off-season. Corey Dillon of the Bengals is a name frequently mentioned as someone the Cowboys could acquire, but the team's best hope may be for Michigan's Chris Perry to fall to them at the #22 pick in the 1st round of April's draft. Virginia Tech's Kevin Jones and Oregon State's Steven Jackson could also be options. It's interesting that Dollins name keeps popping up in respect to Dallas. Earlier in the year, they had an article that said the while so many people were talking about Dillon, that it was actually Rudi that they had inquired about and were interested in obtaining. ???????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJBestInAFC Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Dillon to Dallas would be great. I think anything is good as long as he is not on the Bengals any more. I would love to see Dillon against his old team next season. I am sure you are all well aware that we play NFC East teams next season, and would love nothing more to see the Bengals hold Dillon to hardly any yards in that game. A very nice thought.B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted January 15, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 From the Cincy paper...When is Coach Lewis planning to act on RB Dillon and whether or not he will be around next year; and re-signing Rudi Johnson ? A resolution to the Dillon situation might not occur until after June 1. If Dillon is released after that date, the Bengals can absorb the remaining $4.2 million on their salary cap in '04 and '05. Any move before June 1 that dismisses Dillon would force the team to take the entire hit in'004. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJBestInAFC Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 How does it work if we trade him before June 1? Lets say we trade him for draft picks this year or in upcoming years what type of cap hit will this have on the Bengals? If we trade him for another player how will this affect the Bengals cap for 04?B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted January 15, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 How does it work if we trade him before June 1?In summation, if we trade before 6/1, we'd have to take the salary cap hit no matter what we get in return. This penalty would be enforced all in lump sum in 2004. After 6/1, you can spread the hit through the term of the contract. I don't have any numbers to support this though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 How does it work if we trade him before June 1?In summation, if we trade before 6/1, we'd have to take the salary cap hit no matter what we get in return. This penalty would be enforced all in lump sum in 2004. After 6/1, you can spread the hit through the term of the contract. I don't have any numbers to support this though. Yup. I believe the remaining salary bonus hit is $4.2 million. We'll take the whole thing in '04 if we cut him before June 1, or we can split it in 2 ('04 and '05) after. We still "save" on the cap even if we take the whole hit this year, since his salary plus the prorated signing bonus hit are over $5 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBrooks Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 How does it work if we trade him before June 1?In summation, if we trade before 6/1, we'd have to take the salary cap hit no matter what we get in return. This penalty would be enforced all in lump sum in 2004. After 6/1, you can spread the hit through the term of the contract. I don't have any numbers to support this though. Yup. I believe the remaining salary bonus hit is $4.2 million. We'll take the whole thing in '04 if we cut him before June 1, or we can split it in 2 ('04 and '05) after. We still "save" on the cap even if we take the whole hit this year, since his salary plus the prorated signing bonus hit are over $5 million. I don't have much knowledge of this, so this is more of a question.I know we take the hit (pro-rated or not) if we release. But do we take the hit if he's traded?I thought that gets rid of his contract, we take not hit and it frees up cap space where his salary used to be.Do we really take a cap hit if traded? If so, does anyone know why? That's a ridiculous rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 Do we really take a cap hit if traded? If so, does anyone know why? That's a ridiculous rule. Yup, we take the cap hit if he's traded. That's the big reason why the NFL rarely has MLB-style blockbuster trades; teams can't afford the hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted January 15, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 Yup, we take the cap hit if he's traded. That's the big reason why the NFL rarely has MLB-style blockbuster trades; teams can't afford the hit.In terms of trading, I think we are only hit based on his signing bonus, not the remaining $ on his contract. I could be wrong, but that was my understanding and the new team would take on the new contract. Since rarely do signing bonus come in a form of one check, rather prorated during the length of the contract and do NOT could against a teams contract, when a player is traded, the remaining signing bonus comes into play. I could be wrong, but that was my understanding.I think another reason we don't see big blockbuster deals is the amount of contracts that are back-loaded, allowing most teams to sign a lot of good players at one time; why the Titans could be $20 mil over the cap next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 I think another reason we don't see big blockbuster deals is the amount of contracts that are back-loaded, allowing most teams to sign a lot of good players at one time; why the Titans could be $20 mil over the cap next season. Josh, I'm a little vague on the cap deal. If a team is over, whats the penalty? Is it similar to what the Yankees have to pay for being over the limit in baseball? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted January 15, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 Actually Billy, another little known fact is that all contracts MUST go through the league office. This is so the league can determine if they will go over the cap, and if so, they reject the contract offer. If a team does sneak one by the league office they could either get fined or lose draft picks or both (most likely option). This happened recently to the Steelers and the '9ers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 In terms of trading, I think we are only hit based on his signing bonus, not the remaining $ on his contract. Correct. And that remaining signing bonus is something a bit more than $4 million. Any team he's traded to assumes his contract (which is a separate document than the signing bonus agreement, which is what the fuss with the "loyalty clause" was about: Mikey took his "loyalty" language from the salary contracts and inserted it into the signing bonus agreements). