Rogers Deal on Tap!

[burmafrd]

Brees is being paid 60m over 3 years, actual money
Flacco is getting 61m over 3 years
Brady is getting 40m over 3 years

Tony should be around 36-39m over 3 years. His last deal was 5/67.5m and he will get every penny of that deal. He can sign a fake deal for his agent or a real deal he will actually collect.

This is money they will all get. If you restructure their deals, they get even more money upfront, not less. Brady took a big pay cut, there is no way around it. His last deal was 4/72, the new one is 5/57. He may get more later, but he may not. Kraft just made it pretty clear with Welker that he doesn't answer to Brady. Tony Romo is not Tom Brady.

If you think romo is going to sign for that little you are nuts. Certainly no less than $15 million per year and I predict around $17 million.

 

[Rack]

Team: "We gave you a 76.9 defensive PR in 2007. Shut up."

 

[BIGDen]

Team: "We gave you a 76.9 defensive PR in 2007. Shut up."

Yeah and they were 13-3 and had home field advantage throughout the playoffs. BUT thanks to Crayton, Fasano, 12 penalties, etc. the TEAM lost. To pin that loss on Romo is moronic. Romo threw clutch passes to Crayton in the biggest moments of that game and Crayton dropped one and pulled up on the other route. Fasano dropped a perfect TD pass. Romo was called for a huge grounding penalty only to have the league say it was an error after the game. Romo played more than well enough to win that game while Eli completed like 10 passes or something, but ELI won the game, right? Not Dallas basically giving it away. Ridiculous. Go watch the game.

 

[AbeBeta]

Yeah and they were 13-3 and had home field advantage throughout the playoffs. BUT thanks to Crayton, Fasano, 12 penalties, etc. the TEAM lost. To pin that loss on Romo is moronic. Romo threw clutch passes to Crayton in the biggest moments of that game and Crayton dropped one and pulled up on the other route. Fasano dropped a perfect TD pass. Romo was called for a huge grounding penalty only to have the league say it was an error after the game. Romo played more than well enough to win that game while Eli completed like 10 passes or something, but ELI won the game, right? Not Dallas basically giving it away. Ridiculous. Go watch the game.

I'm not pinning the loss on Romo. I am demonstrating how silly the argument based on DPR is.

Ultimately though we have our answer. The only arguments here supporting Romo deserving the same deal as Rodgers, Brees, or Flacco is that not winning the SB is someone else's fault. It lead to that every time.

The fact remains Tony has one playoff win and has also lost several "loser goes home" games in Week 17. You will not get paid on par with SB winners if that is your record.

 

[BIGDen]

I'm not pinning the loss on Romo. I am demonstrating how silly the argument based on DPR is.

Ultimately though we have our answer. The only arguments here supporting Romo deserving the same deal as Rodgers, Brees, or Flacco is that not winning the SB is someone else's fault. It lead to that every time.

The fact remains Tony has one playoff win and has also lost several "loser goes home" games in Week 17. You will not get paid on par with SB winners if that is your record.

The thing is, if people actually watched this team all these years they would realize that it is RARELY (not never) Romo's fault. He is typically the reason they have a chance. He has had a few bad games in big moments and he has had plenty of great games with their playoff chances on the line (the final game of the season is not the only critical late season game). The fact is that the defense, OVERALL, has not been very good at coming up with big stops and has NEVER been good at creating turnovers while he has been QB. Dallas' running game has typically been weak with Romo at QB. Romo, like ANY QB you can think of in the history of football, has had some bad important games. However, unlike many of the "winner" QBs, he has not had a TEAM that has come up big in big moments either.

If winning the SB or playoff games was just about QBing then we would never see Dilfer, Johnson, Hostetler, Williams, etc with rings and guys like Marino without them. Romo will get a big payday based on HIS play and his value as a QB in this league.

 

[AbeBeta]

The thing is, if people actually watched this team all these years they would realize that it is RARELY (not never) Romo's fault. He is typically the reason they have a chance. He has had a few bad games in big moments and he has had plenty of great games with their playoff chances on the line (the final game of the season is not the only critical late season game). The fact is that the defense, OVERALL, has not been very good at coming up with big stops and has NEVER been good at creating turnovers while he has been QB. Dallas' running game has typically been weak with Romo at QB. Romo, like ANY QB you can think of in the history of football, has had some bad important games. However, unlike many of the "winner" QBs, he has not had a TEAM that has come up big in big moments either.

