Proof - Cap Space and Romo Trade not a problem

[Elusive6thRing]

Explain this to me again like I'm a 5 year old.

 

[robjay04]

If a team wants to trade for Romo that is likely where he would want to go.

How do?

If the Browns are the only one willing to trade for him...does he want to go there? Or would he prefer to hit the open market where other teams would be interested?

Fact is, he has all the leverage. GMs know we aren't keeping him at his current cap number, they can likely get him for free in the market. If we just trade him to the highest bidder, all he has to do is leak that he is contemplating retirement(which has already started) and that's the end of it.

 

[ROUSH8692]

Ok. Let me give all of you a dose of common sense.

Romo is not going to do the Cowboys any favors, and he is not going to cripple his new team by doing so. He is in it to win a championship.

Romo has FULL VETO RIGHTS!!!! If a trade does not benefit him or the team he is going to HE WILL VETO THE TRADE.

So keep him or release him. Those are the two options.

 

[Nightman]

Ok. Let me give all of you a dose of common sense.

Romo is not going to do the Cowboys any favors, and he is not going to cripple his new team by doing so. He is in it to win a championship.

Romo has FULL VETO RIGHTS!!!! If a trade does not benefit him or the team he is going to HE WILL VETO THE TRADE.

So keep him or release him. Those are the two options.

He has NO veto rights........where are you getting that from????

If he gets traded he has to play for them for 3 years or retire

 

[Nightman]

You still don't understand what you are talking about. A trade or a release frees 5 mill on our cap. That benefits us.

It also benefits us to not send a player somewhere he doesn't want to go.

It is sad to see folks not understand that how we treat Romo at this stage affects so many things. It is sad to see that the concept of respect is lost on you.

That is a false equivalency....he was never going to play under a 24.7m cap hit so saving 5m to 19.6m is not a real savings........it is an insanely high number for a non-starting QB

You also over-rate the goodwill benefits vs the value of a high trade pick..... I assure you Dak wants a WR or DE over a happy Romo on DEN trying to beat us

 

[xwalker]

How do?

If the Browns are the only one willing to trade for him...does he want to go there? Or would he prefer to hit the open market where other teams would be interested?

Fact is, he has all the leverage. GMs know we aren't keeping him at his current cap number, they can likely get him for free in the market. If we just trade him to the highest bidder, all he has to do is leak that he is contemplating retirement(which has already started) and that's the end of it.

Why would the Browns want to trade for him? You have to be realistic. Only teams that could be contenders by adding a Pro Bowl QB would be interested in trading for him. It's basically the same set of teams that would be interested if he was a free agent.

Technically, the Cowboys can request that he repay the unrealized portion of his signing bonus which is 12.5 million if he retires.

GMs don't really know for certain that Jerry would not keep Romo. Everybody knows that Jerry is a wildcard and that he loves Romo.

 

[xwalker]

I'll be honest. I am still confused about how Romo's contract works.

So if we cut him prior to June 1, what are the ramifications cap wise not only for the 2017 cap year but the 2018 cap year.

What happens if he's a post June 1 cut. How does that affect the 2017 cap year and 2018 cap year.

Do the parameters change if he is traded either post or pre June 1?

I tried to explain it in another thread.
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/salary-cap-primer.370423/

The bottom line is that June 1st does not matter to the Cowboys in 2017.

The total amount of dead-money is the same. The June 1st issue just varies how much of it hits in 2017 and how much in 2018, but the total is the same. They can push money from another players contract forward and absorb all of the dead-money now or do a June 1st cut and not restructure other contracts. It all equals out in the long run.

 

[ROUSH8692]

He has NO veto rights........where are you getting that from????

If he gets traded he has to play for them for 3 years or retire

I am getting it from EVERYWHERE....It is common knowledge that he has VETO RIGHTS... Read the last sentence.

Romo, I’m told, already has eyes on the Broncos as a possible destination if general manager John Elway decides Paxton Lynch needs another year and that Trevor Siemian isn’t the guy. Other options, depending on a variety of factors, include the Bears, Jets, Cardinals, and Bills. When the Cowboys do trade him, they’ll still have to deal with about a $20 million salary-cap hit. Romo will have significant say in the matter given that he will need to renegotiate his deal. He, essentially, could veto any move.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/11/tony-romo-trade-denver-broncos-rumor

 

[Nightman]

I am getting it from EVERYWHERE....It is common knowledge that he has VETO RIGHTS... Read the last sentence.

