Interesting point about Romo and leverage

[waldoputty]

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2017/3/11/14892656/regarding-existence-of-romo-leverage

it states that if romo retires, he would have to pay back a portion of his signing / restructuring bonus.
is this true?

so he could not just threaten to retire if traded to a team he does not like.
furthermore, the cowboys would still hold his rights if he unretire?
if all this is true, cowboys have all the cards other than the tony jones part...

 

[Tass]

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2017/3/11/14892656/regarding-existence-of-romo-leverage

it states that if romo retires, he would have to pay back a portion of his signing / restructuring bonus.
is this true?

so he could not just threaten to retire if traded to a team he does not like.
furthermore, the cowboys would still hold his rights if he unretire?
if all this is true, cowboys have all the cards other than the tony jones part...

I remember when Barry Sanders retired. A year later he was contemplating a comeback but was informed the Lions still retained his rights.

Barry stayed retired.

 

[Vero_F250]

Jerry could fight to make him repay it; which we all know he won't. If Romo retires, which he isn't, but IF he did...he would keep the money.

And yes the Cowboys would still have rights to him.

 

[JoeKing]

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2017/3/11/14892656/regarding-existence-of-romo-leverage

it states that if romo retires, he would have to pay back a portion of his signing / restructuring bonus.
is this true?

so he could not just threaten to retire if traded to a team he does not like.
furthermore, the cowboys would still hold his rights if he unretire?
if all this is true, cowboys have all the cards other than the tony jones part...

Some one doesn't listen to a single word Mickey Spagnola has said a thousands times.

 

[jterrell]

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2017/3/11/14892656/regarding-existence-of-romo-leverage

it states that if romo retires, he would have to pay back a portion of his signing / restructuring bonus.
is this true?

so he could not just threaten to retire if traded to a team he does not like.
furthermore, the cowboys would still hold his rights if he unretire?
if all this is true, cowboys have all the cards other than the tony jones part...

romo has no leverage.
he wants to play football.
he doesn't wanna pay pay back money.
his retiring gives us cap space.

dallas won't force romo to play in purgatory so this was always a non-factor beyond whispers to media members.

 

[bandfan]

I expect the team would actually endorse retirement. 1. not on payroll. 2. not playing against them. 3. if Dak goes down....

 

[DFWJC]

romo has no leverage.
he wants to play football.
he doesn't wanna pay pay back money.
his retiring gives us cap space.

dallas won't force romo to play in purgatory so this was always a non-factor beyond whispers to media members.

Retire, waive, trade....all the same cap implications except how it is dispursed (june 1 waiver )

And no...he would not have to pay back signing bonus money. Maybe if Jerry had intention of trading or waiving him, but it wouldve been sunk cost anyway and Jerry wont ask for it back.

Romo has veto power on these trades. Period. Not even debateable.
Some can argue that he shouldnt have, but he flat out does.

He DOES have plenty of leverage, but wont push it. In fact, hes the one who told Jerry to take a few days if he wants, as stated by Jerry.

 

[jazzcat22]

I remember when Barry Sanders retired. A year later he was contemplating a comeback but was informed the Lions still retained his rights.

Barry stayed retired.

Yes teams retain rights after they retire. Maybe the rules are a little different now. But when Sanders retired, they were the same as they always been.
After Staubach retired, it wasn't until 10 years later when Dallas released his rights as a player. Therefore making him eligible to sign with any team at the age of 48.

Not sure if there is a time limit now or not. Or if a team can hold that right for 20 years if they want to.

 

[visionary]

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2017/3/11/14892656/regarding-existence-of-romo-leverage

it states that if romo retires, he would have to pay back a portion of his signing / restructuring bonus.
is this true?

so he could not just threaten to retire if traded to a team he does not like.
furthermore, the cowboys would still hold his rights if he unretire?
if all this is true, cowboys have all the cards other than the tony jones part...

Romo is not retiring
That is just rubbish put out by the Romo homies
He desperately wants to play to show the Cowboys what a mistake they made not playing him last year
Jerry is the moron who is muddying the waters so that all the teams know he will release Romo so they're not trading and are content to wait him out

 

[jazzcat22]

Retire, waive, trade....all the same cap implications except how it is dispursed (june 1 waiver )

And no...he would not have to pay back signing bonus money. Maybe if Jerry had intention of trading or waiving him, but it wouldve been sunk cost anyway and Jerry wont ask for it back.

Romo has veto power on these trades. Period. Not even debateable.
Some can argue that he shouldnt have, but he flat out does.