If winning the SB or playoff games was just about QBing then we would never see Dilfer, Johnson, Hostetler, Williams, etc with rings and guys like Marino without them. Romo will get a big payday based on HIS play and his value as a QB in this league.

Like I said the "it isn't his fault" argument will never be one that gets someone a contract on par with those QBs who win. Winning QBs often have to overcome mistakes and great performances by the opposition.

Oh yeah. Marino won 8 playoff games. You cannot put him in the same class as Romo.

 

[DFWJC]

Yeah and they were 13-3 and had home field advantage throughout the playoffs. BUT thanks to Crayton, Fasano, 12 penalties, etc. the TEAM lost. To pin that loss on Romo is moronic. Romo threw clutch passes to Crayton in the biggest moments of that game and Crayton dropped one and pulled up on the other route. Fasano dropped a perfect TD pass. Romo was called for a huge grounding penalty only to have the league say it was an error after the game. Romo played more than well enough to win that game while Eli completed like 10 passes or something, but ELI won the game, right? Not Dallas basically giving it away. Ridiculous. Go watch the game.

I really get tired of hearing that 13-3 , a Division Title, a 1st round bye, and a narrow playoff loss to the eventual Super Bowl Champs is a failure.
That boils me more than most of this stuff.
I would agree it was a missed opportunity to go even further given how well they played for most of the year (but not late in the year).
But the team can get to where they want to go if they regularly have 12-4, 11-5 records every year or so. If the team plays at the level they did for much of the season in 2007, then they will break through for a Super Bowl.

As for Romo, that was his second year as a starter and despite some of the goofy stuff this year, I think he is an overall better player now than in '07.

I still don't think he deserves a contract like Brees or the overpaid Flacco.

 

[BIGDen]

Like I said the "it isn't his fault" argument will never be one that gets someone a contract on par with those QBs who win. Winning QBs often have to overcome mistakes and great performances by the opposition.

Oh yeah. Marino won 8 playoff games. You cannot put him in the same class as Romo.

Romo regularly overcomes his team's shortcomings and great performances by opponents, but he is asked to do it more than many of the QBs that have had the good fortune of a turnover-creating defense or good OL (or receivers that don't drop game clinching catches). The point was not to say that Marino and Romo are the same, but to make the point about QBs winning and losing playoff games and SBs. It's a TEAM game.

 

[Hoofbite]

Brees is being paid 60m over 3 years, actual money
Flacco is getting 61m over 3 years
Brady is getting 40m over 3 years

Tony should be around 36-39m over 3 years. His last deal was 5/67.5m and he will get every penny of that deal. He can sign a fake deal for his agent or a real deal he will actually collect.

This is money they will all get. If you restructure their deals, they get even more money upfront, not less. Brady took a big pay cut, there is no way around it. His last deal was 4/72, the new one is 5/57. He may get more later, but he may not. Kraft just made it pretty clear with Welker that he doesn't answer to Brady. Tony Romo is not Tom Brady.

Not sure about your take on the Brady deal. I'm a little confused where you are getting the numbers. On the one hand it looks like you are discussing the contract in terms of an extension and on the other it looks like you are only talking about in terms of an extension as it pertains to certain aspects.

In regards to the 4 Years/$72M, that's what they effectively "added" to the final year of his previous deal but given that the final year (2010) was wiped out, his salary was increased $4M and his SB was prorated over a 5 year span and not just the additional years tacked onto the end, they basically look to have ripped up his previous deal and agreed to an entirely new deal of 5 Years/$78M. Calling it a 4 Year/$72M deal is where it looks like you are talking about it in terms of an extension.

In regards to the 5 Year/$57M, I'm not sure where that's coming from. He had 2 years on his previous deal and now his deal runs through 2017. In calling it a 5 year deal, it looks like you are talking about it in terms of a new contract (and not just the extension) but you are also citing $57M when his deal is listed as being worth $70M.

He was set to make about $30M over 2013 and 2014 between base salary and roster bonus, according to Spotrac.

