Dallas owner ranks near bottom of league in real money spent. Brad Biggs
If only Jerry Jones could find someone to sponsor Jerryworld, his sparkling new football palace, maybe times wouldn’t be quite so tight for the Dallas Cowboys.
Jones, one of the NFL’s revenue-creating visionaries for two decades now, has either cut back spending on his on-field product or he’s taken a new approach to building his roster, because the man typically on top of the league when it comes to spending is now looking up at just about everyone else.
APJones' new stadium could use a name.
NFL Management Council figures for committed cash — the actual dollars teams spend on their roster, a better indication of where a club is at than the salary cap because it indicates real money spent — show that Jones and the Cowboys rank 31st in the league with $93.5 million committed for the 2009 season. The only team below Dallas in the most recent figures? The Kansas City Chiefs at $89 million.
It’s a stark contrast from where Jones is used to being. From 2004 to 2008, a run of five seasons, he spent $566 million, more than any club in the league. In that period, Jones outspent the Glazers in Tampa Bay by $115 million. It’s a huge difference and proof that while the salary cap does a good job of leveling the playing field, every roster isn’t created equal.
Jones certainly spared no expense in the construction of Dallas Cowboys Stadium, but he’s been finding ways to save money in some areas. For instance, the Cowboys were one of nine franchises that pulled out of an NFL pension plan that covers all team employees. The NFL owners voted to make the 401k and supplemental retirement program no longer mandatory, and Jones promptly jumped out of it. Perhaps when the new stadium turns into the cash machine Jones envisioned, he’ll resume. Who knows?
APIs this a new era for Jones?
But right now, the telling statistic is what he’s spent for the product on the field. The Cowboys have been in negotiations with outside linebacker DeMarcus Ware on a contract extension. If and when that gets done, it’s going to bump up that $93.5 million figure, but not to a point where Jones is once again atop the NFL landscape in committed cash.
Maybe he’s decided a youth movement is in order. A year after some wild spending — Jones signed Terrell Owens, Marion Barber, Flozell Adams, Terence Newman and Ken Hamlin to massive deals—he worked fast to rid himself of some of the older, underachieving players. Owens left and is counted as more than $9.5 million in dead money against the cap, again an expenditure in terms of the cap but not actual cash spent. Greg Ellis and Roy Williams were jettisoned in cost-cutting moves also aimed at getting younger players into the mix.
AP
Miles Austin has stepped up at wide receiver at a fraction of the cost. The club is still seeking some pass-rushing help for Ware, one thing Ellis provided. It’s interesting, though, that Dallas Morning News columnist Jean-Jacques Taylor posed the question in a blog over the summer: Is Jerry Jones broke? He spent the bulk of the piece explaining why Jones isn’t broke, pointing out mainly that he’s got cash socked away to spend on Ware.
Even in a rough economy, Jones isn’t broke. But there’s certainly a sense that he’s strapped for cash or has a new model in mind when it comes to building the organization. The numbers say so.
Follow me on Twitter: BradBiggs
Jerry is not broke. Financing the stadium during the financial crisis required making painful concessions on repayment terms. More cash is flowing out for debt service and that means less cash for salaries, benefits, etc.
Last I checked the Chiefs had in excess of $30m in cap space, and Dallas was near the bottom. As opposed to the Chiefs, I'm guessing their cash out is more related to the overspending catching up. Owens dead money isn't actual cash, but counts toward the cap. Overspending the cap in real cash (greater than annual increases) is borrowing from future caps. By nature (brilliance) of the cap, overspending is not sustainable. At some point you have to underspend to make it balance. Probably as simple as that. The future is now.
Stephen Jones is now in charge...he learned from Jimmy and Bill P...he understands you need blue collar attitude and win with the lines...he was against signing Deion to the point he and the old man almost came to blows...Stephen is a no nonsense football guy...for all the money spent 2004-08 how many playoff games did they win? Jerry wants to be the mouth piece...whatever...the next head coach hire will be Stephen's choice.
Jones may be trying to save money looking forward due to the potential of a work stoppage in 2011. Financing the debt on the stadium while there is no incoming revenue could be weighing pretty heavy on Jones.
This article is misleading.
Jones and the Cowboys have been greatly spending cash over cap in 2007 and 2008 and because of the salary cap implications of signing bonuses and their allocation, 2009 is a "correction year". Daniel Snyder goes through the same lows some off-seasons.
In 2007 Jones spent $139 million in salary and bonuses on players ($77.6M in signing bonuses).
In 2008 Jones spent $150 million in salary and bonuses (and a rediculous $97.5M in signing bonuses).
All the 2009 numbers represent is that Jones and the Cowboys are strapped against the salary cap because of the large signing bonuses given out the previous two seasons.
I also strongly suspect if Ware gets a new deal (he's only being paid $1M this season in actual cash), this number could go up $20M easily with the type of signing bonus Ware would likely get.
Again... bad article, too little background information/research, false conclusions. I'm disappointed NFP published it.
Uncle Rico and deljzc, I agree with both of you (I can't locate the current cap number for the Cowboys, but I'll take you at your word that the Cowboys are relatively close to the cap). I'll add a couple of other considerations that can (and should) limit the desire of all teams to commit big bonus dollars this year.
The possiblity of a lockout or strike in 2011. With that possibility, why pay big up-front bonus dollars to lock up players in long-term deals? The up-front bonus money is to some degree wasted if the 2011 season doesn't happen.
The changes in 2010, principally an uncapped year and the longer service requirement for unrestricted free agency. The latter means that DeMarcus Ware is a restricted free agent after this season, not unrestricted. That's a huge difference, and I'd expect it to limit the dollars that the Cowboys need to commit to extend Ware. As for the former, it may open up some opportunities to spend cash next year.
Finally, there's the sheer uncertainty of the expiring CBA. Again, why commit up-front money to securing long-term extensions without knowing what a salary cap will look like in 2 years (assuming that it still exists)?
I guess what I find most disappointing about this article is that some of the other writers on this site - especially Andrew Brandt - do such a great job of writing about these issues and educating us on the proper context for figures like this cash number.
The KC Chiefs need to make some major investments into their team to meet the minimum requirement for any 2 year window as required by the CBA. KC way underspent last year as well.
Do you have those total dollars? Last I saw KC needed to commit to another $45-50 million this year to reach the minimum and that was after they had signed Cassel.
| powered by TheSeats.com |
Restricted free agent linebacker...
Pirates' baseball schedule affects...
Tight end joining Patriots
49ers, Jaguars, Buccaneers among...
Tight end closing in on a deal
Oct 22, 2009
08:46 AM
Jerry and The Daniel are both running their teams into the ground.