I don’t think one should consider the size of Romo’s contract when evaluating whether to draft a QB. The position is too valuable and too fragile to be hamstrung by a past decision – and that is not to say it was a poor decision to reward Romo. It was a good decision – but it shouldn’t affect what happens now.
The Commanders very likely will be forced by circumstance to reward Kirk Cousins with a multimillion-dollar deal. Suppose this year was a flash in the pan. Suppose he reverts to being an interception machine. Should the Commanders then sit on their hands, accept the losing and refuse to re-address the position? Should the 49ers not move on from Kaepernick?
And on and on.
Obviously the situation in Dallas is different. Romo has proven himself over the long-term and shows no significant erosion of his skill set. But he is showing that Father Time wins them all. He has a bad back and a circumstance with his collarbone sufficiently serious to warrant surgery to support the bone. And of course he is 36 years old.
Clearly there is a reason to address the future of the position, and at this point, Romo’s deal is irrelevant. The rookie salary cap has made it possible to draft a QB at any point, and the Cowboys should do so if they feel that a long-term solution is available. Goff, Lynch and Wentz each have traits to suggest they any one of them will be a long-term solution. The Cowboys must determine whether those traits will translate into NFL success.
The QB-centric NFL now forces teams to pay a capable starting QB very large dollars. Any QB who demonstrates the ability to be beyond capable must be rewarded with a deal that occupies a higher percentage of the salary cap than any of the team’s other players. This is reality. In that sense, one could argue that teams with good QBs should ignore the future – which would be absurd.
Romo might play 5 years, but it’s unlikely. It is unlikely he will play more than 3 years. It is even more unlikely that he will play injury-free and at a high level for more than 3 years.
The Cowboys are in a position – assuming there isn’t a shocking 1-2-3 run on QBs – to take the guy they have ranked no worse than third at the position. They are more likely to have their first or second choice of QBs. It doesn’t mean they must take one. Any NFL team must trust its on board and its on evaluation. But if the Cowboys stack a QB in the first round and have the chance to make that pick, I think they should.
Yes it’s risky. They could make a mistake. But every player in the NFL draft comes with risk. And risk aversion typically breeds mediocrity.
There has always been an argument whether “busts” occur because the player simply wasn’t as good as expected – or blew up in some other way – or at least in part because of the circumstance into which a player was placed. I’m sure both factors are involved.
The beauty of the situation in which Dallas finds itself is this – circumstance eliminates a portion of the risk. A rookie QB will not be seen as an immediate savior and will be expected to spend a year or two on the bench. He will have the chance to develop and to learn. In the trading world, this would be seen as a hedge – a good one.
Should Romo go down and the youngster be forced to play, there will be greater risk of failure. But if one knew now that such would be the case with Romo, one would be pounding the table for a QB.
By the way, take a look at the list of QBs taken in the top 10 of the NFL draft since 1960 and determine whether you think the risk of failure has grown. On the contrary, one might argue that the risk has diminished. While QBs do play in spread offenses, they are throwing the ball much more while in college. This isn’t comparable to the days when college football was dominated by triple option rushing attacks.