If you were going to view it in terms of an extension, wouldn't it really be a 3 Year/$40M contract?

All in all it looks like they just tore up the remaining years and agreed to a new deal all together for both contracts.

In that regard his new deal is 5 Years/$70M whereas his old deal was 5 Years/$78M.

I wouldn't consider this a big pay cut. Perhaps based on what other QBs have signed for but not in terms of Tom being 35 years old, I think he made the right call. You can't realistically expect him to play at a high level forever. If for whatever reason he starts to decline after another season or two, I really doubt that the Patriots would be willing to allow him to remain on the team if his cap figure was skyrocketing like Flacco's will.

If his cap hit in the 4th year is what Flacco's is and he slows down, he wouldn't see that 4th year. He'd be 38, turning 39 prior to the start of the season, and would be a free agent. I doubt anyone would give him anything close to his base salaries for 2016 and 2017 on his current contract and any team that would probably wouldn't be a contender and that guy seems to care about winning to a pretty big extent so he might just retire. Given his current contract and how manageable his cap number is, he'll play out that contract so long as he's healthy and interested. Even if he slips down to being 75% of what he currently is a $15M cap hit for what would still be a QB who's better than half the league is manageable.

Granted he'd make a ton in those first 3 seasons with Flacco's contract but his cap figure would almost certainly be unmanageable and he'd probably be cut. If money was his primary motive, he could probably latch on to a bottom feeder and continue to rack up cash but I doubt he'd do that. He's made more money than he likely can ever spend so I doubt he'd sacrifice a year of his time to play for a loser.

The alternative is that he plays 5 years for a contender and ultimately ends up making more money than the 3 year route and then sails off into the sunset.

For Tom Brady, I don't think it was a pay cut at all. Given his age, I think he'll end up earning more in the long run and he'll remain with a competitive team the whole time.

I think it was a smart decision that ensured he remains with the team, gets paid, and doesn't put a burden on the cap.


I think Romo would be best served going the route of Brady rather than Flacco. If he were to sign a deal that put his cap hit into the mid 20's for year 4 and this team doesn't at the very least get deep into the playoffs, I don't think he'd see year 4. I don't think it matters how much confidence you have in a guy, if after a decade you can't make some headway, you're kidding yourself to be taking a cap hit like that. If he signs a deal that keeps his cap figure manageable, I think he plays the contract out.

 

[BIGDen]

I really get tired of hearing that 13-3 , a Division Title, a 1st round bye, and a narrow playoff loss to the eventual Super Bowl Champs is a failure.
That boils me more than most of this stuff.
I would agree it was a missed opportunity to go even further given how well they played for most of the year (but not late in the year).
But the team can get to where they want to go if they regularly have 12-4, 11-5 records every year or so. If the team plays at the level they did for much of the season in 2007, then they will break through for a Super Bowl.

As for Romo, that was his second year as a starter and despite some of the goofy stuff this year, I think he is an overall better player now than in '07.

I still don't think he deserves a contract like Brees or the overpaid Flacco.

I don't know what the exact number is that he deserves, but based on how good of a QB he is and the current market, he deserves to be paid like a top 5-10 QB. If his number ends up coming in at fourth highest or something, so be it. Some of it has to do with timing of whe your contract is up.

 

[noshame]

The thing is, if people actually watched this team all these years they would realize that it is RARELY (not never) Romo's fault. He is typically the reason they have a chance. He has had a few bad games in big moments and he has had plenty of great games with their playoff chances on the line (the final game of the season is not the only critical late season game). The fact is that the defense, OVERALL, has not been very good at coming up with big stops and has NEVER been good at creating turnovers while he has been QB. Dallas' running game has typically been weak with Romo at QB. Romo, like ANY QB you can think of in the history of football, has had some bad important games. However, unlike many of the "winner" QBs, he has not had a TEAM that has come up big in big moments either.

If winning the SB or playoff games was just about QBing then we would never see Dilfer, Johnson, Hostetler, Williams, etc with rings and guys like Marino without them. Romo will get a big payday based on HIS play and his value as a QB in this league.