He DOES have plenty of leverage, but wont push it. In fact, hes the one who told Jerry to take a few days if he wants, as stated by Jerry.

Disagree.
Not from what I read, there are no clauses in Romo's contract saying he can veto any trades. Now he can be an arse and refuse to report or try to fight it. But there is not any "no trade" clauses.
Any if he retires, he would have to pay back a portion of the prorated signing bonus. As that is spread out over the length of the contract for cap purposes.

 

[DFWJC]

Disagree.
Not from what I read, there are no clauses in Romo's contract saying he can veto any trades. Now he can be an arse and refuse to report or try to fight it. But there is not any "no trade" clauses.
Any if he retires, he would have to pay back a portion of the prorated signing bonus. As that is spread out over the length of the contract for cap purposes.

No clauses. True
But that is how it is.

Just wait and see. Tony wont get traded somewhere were he doesnt want to go...and no team would want him unless he was sold on being there.
Not sure what this talk is about him being an arse. Dude has been around forever, he cant be forced to play anywhere....nor should he. Nor would Jerry EVER consider trying to force that.

Odds are, he wont get traded at all, but itd be great if they could work out something.

 

[LittleD]

Disagree.
Not from what I read, there are no clauses in Romo's contract saying he can veto any trades. Now he can be an arse and refuse to report or try to fight it. But there is not any "no trade" clauses.
Any if he retires, he would have to pay back a portion of the prorated signing bonus. As that is spread out over the length of the contract for cap purposes.

What part of he will never pay back a dime in bonus money don't you get. The precedents have been set by a previous backup QB who went to Buffalo and a DT who went
to Chicago. They never paid back a dime of bonus/pre paid salary. No player is going to pay back a dime and Jerry is not going to waist time over 5mil to his adopted son.
He wants his trophy UDFA moving to the ROH at the stadium.

 

[DFWJC]

Retire, waive, trade....all the same cap implications except how it is dispursed (june 1 waiver )

And no...he would not have to pay back signing bonus money. Maybe if Jerry had intention of trading or waiving him, but it wouldve been sunk cost anyway and Jerry wont ask for it back.

Romo has veto power on these trades. Period. Not even debateable.
Some can argue that he shouldnt have, but he flat out does.

He DOES have plenty of leverage, but wont push it. In fact, hes the one who told Jerry to take a few days if he wants, as stated by Jerry.

Oop, left out the "didnt"
Maybe if Jerry didnt have any intention of waiving or trading him....or maybe if he was allowed to compete for his job.
But thats not how it is.
If he retires, Jerry wont make him pay back anything

Btw, I definitely am not at all predicting he will retire, but Im also not in the camp that say no chance hed do that. Its a lesser, but viable option, imo.

 

[jazzcat22]

What part of he will never pay back a dime in bonus money don't you get. The precedents have been set by a previous backup QB who went to Buffalo and a DT who went
to Chicago. They never paid back a dime of bonus/pre paid salary. No player is going to pay back a dime and Jerry is not going to waist time over 5mil to his adopted son.
He wants his trophy UDFA moving to the ROH at the stadium.

Well, dang sorry to upset you...carry on dude....

 

[LittleD]

Well, dang sorry to upset you...carry on dude....

No upset here at all...Just trying hard to educate the masses.

 

[jazzcat22]

No upset here at all...Just trying hard to educate the masses.

Then the rules have changed on repaying bonuses, as they used to be spread out over the contract, and repaid if a player retired. Or was supposed to be repaid as not to count toward the cap.

 

[LittleD]

Then the rules have changed on repaying bonuses, as they used to be spread out over the contract, and repaid if a player retired. Or was supposed to be repaid as not to count toward the cap.

Jerry would have to press the issue against Tony and I'm sure he will not. Jerry will eat the cap hit to maintain the special relationship.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

If I were him I would take a serious look at Jacksonville. That team is loaded with talent. Winnable division, nice weather. Stick it to the two teams playing hardball with the Cowboys. I could see a deal easily being reached, if they wanted to acquire Romo. Win-win.

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

Romo retires, pays back 19m signing bonus, JJ hires Romo as consultant for 19m. Everyone wins

 

[waldoputty]

Jerry would have to press the issue against Tony and I'm sure he will not. Jerry will eat the cap hit to maintain the special relationship.

actually i think it is the new team that would be the one to press the issue.
so jones does not have to be the one that does the dirty work.
so the threat is credible.