Imagine if this happens?

[jarntt]

According to Bleacher Report's Jason Cole, the Redskins are wondering if they can sign Tony Romo if he's released by the Cowboys.

We wouldn't go as far to label this as a report, as it's more of a throwing-at-the-wall by Cole. But it's notable nonetheless since it makes a ton of sense. Long-term talks with Kirk Cousins have broken down, and it has the looks of a divorce waiting to happen. But as Cole mentions, Washington may not even get a shot at Romo if the Cowboys choose to trade him. Even if he's released, Romo and the Cowboys may have a handshake agreement that he doesn't sign with a division rival. Colt McCoy is currently the Redskins' No. 2 quarterback.

 

[jarntt]

I think we all want Romo to go somewhere that we can root for him. This would not be such a place. But it would be funny to read the skins fans do a 180 and proclaim him a great QB as soon as he put the uniform on...

 

[jarntt]

According to CBS Sports' Jason La Canfora, Tony Romo is willing to "massage" his contract in order to facilitate a trade.

This flexibility is critical if Dallas is going to get trade compensation. Romo must be willing to restructure his contract for any deal to get done, and if he wasn't it's entirely possible Romo would already have been released. The Cowboys should have a better idea of what they may be able to get for Romo when NFL teams convene at the Combine, which begins on Tuesday, February 28.

 

[PDay8810]

as I said on the general board....I'd laugh if Washington signed Romo. It's already a circus on their board and this would be icing on the cake.

BUT...I really think Romo is suited for Houston.

 

[ROMOTOOWENS]

I would not want this to happen

 

[es4m11]

According to CBS Sports' Jason La Canfora, Tony Romo is willing to "massage" his contract in order to facilitate a trade.

This flexibility is critical if Dallas is going to get trade compensation. Romo must be willing to restructure his contract for any deal to get done, and if he wasn't it's entirely possible Romo would already have been released. The Cowboys should have a better idea of what they may be able to get for Romo when NFL teams convene at the Combine, which begins on Tuesday, February 28.

This does not make any sense to me. I keep reading stories like this, and none of them seem to be based on sound logic. Has Jason LaCanfora looked at Romo's contract?

If a team trades for Romo, they only have to pay him $14m in 2017. And there is no guaranteed money, since the Cowboys will be paying all bonus money due at the time of the trade - meaning a team can cut Romo at any time, with no future cap penalties. How is this not already a favorable deal? Especially when considering the Brock Osweillers of the world are getting $16-17m...

If Romo proves healthy, he will be more than worth the $19.5m he is scheduled to earn in 2018. And still, at ANY point in the remaining three years of Romo's deal he can be cut with no penalty, if the acquiring team decides to go in a different direction.

Romo on the open market will almost certainly get more than $14m AAV, and will most likely have at least some guaranteed money in the deal. I'm genuinely confused here.

What am I missing regarding Romo's current contract? Or is Jason LaCanfora missing the point? Click bait? I'm genuinely confused here.

 

[Manster7588]

This does not make any sense to me. I keep reading stories like this, and none of them seem to be based on sound logic. Has Jason LaCanfora looked at Romo's contract?

If a team trades for Romo, they only have to pay him $14m in 2017. And there is no guaranteed money, since the Cowboys will be paying all bonus money due at the time of the trade - meaning a team can cut Romo at any time, with no future cap penalties. How is this not already a favorable deal? Especially when considering the Brock Osweillers of the world are getting $16-17m...

If Romo proves healthy, he will be more than worth the $19.5m he is scheduled to earn in 2018. And still, at ANY point in the remaining three years of Romo's deal he can be cut with no penalty, if the acquiring team decides to go in a different direction.

Romo on the open market will almost certainly get more than $14m AAV, and will most likely have at least some guaranteed money in the deal. I'm genuinely confused here.

What am I missing regarding Romo's current contract? Or is Jason LaCanfora missing the point? Click bait? I'm genuinely confused here.

Because teams are trading for a player with major injury history. Granted the team will only be on the hook for each season individually, but 19.5 and 20.5M could put a big damper on a teams cap if he's still on a team.
What round would you trade for a "maybe" one year player?

 

[jarntt]

This does not make any sense to me. I keep reading stories like this, and none of them seem to be based on sound logic. Has Jason LaCanfora looked at Romo's contract?

If a team trades for Romo, they only have to pay him $14m in 2017. And there is no guaranteed money, since the Cowboys will be paying all bonus money due at the time of the trade - meaning a team can cut Romo at any time, with no future cap penalties. How is this not already a favorable deal? Especially when considering the Brock Osweillers of the world are getting $16-17m...

If Romo proves healthy, he will be more than worth the $19.5m he is scheduled to earn in 2018. And still, at ANY point in the remaining three years of Romo's deal he can be cut with no penalty, if the acquiring team decides to go in a different direction.

Romo on the open market will almost certainly get more than $14m AAV, and will most likely have at least some guaranteed money in the deal. I'm genuinely confused here.

What am I missing regarding Romo's current contract? Or is Jason LaCanfora missing the point? Click bait? I'm genuinely confused here.

