dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
55,123
Reaction score
6,199
Cowboys' dead money on salary cap

February, 12, 2014

By Todd Archer | ESPNDallas.com

IRVING, Texas – A couple of weeks ago, Calvin Watkins gave you the top-10 salary-cap figures on the Dallas Cowboys. Last week, I gave you some salary-cap bargains.

Today we bring you the dead money that will be accounted for on the Cowboys’ 2014 salary cap.

They will have roughly $11.8 million in dead money, led by Jay Ratliff’s $6.928 million.

Two teams will have more dead money than the Cowboys (Carolina Panthers at $17.8 million, Buffalo Bills at $12.07 million). The Arizona Cardinals will have about $10 million in dead money.

The top-five “dead money” players remaining on the books for 2014 after Ratliff are: Nate Livings ($2.1 million), Marcus Spears ($1.4 million), Sean Lissemore ($1.2 million) and David Arkin ($113,400).

By the time the Cowboys have to get under the cap in March, there will be more dead money added after players are released. If the Cowboys cut DeMarcus Ware, they would have $8.5 million in dead money dedicated to Ware, but the move would save them nearly $7.4 million in cap space.

If they designate wide receiver Miles Austin as a June 1 cut, then the Cowboys would carry $2.749 million in dead money and Austin would count $5.1 million against the cap in 2015.
 

cmd34(work)

Draft Pick
Messages
4,342
Reaction score
0
If they designate wide receiver Miles Austin as a June 1 cut, then the Cowboys would carry $2.749 million in dead money and Austin would count $5.1 million against the cap in 2015.

Miles Austin, the gift that keeps on giving.
 

Hoofbite

Draft Pick
Messages
4,231
Reaction score
0
None of this would have happened if Dallas was screwed that $10M over two years. That changed everything.
 

ThoughtExperiment

Quality Starter
Messages
9,906
Reaction score
3
I still wonder why we gave away Lissemore for basically nothing. He was a pretty decent contributor in SD.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
55,123
Reaction score
6,199
I still wonder why we gave away Lissemore for basically nothing. He was a pretty decent contributor in SD.

IIRC, they (Kiffin and Marinelli) didn't feel like he fit anywhere in their 4-3 front, and he wasn't having a very impressive camp when they moved him.
 

ThoughtExperiment

Quality Starter
Messages
9,906
Reaction score
3
Well yeah, sure they claimed he wasn't any good and that's why they traded him. But that was wrong. Even if you think he isn't quick enough or whatever, he could have spelled that super spare white dude who had to play 1-technique all year. He'd proven he could basically play that in a 34.

But I guess they were thinking there was no way he could beat out the wondrous Ben Bass.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
55,123
Reaction score
6,199
But I guess they were thinking there was no way he could beat out the wondrous Ben Bass.

Bass was ahead of him on the depth chart.

Hindsight is always 20/20, I'm sure if they knew they were gonna go through 19 or 20 DL's and basically have to sign guys on Tuesday all season to play the next Sunday, they would have kept him.
 
Top Bottom