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishcovga Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Cincinnati would only incur the remaining signing bonus. The contract would be absorbed by Dallas' salary cap. Something very favorably to the team that wants dillon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Actually Billy, another little known fact is that all contracts MUST go through the league office. This is so the league can determine if they will go over the cap, and if so, they reject the contract offer. If a team does sneak one by the league office they could either get fined or lose draft picks or both (most likely option). This happened recently to the Steelers and the '9ers. Whaaaa? If all contracts have to go through the league office, then how the hell does a team get to be $20 million OVER the cap for chrissakes!?! And I suppose these guy's who okay these deals are alleged college grads I assume!?! So much for diplomas. What did they major in? Arts and crafts? I just don't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted January 16, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 They look at the immediate impact, not the length of the contract. It is now the Titans responsibility to shave the cap, the league doesn't want to baby-sit all of the teams, but I commend them for keeping order and not allowing it to baseball itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 It is now the Titans responsibility to shave the cap What if they don't? What's the penalty is what I'm trying to get at here. Does one even exsist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevnz Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Actually Billy, another little known fact is that all contracts MUST go through the league office. This is so the league can determine if they will go over the cap, and if so, they reject the contract offer. If a team does sneak one by the league office they could either get fined or lose draft picks or both (most likely option). This happened recently to the Steelers and the '9ers.Whaaaa? If all contracts have to go through the league office, then how the hell does a team get to be $20 million OVER the cap for chrissakes!?! And I suppose these guy's who okay these deals are alleged college grads I assume!?! So much for diplomas. What did they major in? Arts and crafts? I just don't get it. Teams go over after the season. Every year of a contract the player gets more of a base salery. Thats why cap numbers go up so much on players that sign a 50 million $ contract. Most big contracts actually call for the player to earn the base salery for the year experience. Add the part of the signing bonus to that year and it's not that bad, however in years 4 and 5 the players usually get another bonus and the average yearly salery by now is around 5 million then the player gets cut instead of going over the cap. It's really stupid on the players part, but it makes the agents look like hot s**t cause they got a player "50 million" When the truth is they usually end up with half of that....So, sign 5 players to big contracts with "small" saleries in the first year, 3 or 4 years later, cap hit, players get cut, plus the other 8 players you have to cut to be able to field enough players...Salery Cap Hell!It's messed up, but it seems to work, so what do I know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 You're right kevnz, it's one hell of a phucked up mess, all too ripe for abuse by almost anyone in the system. What a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevnz Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 You're riight kevnz, it's one hell of a phucked up mess, all too ripe for abuse by almost anyone in the system. What a joke. Yeah, but it will come back and haunt a team...Look at the 49ers, Cowboys, and Ravens a few years ago, watch the Titans next year it won't be pretty... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted January 16, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 You're right kevnz, it's one hell of a phucked up mess, all too ripe for abuse by almost anyone in the system. What a joke. You're right Billy, it is messy. But in it's defense, it's the best financial (payroll) system per team creating that parity that watches teams like New York or Chicago struggle while EVERYONE is on the same playing field. It's way better than basketball and hockey (they are close to bankruptcy plus there will be a strike next season) and baseball, well that's an absolute mess.I think the contract ends in 2007(?) so if the Union decides to change things around, we could be in major trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Okay...I think I get it now. I was looking at it from too much of a baseball perspective. What get's okayed this year doesn't stand an ice cubes chance in hell in the coming years. Thanks for enlightening me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevnz Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 I think the contract ends in 2007(?) so if the Union decides to change things around, we could be in major trouble. Well, I think the biggest thing that will happen is that you'll see the Cap get a big boost, or some type of concessions for vets. You have to remember that the union is made up of mostly mid range and lower guys....They don't want to see the gravy train come to a stop. I also think that they've seen the mess that strikes have cause baseball, basketball and they'll probably get to see hockey destroy itself before 07. The owners in the past have shown that they'll play with replacements, and that people are willing to watch. The NFL is a team game, and while there are plenty of superstars there are way more average guys. I also see the league giving a good number of concessions as well, they know they have it good.But then this could be wishful thinking on my part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted January 16, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Well, I think the biggest thing that will happen is that you'll see the Cap get a big boost, or some type of concessions for vets. You have to remember that the union is made up of mostly mid range and lower guys....They don't want to see the gravy train come to a stop. I also think that they've seen the mess that strikes have cause baseball, basketball and they'll probably get to see hockey destroy itself before 07. The owners in the past have shown that they'll play with replacements, and that people are willing to watch. The NFL is a team game, and while there are plenty of superstars there are way more average guys. I also see the league giving a good number of concessions as well, they know they have it good.I absolutely agree with you. But then this could be wishful thinking on my part.Wishful for us all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.