I agree on Romo's contract. I think it is a great contract for a team signing him. No guaranteed money and huge possible upside. But it's all about health and lack of it. I would look at it as a 1 year $14M contract with option years if I'm trading for him I think perhaps the $14M is a little too high for some teams to give up a high draft pick and then fit under their cap when his health is a HUGE question mark if they don't have the cap room and would need to make other moves to free up the space. Now if a team has the cap room then IMO it's a great contract.

 

[es4m11]

I agree on Romo's contract. I think it is a great contract for a team signing him. No guaranteed money and huge possible upside. But it's all about health and lack of it. I would look at it as a 1 year $14M contract with option years if I'm trading for him I think perhaps the $14M is a little too high for some teams to give up a high draft pick and then fit under their cap when his health is a HUGE question mark if they don't have the cap room and would need to make other moves to free up the space. Now if a team has the cap room then IMO it's a great contract.

Posted this in another thread, that is exactly how I would look at Romo's deal.

I understand not wanting to give a high pick for Romo, that is why I think any pick will be conditional based on games played - if a trade is made. Protects all parties involved that way. The team trading for Romo has insurance they aren't giving up too much value in the event of injury, and Dallas will receive appropriate compensation if Romo turns out to be healthy.

Because teams are trading for a player with major injury history. Granted the team will only be on the hook for each season individually, but 19.5 and 20.5M could put a big damper on a teams cap if he's still on a team.
What round would you trade for a "maybe" one year player?

If Romo is healthy these cap numbers will be bargains. If Romo is not healthy, then the team cuts him with no penalty and it is a moot point.

As far as what would I give up? Depends on what team we are talking about. But for some teams I can see a conditional 2nd Rnd pick being worth it. Some of these teams that are rumored to want Romo would not have much chance to sign him on the open market, so there is extra incentive for them to workout a trade with Dallas. The real question is how much say in this does Romo himself have? If Jerry is willing to let Romo decide which team(s) is allowed to trade for him, then it could severely limit his value - and this could very well be the case. But if it is an open market, I could see a team like Buffalo or New York Jets being willing to pay up.

No matter what, I don't buy any of these stories talking about 5th and 6th round picks. That is just ridiculous. The QB trade market is always an over-pay. And while Romo has big question marks, his potential upside is HUGE for any team that is close to contention in need of a QB. He's not going to be had for a bag of peanuts, it is going to cost something of value to acquire him in trade.

 

[jarntt]

If Romo is healthy these cap numbers will be bargains. If Romo is not healthy, then the team cuts him with no penalty and it is a moot point.
.

Yes and no. There are rules on cutting injured players. I'm not exactly sure what they are for Romo, but unless specifically covered with language in the contract (guaranteed against injury) I'm almost certain that you can't cut a player on injured reserve and relieve yourself of his cap hit. If a team trades for him and he gets hurt they will incur the cap hit for the rest of that years salary. So if he gets hurt year 2, week 1 you still need to give him the $19M. But if he gets hurt year 1, week 1 you only have to give him the $14M for year one and the other two years you do not need to pay him unless his contract is guaranteed against injury. My facts may not be 100% accurate, but I'm pretty sure they are close.

 

[es4m11]

Yes and no. There are rules on cutting injured players. I'm not exactly sure what they are for Romo, but unless specifically covered with language in the contract (guaranteed against injury) I'm almost certain that you can't cut a player on injured reserve and relieve yourself of his cap hit. If a team trades for him and he gets hurt they will incur the cap hit for the rest of that years salary. So if he gets hurt year 2, week 1 you still need to give him the $19M. But if he gets hurt year 1, week 1 you only have to give him the $14M for year one and the other two years you do not need to pay him unless his contract is guaranteed against injury. My facts may not be 100% accurate, but I'm pretty sure they are close.

I meant cut him after 2017 season, not in-season. 2017 will be a sunk cost for whatever team that potentially trades for Romo - no avoiding that. Unless of course Tony gets hurt playing golf or something.

 

[Manster7588]

Posted this in another thread, that is exactly how I would look at Romo's deal.

I understand not wanting to give a high pick for Romo, that is why I think any pick will be conditional based on games played - if a trade is made. Protects all parties involved that way. The team trading for Romo has insurance they aren't giving up too much value in the event of injury, and Dallas will receive appropriate compensation if Romo turns out to be healthy.



If Romo is healthy these cap numbers will be bargains. If Romo is not healthy, then the team cuts him with no penalty and it is a moot point.

As far as what would I give up? Depends on what team we are talking about. But for some teams I can see a conditional 2nd Rnd pick being worth it. Some of these teams that are rumored to want Romo would not have much chance to sign him on the open market, so there is extra incentive for them to workout a trade with Dallas. The real question is how much say in this does Romo himself have? If Jerry is willing to let Romo decide which team(s) is allowed to trade for him, then it could severely limit his value - and this could very well be the case. But if it is an open market, I could see a team like Buffalo or New York Jets being willing to pay up.

No matter what, I don't buy any of these stories talking about 5th and 6th round picks. That is just ridiculous. The QB trade market is always an over-pay. And while Romo has big question marks, his potential upside is HUGE for any team that is close to contention in need of a QB. He's not going to be had for a bag of peanuts, it is going to cost something of value to acquire him in trade.

