clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Should Tony Romo Be a Ram in 2017?

It's no secret there's a new sheriff in Dallas, but should the previous sheriff take his duties to L.A.? The staff discusses it...

NFL: NFC Divisional-Green Bay Packers at Dallas Cowboys Tim Heitman-USA TODAY Sports

Once Dallas Cowboys QB Tony Romo was hurt in the preseason, many thought it would be just another injury he'd come back from to take back the reigns and control the starting job. But a young kid by the name of Rayne Dakota Prescott, had other plans.

Cowboys QB Dak Prescott seized the opportunity, and never looked back. Now Romo — one of the NFL's top QB's when healthy — is likely to become available. There's been a lot of team names thrown out there as to where he could land. And one name that is constant is the Los Angeles Rams.

However, the Rams just invested heavily in QB Jared Goff, and he's currently pegged to be the starter in 2017. Adding Romo could either end that starter tab — or at least postpone it for a yr or two — or add the mentor the kid never thought he could have. Either way, the TST staff has their own thoughts on the possibility...

Brandon Bate — "unlikely"

While I'd personally have no qualms with having Tony Romo under center to start the 2017 season, I find Los Angeles a very unlikely landing spot for the Cowboys' castoff. For starters, I'm going to bet the Rams are all in on Goff, given what they gave up to get him. And I imagine that part of the reason they ultimately selected McVay was because they liked what he was able to accomplish with Kirk Cousins.

Financially, I'm not sure what it would cost to land Romo, but with glaring holes elsewhere on their roster - mainly the ones in front of either Goff or Romo - the Rams probably can't afford to get into a bidding war with other, more QB-needy teams (like the Texans or Bears). I think the Rams would be wise to get themselves a veteran backup who can mentor Jared Goff. But I'm going to guess that Romo - and his potential suitors - still view him as a very capable QB1. And injury concerns aside, he is.

I'm just not sure it's in the cards for the Rams. Whether right or wrong, I think the Rams intend on throwing Goff back into the fire in 2017 and finding out whether he's the quarterback they hoped he'd be when they drafted him.

Derrik Klassen — "Can't see Romo being a Ram"

Tony Romo is probably hunting for a ring. The Rams aren't in position to compete for one right now, not to mention the Rams offensive line won't be able to keep him near as clean as he needs at this point. It's an enticing idea, but I can't see Romo being a Ram as a good move for him or the team.

Eddie Perez — "Stay clear from him"

If the Dallas Cowboys made Tony Romo available, the Rams should stay clear from him. At his age, Romo would not do a 4-12, rebuilding team any service. He would be more valuable to a team like Denver, not a non-contender. Give Sean McVay time to mold Jared Goff and see what the Rams have in the sophomore passer. The team owes him as much, based off of the draft capital given up to select him.

Elijah Kim — "Romo would be an odd move"

Adding Tony Romo would be an odd move for the Rams Franchise. While he would be an immediate upgrade to Jared Goff, I believe the Rams from the top down have essentially doubled down on Jared Goff, hiring young offensive guru, Sean McVay, to turn Goff into at least a serviceable NFL quarterback. If for some odd reason the Rams would get Romo, the thought process would be that Romo would bridge until Goff would further prepare to be a better quarterback for the long term. If I were the Rams, I would have to pass on the idea.

Eric — "Rams dont need to waste their money"

There is no reason for the Rams to go after Romo. You have two young quarterbacks on the roster already and Romo will likely command a large salary for some needy team that is a competitor (Texans? Broncos?). The Rams don't need to waste their money on a QB who will likely never play, and even if he does, has shown no ability to healthy.

Josh Webb — "teach Goff how to succeed"

Tony Romo would provide veteran leadership. He would also bring playoff experience, regardless of how (far) they've gone, he will have experience that most of the team will not. He's also an extremely capable backup for Jared Goff, he could even start over Goff. But most importantly, he could teach Goff how to succeed in the NFL.

Sean Wilkinson — "would be a bad idea"

Personally, I think adding Romo would be a bad idea. LA fans showed that they have no problem calling for a QB change when Goff wasn't playing. How long before fans would be chanting "Romo" at the Coliseum?

Also, from Romo's point of view, I'd think that he would prefer going to a contender. In order for this to be feasible for the Rams, he'd have to rework his contract. What incentive does he have to take less money to be a backup when other teams could pay him to be a starter?

Misone A. — "new regime, making old regime moves"

Adding Romo would be very enticing for the right price. If the Cowboys called saying send us a conditional fourth round pick, I would have trouble looking the other way; especially if he's 100% healthy.

However, pulling the trigger would make me feel like the child who hates his parents but grows up to relaize he's just like them.

I hated 99% of the moves made with Jeff Fisher at the helm. And this would be a Fisher thing to do. Like passing on drafting QB's regularly because you say Sam Bradford is your guy, then suddenly trading him away. Or drafting a running back every year, even though the previous pick showed more than capable of getting the job done. Some things just don't make much sense.

If they could get his deal re-worked and the compensation is managable (fifth round pick) I'd trade for him solely to be a back-up and mentor. But because of the investment in Goff, bringing in a pure lock to start — based on trade, reputation, and dollars — it would be a bad move. I'm all for a QB battle, but this wouldn't be that at all, instead it would be the new regime, making old regime moves.