Romo v Manziel

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
If there was serious thought about drafting Manziel in the first round, the team would almost certainly have to make Romo a June 1st cut this year. Before you respond, let me go further. By drafting Manziel you are already effectively giving up on making this team competitive with Romo. That means there is very little reason to carry Romo's contract any longer than you have to. You aren't planning on winning this year with Romo, and you wouldn't be next year.

Making Romo a June 1st cut effectively does nothing to this year's salary cap figure, and gives us a 9 million dollar cap hit next year, which would put us about a million over a projected 140 million dollar salary cap, but more importantly it frees up 2016 and 2017 (~20 million per year).

Rebuilding of this nature simply doesn't make any sense. There is very little reason to believe that Manziel would be more effective than Romo with the current team, and by the team the team is rebuilt around Manziel, you're looking at some pretty expensive contracts all around.

The most prudent action to take is not investing in a first round quarterback at the moment, and continuing to build up the defense. The correct time to draft a replacement for Romo is around the time in which this team is rebuilt in other areas through the draft. This maximizes the ability of a young QB to step into an already decent team, as opposed to a team that struggles and goes 8-8 with an already top 5 QB.

The biggest worry is Romo's back, but I'd like to make the argument that betting on Romo and his health is a much more sensible bet than rebuilding this team and giving up on Romo.

For those who will try to make the argument (who probably didn't read this whole post) that we should keep Romo and draft Manziel. My counter to that idea is how much do you think Manziel will cost as a top 16 pick, yet not directly contribute towards any short term success. You are now taking up salary cap space and using valuable cap resources for someone sitting on the bench. On top of that how many years are you going to pay Romo while Manziel sits? You've got 4 years, with a 5 year option, and then you have to start paying pretty big money (assuming he even works out). In the mean while, you have no money to help build a team around Manziel, and all the core players he would be playing with will also become older and more expensive. It's simply not sensible.
 
That Galian Beast, he's a funny guy. We're screwed no matter what we do. We're not going anywhere with Romo, we're not going anywhere with Manziel (this year anyway). We need to really start thinking about 3 years down the road.
This maximizes the ability of a young QB to step into an already decent team, as opposed to a team that struggles and goes 8-8 with an already top 5 QB.
 
If there was serious thought about drafting Manziel in the first round, the team would almost certainly have to make Romo a June 1st cut this year. Before you respond, let me go further. By drafting Manziel you are already effectively giving up on making this team competitive with Romo. That means there is very little reason to carry Romo's contract any longer than you have to. You aren't planning on winning this year with Romo, and you wouldn't be next year.

Making Romo a June 1st cut effectively does nothing to this year's salary cap figure, and gives us a 9 million dollar cap hit next year, which would put us about a million over a projected 140 million dollar salary cap, but more importantly it frees up 2016 and 2017 (~20 million per year).

Rebuilding of this nature simply doesn't make any sense. There is very little reason to believe that Manziel would be more effective than Romo with the current team, and by the team the team is rebuilt around Manziel, you're looking at some pretty expensive contracts all around.

The most prudent action to take is not investing in a first round quarterback at the moment, and continuing to build up the defense. The correct time to draft a replacement for Romo is around the time in which this team is rebuilt in other areas through the draft. This maximizes the ability of a young QB to step into an already decent team, as opposed to a team that struggles and goes 8-8 with an already top 5 QB.

The biggest worry is Romo's back, but I'd like to make the argument that betting on Romo and his health is a much more sensible bet than rebuilding this team and giving up on Romo.

For those who will try to make the argument (who probably didn't read this whole post) that we should keep Romo and draft Manziel. My counter to that idea is how much do you think Manziel will cost as a top 16 pick, yet not directly contribute towards any short term success. You are now taking up salary cap space and using valuable cap resources for someone sitting on the bench. On top of that how many years are you going to pay Romo while Manziel sits? You've got 4 years, with a 5 year option, and then you have to start paying pretty big money (assuming he even works out). In the mean while, you have no money to help build a team around Manziel, and all the core players he would be playing with will also become older and more expensive. It's simply not sensible.

and you are gambling on the cap going up that much which is no sure thing.
 