Wrong, they did not make that critical mistake, like our boy Tony does. You people sleigh me, when we win, it's all Romo, when we lose, it's the rest of the team. Talk about actually watching the game.:laugh2:

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Wrong, they did not make that critical mistake, like our boy Tony does. You people sleigh me, when we win, it's all Romo, when we lose, it's the rest of the team. Talk about actually watching the game.:laugh2:

You can't even name any "critical mistakes" since there are so few of them. To even have the discussion, you have to use "win or go home" games which is a concept for the ignorant football fan, or you have to judge him on his abilities as a holder, something he was only doing because he started out the season as a backup and has never done since. The Washington game was the first time he could be implicated as the chief reason they lost a game like that. He certainly wasn't the main reason they lost any of the playoff games, and he didn't make any "critical mistake". Talk about watching the games.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Here is the agents counter to that:

When the Ravens won they had a 80.6 defensive passer rating in the 2012 season.
When the Saints won they had a 68.6 defensive passer rating.
When the Packers won they had a 67.2 defensive passer rating.

Last year we were in the bottom 5 in defensive passer rating, and went 8-8. The other 4 teams went a combined 17-47. In 2011 The Cowboys again ranked in the bottom 8 in defensive passer rating, going 8-8 in the process. The other 7 teams went a combined 37-75.

His agent has a legitimate argument that no other team is asking more out of their quarterback.

Exactly.

Its not Romo's fault that the rest of the team sucks. And if you guys think Tom Condon is going to let Romo sign a low ball offer, well I got a bridge to sell you. Condon is the agent for Stafford and Matty Ice as well so he is not going to let the market be set lower for Romo.

And for you guys talking franchise him, once these new deals for Rogers and others get done, the franchise tag for Romo next year will be close to $25 million and if you franchise him the following year, it will be 144% of $25 million.

Do the math, the team cant afford this without dismantling the roster. Jerry knows this, Romo knows this, and Romo's agent knows this as well. Bottom line is that we have no choice but to pay Romo "market value".

 

[Beast_from_East]

Team: "We gave you a 76.9 defensive PR in 2007. Shut up."

Romo's response.........."and if Crayton doesnt stop on his route, we are in the NFC title game".


"Now pay me my money or enjoy 3 win seasons, your choice".

 

[DandyDon1722]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DandyDon1722

Did Elway finally prove he could get it done? You guys have to understand there is no future without a QB. Ask the Bills and Cards and Chiefs. You can't afford to give up on a year when you have a chance to compete for a title in a leauge where teams come back from the dead to win it. You simply have to play out the string with Romo until you have to move on.


Romo isn't Elway. Garrett isn't Shannahan. Murray isn't Davis. Etc. Do you really think that Romo and co wins a championship next year? Or do you think it's more likely that we let him walk after 2013 and have nothing to show for it, stuck in a hole or possibly even worse... we pay for a 35 yr old QB that has a knack for choking with his better days behind him.

I'm tired of holding on and hoping for something special to happen. It's time we create opportunity for ourselves. And in order to create opportunity we have to sacrifice what is 'safe'.

God strike me dead but I believe we can make a run next year if we stay healthy. I respect your feelings on it but I just don't believe that as a franchise with Romo you just take the chance you're talking about that could doom us for years. We will have to agree to disagree but unfortunately for you my scenario will play out and we will see if I was right or not.

 

[StarBoyz83]

Hey SB

I'd do some sort of bet (sig bet?) on that 7-9 prediction.
Say 8-8 nobody wins.
Anything worse, you win.
Anything better, I win.

Up for it?

If Romo is not extended, all bets are off though.

Yes sig bet

 

[SacredStar]

All of these quarterbacks are outrageously overpaid compared to the salary cap anyway, so it actually works in our favor that Romo doesn't have a ring. The Packers have been getting Rodgers on the cheap for a good while now, so this definitely affects them. By the time they pay Rodgers and Matthews they are really going to have to be smart with their resources. This only weakens the Packers, providing you never thought Rodgers would ever leave Green Bay.

Agree. Rodgers and Matthews will account for a huge chunk of GB's future cash. And I doubt Rodgers ever leaves the Packers.....he likes it there, and they will pay him what he wants, he deserves it. GB has never really overpaid any of their players, because they have a smart GM and President.

