Cowboys Sign Romo to $108M Deal: Skins Fans Rejoice!

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think we all (myself certainly) thought that the Giants dumped a ton of money into Eli in 2009 when he was a mediocre player on a mediocre team and couldn't understand that $100 million deal. But of course, that extension looks great now. The Giants look a lot better because of Eli's contract going forward. I think the Cowboys are hoping for the same thing, and I don't think they are going to get it.

You forget Eli had already won a bowl and a MVP of the game by then, Romo not even close.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

How many playoff wins and SB wins a guy has doesn't matter when you're determining his worth. Teams don't even consider it. As they shouldn't.

Maybe not playoff and SB wins, but it's a good thing to examine playoff and SB stats. Getting your team to the playoffs or win and you're in situations does no good if you play bad and get your team eliminated.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

How many playoff wins and SB wins a guy has doesn't matter when you're determining his worth. Teams don't even consider it. As they shouldn't.

.

Should it be a factor...HELL YES, as I said before in the NFL you get paid to produce and that means win and make and win playoff games SUPER BOWLS too. The man has had his opportunities and blown them. I would take 2 other QB's in the NFC east before I would take Romo, you have one and we have the other.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Should it be a factor...HELL YES, as I said before in the NFL you get paid to produce and that means win and make and win playoff games SUPER BOWLS too. The man has had his opportunities and blown them. I would take 2 other QB's in the NFC east before I would take Romo, you have one and we have the other.

So, so wrong. You don't get paid in the NFL based on past production. You get paid for repeatable skills.

Since winning "event" games isn't a skill, i.e. no player is more or less likely to win a single event in the future than the past, it is not valued. The abilities that translate to wins are valued, but past record (particularly team record) doesn't mean anything.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

So, so wrong. You don't get paid in the NFL based on past production. You get paid for repeatable skills.

Since winning "event" games isn't a skill, i.e. no player is more or less likely to win a single event in the future than the past, it is not valued. The abilities that translate to wins are valued, but past record (particularly team record) doesn't mean anything.

100% right...in bizarro land. ALL that matters is what you have done. Romo has won...a lot. Just not when it matters most. But enough that they had no choice but to pay him. Part of his repeatable skills is not getting the job done in the playoffs. They're not paying him for that but it comes with the bundle. Or o it seems.

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

So, so wrong. You don't get paid in the NFL based on past production. You get paid for repeatable skills.

Since winning "event" games isn't a skill, i.e. no player is more or less likely to win a single event in the future than the past, it is not valued. The abilities that translate to wins are valued, but past record (particularly team record) doesn't mean anything.

Whhhhhhhhhhaaaaatttt? Lol.

He has to be trolling. Nobody could post something this arrogantly wrong and mean it

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

So, so wrong. You don't get paid in the NFL based on past production. You get paid for repeatable skills.

Since winning "event" games isn't a skill, i.e. no player is more or less likely to win a single event in the future than the past, it is not valued. The abilities that translate to wins are valued, but past record (particularly team record) doesn't mean anything.

You call "winning" the super bowl and event game and in your opinion it carries no weight in their (the players) contract talks, so your saying you get paid for potential not performance, correct?

[MTK]

As if there wasn't enough pressure already, and we all know how well he handles it lol

Pressure now on Tony Romo to make good - NFC East Blog - ESPN

1-6 in elimination games lol

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

As if there wasn't enough pressure already, and we all know how well he handles it lol

Pressure now on Tony Romo to make good - NFC East Blog - ESPN

1-6 in elimination games lol

That says it all about Romo.
Peyton Manning also falls in this category a little bit. Great regular season player but tends to throw too many interceptions and turnovers in the playoffs. Manning and Romo become too one dimensional and throw the ball way too much for their won good.
It is not coincidence that the Ravens, 49ers, Seahawks and Redskins have a good running game to compliment a good passing game. The Cowboys do not. The Cowboys desperately need to rebuild their OL but continue to draft other positions. It is the Vinny Cerratto syndrome of undervaluing the need for a strong O-line and running game.

