Fair Compensation

[haleyrules]

Tony is no longer a good QB. If any club is seriously interested in him, and thats very doubtful, they will wait until he is released. Too old... too injury prone...too bloated a contact and has never produced when it counted. Tony has always been the greatest subject of revisionist history. Be sure NFL GM 's don't view him the way he is viewed on Cowboy fan sites.

 

[negativecreep]

if you are a GM trading for Romo and you believe the following:

1. Romo is healthy
2. He can withstand the rigors of a season
3. He is a top 5 QB
4. You can absorb his cap hit
5. With Romo your team is an instant super bowl contender and without him you will likely waste a window of opportunity

What would you give up for Romo? If you win a super bowl what was he worth to you?

If Jerry jones were guaranteed a super bowl in exchange for three first round picks do you think jerry would do it? Hell yeah he would. He hasn't been there since 1995 and the Texans have NEVER even been to one.

If I thought I was close to winning the SB I would give up a 1st. That's the most I would trade, maybe throw in in a LB or DE with some potential, that's it. Romo is a great QB in my opinion, but he's really taken a beating. I would throw a a rager with 16 kegs and invite you all if we got a 1 for him, I will be upset if we just cut him, but I don't see getting more than a 4th or maybe a 3rd next year. My offer stands though if we can fleece someone out of a first, 16 kegs, just bring some munchies because I will be broke, lol.

 

[Verdict]

D

If I thought I was close to winning the SB I would give up a 1st. That's the most I would trade, maybe throw in in a LB or DE with some potential, that's it. Romo is a great QB in my opinion, but he's really taken a beating. I would throw a a rager with 16 kegs and invite you all if we got a 1 for him, I will be upset if we just cut him, but I don't see getting more than a 4th or maybe a 3rd next year. My offer stands though if we can fleece someone out of a first, 16 kegs, just bring some munchies because I will be broke, lol.

You better be careful, Romo may just net that plus some.

 

[negativecreep]

D



You better be careful, Romo may just net that plus some.

well if he does get ready to party folks! I keep my word. I would be thrilled if we could pull that off.

 

[darthseinfeld]

We aren't changing the hypothetical. I asked if you believed all of the above what would be fair compensation.

Problem is believing #2 and #3

 

[DFWJC]

the problem is #2

This

 

[casmith07]

No one thinks Romo is a top 5 QB anymore.

I disagree. I think they probably have him in "the neighborhood" but the problem is fragility and age.

 

[JoeKing]

@Verdict ... I don't think anyone truly buys the premise of your question so how can you expect an honest answer.

 

[Verdict]

@Verdict ... I don't think anyone truly buys the premise of your question so how can you expect an honest answer.

Some do some don't. That's not what we are discussing here through. If everyone believes that Romo is done then he won't draw anything in a trade and it is a moot point.

Most people here believe in Romo to some degree and believe he has value in a trade. I am trying to gauge what he would be worth if those variables are true in order to determine what an appropriate discount would be if you are not fully on board with all of the parameters. That's how value is determined in real world negotiations.

You need to know what your best case scenario is and your worst case scenario and YOUR tolerance for risk. The team taking on Romo will risk his known issues like age, etc. But a team who does not take Romo risks watching the super bowl from the sidelines and wasting another year of their window. That's a risk too.

I weigh all risks that are known and some unknown risk too when I evaluate a case. Everything must be factored into negotiations.

If I knew a case was worth a million dollars but the opponent will pay two million why would I settle for a million?

Conversely if I know that I am on the paying side and the opponent will eventually give in why would I pay any more than I know they will take even if it is a fair price? That's real world negotiations.

The Cowboys have been viewed as weak in negotiations but that is starting to change. We stood pat on Lynch and Cook. We didn't overpay.

We should be willing to keep Romo on the roster. If it doesn't work out keep him and pay him next year. It sends a message to the NFL that we will play hard ball with you and won't give you what you want at a discount.

In negotiations if someone says give me what I want or I will kill a hostage I shoot two hostages just to show them I mean business and then say what were you saying? I mean that figuratively of course, but you get the drift.

The Cowboys really should hire me to negotiate their deals. I can read between the lines better than most and evaluate someone's position very swiftly and accurately.

What no one is factoring into this equation is that there are no acceptable Romo substitutes and there hasn't been for MANY years. This is a once in a decade opportunity for the Cowboys and I hope they don't piss it off.

 

[WeaponX]

Playing with the given assumptions but considering the short window of opportunity, I'd say a first if it's a mid rounder and a first and a 3-4th it's a late rounder

 

[xwalker]

if you are a GM trading for Romo and you believe the following:

1. Romo is healthy
2. He can withstand the rigors of a season
3. He is a top 5 QB
4. You can absorb his cap hit
5. With Romo your team is an instant super bowl contender and without him you will likely waste a window of opportunity

What would you give up for Romo? If you win a super bowl what was he worth to you?

If Jerry jones were guaranteed a super bowl in exchange for three first round picks do you think jerry would do it? Hell yeah he would. He hasn't been there since 1995 and the Texans have NEVER even been to one.

I would give up a 3rd, becomes a 2nd if he plays 10 games and a 1st if he plays 16 with playoff games counting as part of the 16.

 

[Beast_from_East]

We aren't changing the hypothetical. I asked if you believed all of the above what would be fair compensation.

If we are playing hypotheticals and everything you listed is written in stone, then yes, Romo would be worth multiple first round picks.