 

[Nightman]

Not sure about your take on the Brady deal. I'm a little confused where you are getting the numbers. On the one hand it looks like you are discussing the contract in terms of an extension and on the other it looks like you are only talking about in terms of an extension as it pertains to certain aspects.

In regards to the 4 Years/$72M, that's what they effectively "added" to the final year of his previous deal but given that the final year (2010) was wiped out, his salary was increased $4M and his SB was prorated over a 5 year span and not just the additional years tacked onto the end, they basically look to have ripped up his previous deal and agreed to an entirely new deal of 5 Years/$78M. Calling it a 4 Year/$72M deal is where it looks like you are talking about it in terms of an extension.

In regards to the 5 Year/$57M, I'm not sure where that's coming from. He had 2 years on his previous deal and now his deal runs through 2017. In calling it a 5 year deal, it looks like you are talking about it in terms of a new contract (and not just the extension) but you are also citing $57M when his deal is listed as being worth $70M.

He was set to make about $30M over 2013 and 2014 between base salary and roster bonus, according to Spotrac.

If you were going to view it in terms of an extension, wouldn't it really be a 3 Year/$40M contract?

All in all it looks like they just tore up the remaining years and agreed to a new deal all together for both contracts.

In that regard his new deal is 5 Years/$70M whereas his old deal was 5 Years/$78M.

I wouldn't consider this a big pay cut. Perhaps based on what other QBs have signed for but not in terms of Tom being 35 years old, I think he made the right call. You can't realistically expect him to play at a high level forever. If for whatever reason he starts to decline after another season or two, I really doubt that the Patriots would be willing to allow him to remain on the team if his cap figure was skyrocketing like Flacco's will.

If his cap hit in the 4th year is what Flacco's is and he slows down, he wouldn't see that 4th year. He'd be 38, turning 39 prior to the start of the season, and would be a free agent. I doubt anyone would give him anything close to his base salaries for 2016 and 2017 on his current contract and any team that would probably wouldn't be a contender and that guy seems to care about winning to a pretty big extent so he might just retire. Given his current contract and how manageable his cap number is, he'll play out that contract so long as he's healthy and interested. Even if he slips down to being 75% of what he currently is a $15M cap hit for what would still be a QB who's better than half the league is manageable.

Granted he'd make a ton in those first 3 seasons with Flacco's contract but his cap figure would almost certainly be unmanageable and he'd probably be cut. If money was his primary motive, he could probably latch on to a bottom feeder and continue to rack up cash but I doubt he'd do that. He's made more money than he likely can ever spend so I doubt he'd sacrifice a year of his time to play for a loser.

The alternative is that he plays 5 years for a contender and ultimately ends up making more money than the 3 year route and then sails off into the sunset.

For Tom Brady, I don't think it was a pay cut at all. Given his age, I think he'll end up earning more in the long run and he'll remain with a competitive team the whole time.

I think it was a smart decision that ensured he remains with the team, gets paid, and doesn't put a burden on the cap.


I think Romo would be best served going the route of Brady rather than Flacco. If he were to sign a deal that put his cap hit into the mid 20's for year 4 and this team doesn't at the very least get deep into the playoffs, I don't think he'd see year 4. I don't think it matters how much confidence you have in a guy, if after a decade you can't make some headway, you're kidding yourself to be taking a cap hit like that. If he signs a deal that keeps his cap figure manageable, I think he plays the contract out.

Brady had 2 years left on the 4/72 extension he signed in 2011 and they still owed him 30m of that. They effectively gave him a new 5 year deal worth 57m and tore up his old deal. He gets a 30m signing bonus paid over 3 years and salaries of 1m, 2m, 7m, 8m and 9m thru 2017. He will collect 40m over the first 3 years and 2016 and 2017 are guaranteed for injury. I think Spotrac has his numbers wrong if that is where you are looking.

I agree that Romo should go the Brady route and take a deal like his last one, 6/67m that he will actually see instead of one that forces a decision in 3 years when he will be 35.

 

[AbeBeta]

Romo's response.........."and if Crayton doesnt stop on his route, we are in the NFC title game".


"Now pay me my money or enjoy 3 win seasons, your choice".

Oh boy! More from the "what if?" crowd.

Results are facts. What if is fantasy. Teams pay for facts.

 

[DFWJC]

Yes sig bet

Okay:starspin