[donofriose]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

That says it all about Romo.
Peyton Manning also falls in this category a little bit. Great regular season player but tends to throw too many interceptions and turnovers in the playoffs. Manning and Romo become too one dimensional and throw the ball way too much for their won good.
It is not coincidence that the Ravens, 49ers, Seahawks and Redskins have a good running game to compliment a good passing game. The Cowboys do not. The Cowboys desperately need to rebuild their OL but continue to draft other positions. It is the Vinny Cerratto syndrome of undervaluing the need for a strong O-line and running game.

I wouldn't compare one of best quarterbacks of all time to tony romo.

[VegasSkinsFan]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Vinny... is that you?

55 mil guaranteed to someone that will be 33 before the season starts is crazy. Especially when he has had solid teams around him in the past and couldnt come through. Im sick of listening to the whole argument that Dallas has never had a good player except Tony Romo since he has been there. Thats just outright nonsense. The Cowboys in his early years had better talent around Romo than RG3 had this past year. Given the injuries to key players this past year (Garcon, Davis, ect), that makes it even worse.

QB's arent overpaid in this league. They are the most important piece. But unless they have won you SB's or even gotten to some conference championships, you dont give a 33 year old that amount of guaranteed money. The Cowboys are already in salary cap purgatory, now they are in even deeper with a QB that will be in decline. At 33, I doubt he is going to get better.

The Cowboys need a major overhaul, so anytime they keep an aging vet and sign him to an uncuttable for 3 or 4 years contract, they are making matters worse, not better (Better if looking at it from a Redskins standpoint).

Since the whole Tony Romo has never had a good team around him argument is always used. What changes this year then? What exactly are you seeing in Dallas that makes you think Romo will now get over the hump?

Since that argument dictates that they wont win anything, why not move on and try to get your cap in order while drafting some young pieces who will EVENTUALLY win?

If you want to defend the move because you hate Dallas and think its funny, then be my guest (I do). But you seem to be saying that its a "good move" for that franchise... I couldnt disagree more. They are better off losing 12 games instead of 8 for a couple of years and building with higher draft picks.

Plain and simple, Romo's contract is a Vinny move. And Vinny moves have been proven to not work in the first year, and cost the team dearly in dead cap in later years. Im glad its now the Cowboys doing those contracts and not us anymore.

If I was a cowboy fan, his age would bother me much more than the dollars. I havn't seen how the 55 mil is structured, but they could be taking a big cap hit in years 4 on for a seriously declining player. Worse yet, this move indicates they either won't or can't afford to use a top pick for a long term replacement unless they want to cut other parts of the team even more.

As an example, lets say they draft someone in the second round this year. That persons rookie contract would be ending while a 37 year old tony is still taking up huge cap dollars. It would force them to cut tony in order to sign the guy they drafted and still have dead space.

[12thMan]

Dez Bryant's rookie deal is up in 2015. I'm sure he'll be looking for a big payday or take his services elsewhere ala Percy Harvin.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

As if there wasn't enough pressure already, and we all know how well he handles it lol

Pressure now on Tony Romo to make good - NFC East Blog - ESPN

1-6 in elimination games lol

Graziano's article pretty sums it up pretty well. Romo's a very good QB September to December, but, to be worth this contract, he has to find a way to extend that to January.

Personally, I just don't think he has it in him. Maybe I am wrong, bit I sure as hell hope not.

[HailGreen28]

Guess there's a certain threshold below "elite", where a good QB is still considered irreplaceable to a team. E. Manning, Flacco, now Romo.

Wow, the Pats got such a discount on Brady. Wonder how much of a discount the Packers will get on Rodgers. (I think getting the same deal as Flacco, would be a bargain for Rodgers.)

[RedskinRat]

I'm with HG28, it's skewing the market.