The problem is that the conditions you listed are not written in stone, thus risk is no introduced into the equation. The more risk a team is taking, the less compensation they are willing to give you. Thus, how much should those multiple first round picks be discounted? I think most objective posters would say a second or third round pick would be fair compensation for the risk the trading team is taking on.

So that is your answer. Multiple first round picks if your conditions are written in stone, a 2nd or 3rd round pick in the real world.

 

[JoeKing]

Some do some don't. That's not what we are discussing here through. If everyone believes that Romo is done then he won't draw anything in a trade and it is a moot point.

Most people here believe in Romo to some degree and believe he has value in a trade. I am trying to gauge what he would be worth if those variables are true in order to determine what an appropriate discount would be if you are not fully on board with all of the parameters. That's how value is determined in real world negotiations.

You need to know what your best case scenario is and your worst case scenario and YOUR tolerance for risk. The team taking on Romo will risk his known issues like age, etc. But a team who does not take Romo risks watching the super bowl from the sidelines and wasting another year of their window. That's a risk too.

I weigh all risks that are known and some unknown risk too when I evaluate a case. Everything must be factored into negotiations.

If I knew a case was worth a million dollars but the opponent will pay two million why would I settle for a million?

Conversely if I know that I am on the paying side and the opponent will eventually give in why would I pay any more than I know they will take even if it is a fair price? That's real world negotiations.

The Cowboys have been viewed as weak in negotiations but that is starting to change. We stood pat on Lynch and Cook. We didn't overpay.

We should be willing to keep Romo on the roster. If it doesn't work out keep him and pay him next year. It sends a message to the NFL that we will play hard ball with you and won't give you what you want at a discount.

In negotiations if someone says give me what I want or I will kill a hostage I shoot two hostages just to show them I mean business and then say what were you saying? I mean that figuratively of course, but you get the drift.

The Cowboys really should hire me to negotiate their deals. I can read between the lines better than most and evaluate someone's position very swiftly and accurately.

What no one is factoring into this equation is that there are no acceptable Romo substitutes and there hasn't been for MANY years. This is a once in a decade opportunity for the Cowboys and I hope they don't piss it off.

For what it's worth, you should send an application for employment to the Cowboys so they can benefit from your sage advice. There was nothing you said I disagree with. I hope the Cowboys adopt your philosophy and everyone lives happily ever after.

 

[Risen Star]

You guys are thinking small. Sam Bradford just went for a first round pick. No conditions. And everybody knows he's just a guy.

Why did that happen? Because a team was desperate for one. A lot of teams are in that same boat.

This is an elite franchise QB in a league starving for them.

It'll be a package of picks probably over several years.

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

Please stick to the thread topic.

Pizza....Pizza.

 

[tyke1doe]

Given the conditions you outlined, a 1st if a team drafting 20 and below. 2nd if team drafting high. The only caveat for not going higher in the 1st is Romo's age.

 

[Verdict]

You guys are thinking small. Sam Bradford just went for a first round pick. No conditions. And everybody knows he's just a guy.

Why did that happen? Because a team was desperate for one. A lot of teams are in that same boat.

This is an elite franchise QB in a league starving for them.

It'll be a package of picks probably over several years.

If they don't **** this up we should get premium compensation in this potential trade. I think it will be to Houston because it makes the most sense and it will be a first rounder or more to acquire Romo.

I think Denver wants him badly but I'm not sure they will give up enough compensation to make the deal.

 

[TwentyOne]

if you are a GM trading for Romo and you believe the following:

1. Romo is healthy
2. He can withstand the rigors of a season
3. He is a top 5 QB
4. You can absorb his cap hit
5. With Romo your team is an instant super bowl contender and without him you will likely waste a window of opportunity

What would you give up for Romo? If you win a super bowl what was he worth to you?

If Jerry jones were guaranteed a super bowl in exchange for three first round picks do you think jerry would do it? Hell yeah he would. He hasn't been there since 1995 and the Texans have NEVER even been to one.

I would give up 2 firsts and maybe more if i'd thought all those points are true.

But you will be hard press to find a gm who believes that even 1 point is true.

Of course point 4 has nothing to do with believing. Its just a questing of logical thinking.

Nr 5 could also be true. But not because Romo would be such a hugh upgrade. Its just because if you have a complete team and are lacking a QB Romo may be the one who gets you over the hump.

Here is what GM #21 thinks ;-)

1. Viewed as a football player Romo is not healthy. He is healthy when i measure him against the demands of a normal life though.
2. He cant. You have to have a major backup plan.
3. Definitly not.
4. Logic
5. No. (biggest reasons are 1.-3.)

 

[Hoofbite]

And #3. Saying Romo, at 37 and not having played sustained football in two season, is a top 5QB with nothing to prove that, is a stretch.

To answer the OP's question, though, I think a high 3rd or 2nd round pick would be relatively fair, given the risks the trading team would be taking.

May as well take #4 off the board. If you're trading for him you don't have to absorb anything you can't afford. The entire trade would hinge on a new contract between Romo and the trading team.

 

[Kevinicus]

Tony is no longer a good QB. If any club is seriously interested in him, and thats very doubtful, they will wait until he is released. Too old... too injury prone...too bloated a contact and has never produced when it counted. Tony has always been the greatest subject of revisionist history. Be sure NFL GM 's don't view him the way he is viewed on Cowboy fan sites.

Now this is some serious trolling.