IF is a big word. I wouldn't trade a high pick for Romo for tge same reason I think Minny overpaid for Bradford, the injury risk is too high. If I were a team trading for Romo I'd demand the right to negotiate with him prior to lower his salary each of his remaining years and not send anything higher than a 3rd, and even that would be conditional. I'm a Romo fan and still hope Dallas finds a way to hold on to him, but I would NOT trade for him.

 

[Manster7588]

I meant cut him after 2017 season, not in-season. 2017 will be a sunk cost for whatever team that potentially trades for Romo - no avoiding that. Unless of course Tony gets hurt playing golf or something.

So you expect a team to just throw away a 2nd round pick?

 

[jarntt]

The interesting thing with Romo is he can likely still be a top 10 QB if healthy. It's a huge risk and it's time Dallas said goodbye because we have a younger, more durable, better QB. But for a lot of teams Romo can be the difference between winning and losing games or possibly the difference between being a playoff contender or a SB contender. So IMO it's worth the injury risk if you really need a QB and the rest of your team is solid

 

[es4m11]

So you expect a team to just throw away a 2nd round pick?

You're making an assumption here.

And if Romo plays like it's 2014? Is a 2nd waste then? The answer would be no.

If health wasn't an issue, 3 years of Romo at friendly prices is worth more than what Bradford brought back. It's a gamble, and it's going to cost someone to find out.

 

[Manster7588]

You're making an assumption here.

And if Romo plays like it's 2014? Is a 2nd waste then? The answer would be no.

If health wasn't an issue, 3 years of Romo at friendly prices is worth more than what Bradford brought back. It's a gamble, and it's going to cost someone to find out.

Agree, but in Romos case IF is the key. I wouldn't trade a high pick for Romo and hope he's healthy. Lets say Romo makes it through 2017 then gets hirt early in 18, the team is now on the for 19.5M. Again I wouldn't throw a high pick at Romo, mid/late along with Romo agreeing to a, straight up pay cut. Same if Dallas decided to keep him, it would be with a pay cut and I don't mean pushing money back into additional guaranteed money.

 

[es4m11]

Agree, but in Romos case IF is the key. I wouldn't trade a high pick for Romo and hope he's healthy. Lets say Romo makes it through 2017 then gets hirt early in 18, the team is now on the for 19.5M. Again I wouldn't throw a high pick at Romo, mid/late along with Romo agreeing to a, straight up pay cut. Same if Dallas decided to keep him, it would be with a pay cut and I don't mean pushing money back into additional guaranteed money.

If Romo proves himself healthy in 2017, I don't see how he plays for anything less than $19.5m in 2018.

I just can't imagine a scenario where Romo signs a discount multi year deal at this stage of his career. There is absolutely no reason for it. Romo will have suitors, whether via trade or free agency. If traded he is under no obligation to renegotiate his current contract, and if released he is free to sign anywhere he wants for whatever terms he and his agent can negotiate. If released, I see no downside for a man in his position, with all his circumstances, signing anything more than a guaranteed 1 year deal. Romo's value is currently at it's lowest, why would he sell off years in the future at a discounted rate, when he can play for 1 year and reestablish his value? And if he gets hurt again, he's probably going to retire anyway. But if Tony plays well in 2017, his value is likely well north of $20m per year. So why would he sign a multi year deal at a discounted rate?

Speculating: If we are talking about a 1 year deal, why would a team renegotiate his current deal? Romo isn't going to play for less than $14m next year, whether via his current contract or a new one. At $14m Romo would be the 23rd highest paid QB in the league.

 

[ROMOTOOWENS]

The interesting thing with Romo is he can likely still be a top 10 QB if healthy. It's a huge risk and it's time Dallas said goodbye because we have a younger, more durable, better QB. But for a lot of teams Romo can be the difference between winning and losing games or possibly the difference between being a playoff contender or a SB contender. So IMO it's worth the injury risk if you really need a QB and the rest of your team is solid

So you two already have Dak in the top 10. Wow. Be careful what you wish for

 

[jarntt]

Agree, but in Romos case IF is the key. I wouldn't trade a high pick for Romo and hope he's healthy. Lets say Romo makes it through 2017 then gets hirt early in 18, the team is now on the for 19.5M. Again I wouldn't throw a high pick at Romo, mid/late along with Romo agreeing to a, straight up pay cut. Same if Dallas decided to keep him, it would be with a pay cut and I don't mean pushing money back into additional guaranteed money.

I think if Romo makes it thru 2017 everything is clearer. If he is the "old Romo" (pun not intended) he is worth well over $20M and you keep him. If he isn't you cut him and move on and he retires.

 

[UK Cowboy]

Romo is a Jerry guy, and Jerry will put Romo in the Ring of Honor, without question. There's a ZERO percent chance Romo pisses on Jerry and the Cowboys and signs with the Skins. Personally, I think it would be hysterical, because Romo, if healthy, would be better than any QB they've had in the last 50 years and they'd have to moonwalk on the Romo insults. Make it happen lol