Let me say not looking for Cowboys to draft manziel but for argument sake say Dallas does well there is more than 1 pick in the draft so the notion that they are giving up making the team competitive with Romo I don't think is true. In terms of cost for the 16th pick last year Buffalo with E.J. Manuel contract was four-year deal worth $8.9 million, with a $4.84 million signing bonus. The days of rookies coming in and getting 30 or 40 mill signing bonus making pro bowl money is gone. So the contract would not force Dallas to do anything in terms of sitting or playing the player

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/e.j.-manuel/
 
Being set (potentially) at qb for a decade > playing out Romo final years, feeling around for a couple years, and then maybe getting a good qb at some point in the future.
 
Romo is not getting cut, Manziel(any other QB) or not. Even if he had a more friendly cap deal, he is not getting cut.
 
If there was serious thought about drafting Manziel in the first round, the team would almost certainly have to make Romo a June 1st cut this year. Before you respond, let me go further. By drafting Manziel you are already effectively giving up on making this team competitive with Romo. That means there is very little reason to carry Romo's contract any longer than you have to. You aren't planning on winning this year with Romo, and you wouldn't be next year.

Making Romo a June 1st cut effectively does nothing to this year's salary cap figure, and gives us a 9 million dollar cap hit next year, which would put us about a million over a projected 140 million dollar salary cap, but more importantly it frees up 2016 and 2017 (~20 million per year).

Rebuilding of this nature simply doesn't make any sense. There is very little reason to believe that Manziel would be more effective than Romo with the current team, and by the team the team is rebuilt around Manziel, you're looking at some pretty expensive contracts all around.

The most prudent action to take is not investing in a first round quarterback at the moment, and continuing to build up the defense. The correct time to draft a replacement for Romo is around the time in which this team is rebuilt in other areas through the draft. This maximizes the ability of a young QB to step into an already decent team, as opposed to a team that struggles and goes 8-8 with an already top 5 QB.

The biggest worry is Romo's back, but I'd like to make the argument that betting on Romo and his health is a much more sensible bet than rebuilding this team and giving up on Romo.

For those who will try to make the argument (who probably didn't read this whole post) that we should keep Romo and draft Manziel. My counter to that idea is how much do you think Manziel will cost as a top 16 pick, yet not directly contribute towards any short term success. You are now taking up salary cap space and using valuable cap resources for someone sitting on the bench. On top of that how many years are you going to pay Romo while Manziel sits? You've got 4 years, with a 5 year option, and then you have to start paying pretty big money (assuming he even works out). In the mean while, you have no money to help build a team around Manziel, and all the core players he would be playing with will also become older and more expensive. It's simply not sensible.

Great post.
 
Regardless of what happens in this draft, I doubt Dallas will be any good this year or next. I do agree the best scenario would be to build up the team and then draft a qb. But if a blue chip qb falls in our laps before that, pull the trigger.

Romo only has a couple decent seasons left. He hasn't won anything thus far, why would anyone think he will now when the odds are stacked against him. Let him go and find a young qb by 2015. Build the trenches in the meantime and then Dallas will be heading in the right direction.
 
Regardless of what happens in this draft, I doubt Dallas will be any good this year or next. I do agree the best scenario would be to build up the team and then draft a qb. But if a blue chip qb falls in our laps before that, pull the trigger.

Romo only has a couple decent seasons left. He hasn't won anything thus far, why would anyone think he will now when the odds are stacked against him. Let him go and find a young qb by 2015. Build the trenches in the meantime and then Dallas will be heading in the right direction.

Dallas was 8-8 last year with the 3rd worst defense in NFL history. Improve the defense and we have a chance to make a run.
 
Being set (potentially) at qb for a decade > playing out Romo final years, feeling around for a couple years, and then maybe getting a good qb at some point in the future.