Romo, I’m told, already has eyes on the Broncos as a possible destination if general manager John Elway decides Paxton Lynch needs another year and that Trevor Siemian isn’t the guy. Other options, depending on a variety of factors, include the Bears, Jets, Cardinals, and Bills. When the Cowboys do trade him, they’ll still have to deal with about a $20 million salary-cap hit. Romo will have significant say in the matter given that he will need to renegotiate his deal. He, essentially, could veto any move.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/11/tony-romo-trade-denver-broncos-rumor

That is not a veto clause in his contract.............no one has reported he has a no-trade clause

If he gets traded his only option is retiring ...... but the new team would have his rights for 3 years

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

I am getting it from EVERYWHERE....It is common knowledge that he has VETO RIGHTS... Read the last sentence.

Romo, I’m told, already has eyes on the Broncos as a possible destination if general manager John Elway decides Paxton Lynch needs another year and that Trevor Siemian isn’t the guy. Other options, depending on a variety of factors, include the Bears, Jets, Cardinals, and Bills. When the Cowboys do trade him, they’ll still have to deal with about a $20 million salary-cap hit. Romo will have significant say in the matter given that he will need to renegotiate his deal. He, essentially, could veto any move.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/11/tony-romo-trade-denver-broncos-rumor

That's not veto rights. That just means if a team traded for him and expected him to renegotiate his contract, he could refuse to do so. If a team were willing to take his contract as-is, Romo has no say, unless he retires.

 

[LocimusPrime]

Let's get that trade rolling then

 

[jamesdojr]

Why would you trade for a guy who has full veto rights and will be released anyway?

Dallas will release him and get nothing for him.

Then Cowboys don't release him. I wouldnt. He's more valuable to the Cowboys as a backup if something happens to Prescott. No team will be willing to trade for him unless they have a need for a starting QB. If Tony wants to start on a team that needs him to be there starter, then Tony should go and be a starter.

Tony has to understand he is an asset and the Cowboys are not giving him away for nothing... They don't have to.

 

[Rockdoc]

if he is going to be traded he should go to the Texans. rb, wr x 2, TE and a defense. no brainer
but our starting qb is making 4th rd money so he doesnt have to leave.
i want him to stay but i want him to be happy

 

[xwalker]

I am getting it from EVERYWHERE....It is common knowledge that he has VETO RIGHTS... Read the last sentence.

Romo, I’m told, already has eyes on the Broncos as a possible destination if general manager John Elway decides Paxton Lynch needs another year and that Trevor Siemian isn’t the guy. Other options, depending on a variety of factors, include the Bears, Jets, Cardinals, and Bills. When the Cowboys do trade him, they’ll still have to deal with about a $20 million salary-cap hit. Romo will have significant say in the matter given that he will need to renegotiate his deal. He, essentially, could veto any move.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/11/tony-romo-trade-denver-broncos-rumor

The article did not say he had veto power. It said essentially, because the article claims he would need to renegotiate his contract. In reality, he does not need to renegotiate his contract. If a team gets him in a trade, they inherit his base salaries which are very reasonable for an elite type QB. He would not be guaranteed any money by the new team which makes it a much lower risk for them.

When the Cowboys do trade him, they'll still have to deal with about a $20 million salary-cap hit. Romo will have significant say in the matter given that he will need to renegotiate his deal. He, essentially, could veto any move.

 

[xwalker]

Then Cowboys don't release him. I wouldnt. He's more valuable to the Cowboys as a backup if something happens to Prescott. No team will be willing to trade for him unless they have a need for a starting QB. If Tony wants to start on a team that needs him to be there starter, then Tony should go and be a starter.

Tony has to understand he is an asset and the Cowboys are not giving him away for nothing... They don't have to.

He does not have veto power in this contract.

The Cowboys would have to pay him 14 million for 2017 to stay. They could do it, but probably won't. He does not want to be a backup anyway.

 

[xwalker]

That's not veto rights. That just means if a team traded for him and expected him to renegotiate his contract, he could refuse to do so. If a team were willing to take his contract as-is, Romo has no say, unless he retires.

There is no reason that he needs to renegotiate his contract. His contract is a bargain for a Pro Bowl type QB and his contact is not guaranteed once he is traded.

 

[xwalker]

Explain this to me again like I'm a 5 year old.

?

 

[Verdict]

Why would you trade for a guy who has full veto rights and will be released anyway?

Dallas will release him and get nothing for him.

I do not believe this is remotely accurate. It is more likely Romo is a $14 Milluon Dollar backup than he will be given away in an outright free release.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

There is no reason that he needs to renegotiate his contract. His contract is a bargain for a Pro Bowl type QB and his contact is not guaranteed once he is traded.

It's not unrealistic to think a team would want him to renegotiate before agreeing to a trade - given his injury history.

 

[CWR]

Why would you trade for a guy who has full veto rights and will be released anyway?

Dallas will release him and get nothing for him.

I think it would be considered because if hes a free agent you have to compete with other teams to sign him. If a team is able to make a trade work they can ensure they get thier guy.