Drafting a QB doesn't mean you will be set for a decade. How many teams have drafted QBs in the first rounds and they simply got busts?
 
true but then that can be said for any position

Right, but the only position that impacts your entire team's future is the QB position. Right now we have a franchise QB, and he gives us our best shot at winning. If we build around him and build a defense that is the most logical course of action. Drafting a QB, giving up on Romo, and hoping that he turns out great... it's a long shot.
 
Right, but the only position that impacts your entire team's future is the QB position. Right now we have a franchise QB, and he gives us our best shot at winning. If we build around him and build a defense that is the most logical course of action. Drafting a QB, giving up on Romo, and hoping that he turns out great... it's a long shot.

again I don't think taking a QB means they are giving up. Rookies are capped they are not getting these big contracts as they once did and we have 11 picks in this draft they do have other rounds besides the 1st rd. I'm not sure Dallas will get the defensive players in rd 1 that we hope to get but I'm sure Dallas will be drafting heavy on the D side of the ball. I don't want to take a 2nd rd defensive player in rd 1. My hope is if out top picks on defense are gone that we look to take Martin for the OL. If we took QB I would be disappointed but I don't think it means they are giving up it means they took the guy they had rated high in the 1st rd.
 
again I don't think taking a QB means they are giving up. Rookies are capped they are not getting these big contracts as they once did and we have 11 picks in this draft they do have other rounds besides the 1st rd. I'm not sure Dallas will get the defensive players in rd 1 that we hope to get but I'm sure Dallas will be drafting heavy on the D side of the ball. I don't want to take a 2nd rd defensive player in rd 1. My hope is if out top picks on defense are gone that we look to take Martin for the OL. If we took QB I would be disappointed but I don't think it means they are giving up it means they took the guy they had rated high in the 1st rd.

Romo needs all the help he can get, spending a 1st on a QB takes a lot of help away from him.
 
Dallas was 8-8 last year with the 3rd worst defense in NFL history. Improve the defense and we have a chance to make a run.

Exactly. Improving a defense so devoid of talent is no easy task. Dallas lost the two best DL they had this offseason, not that I disagree with those decisions. But it won't be all fixed in one draft. It could take 3 years or more depending on how well Dallas hits on draft picks. The question is, can Dallas fix the defense while romo is still playing at a high level? I don't have faith that they can do it fast enough or well enough to be legit contenders in the next couple years. I think we're looking at somewhere between 6-9 wins per year until romo retires. Then Dallas can get a young qb and build this thing right from the feet up.
 
Romo needs all the help he can get, spending a 1st on a QB takes a lot of help away from him.

yes he does and no taking the best player does not hurt this team. We have 11 fricken picks the draft is not 1 player. Dallas reaching is what has killed us in the past. I take a top QB before I would reach for a player and no getting one does not mena we are giving up on Romo on this coming season.
 
Exactly. Improving a defense so devoid of talent is no easy task. Dallas lost the two best DL they had this offseason, not that I disagree with those decisions. But it won't be all fixed in one draft. It could take 3 years or more depending on how well Dallas hits on draft picks. The question is, can Dallas fix the defense while romo is still playing at a high level? I don't have faith that they can do it fast enough or well enough to be legit contenders in the next couple years. I think we're looking at somewhere between 6-9 wins per year until romo retires. Then Dallas can get a young qb and build this thing right from the feet up.

Agreed. It would take many things to fall perfectly in place for Dallas to get the defense performing well enough.
 
Drafting a QB doesn't mean you will be set for a decade. How many teams have drafted QBs in the first rounds and they simply got busts?
You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. You can't neglect the qb position simply bc other teams have picked busts.

If you want a quick turnaround like Indianapolis, look at the blueprint for how they did it. Major structural changes were needed there just like theyre needed in dallas now. They werent scared to let Peyton go. They cleaned house. And they picked luck. They will be competitive for the next decade bc of it. This is what I'm hoping for next year.
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,003
Messages
14,505,671
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top