Was Tony Romo pointing to Dak Prescott's contract as a catalyst for a potential Micah Parsons trade? Unpacking the iconic QB's complex salary cap commentary.
FRISCO - At first blush, it appears Tony Romo is among the army of “nationals and casuals’’ who don’t understand some of the very basic things about the NFL salary cap.
But how can that be? I mean … He’s Tony Romo.
And yet there is a stunning headline that’s gaining traction - and causing concern among some Dallas Cowboys fans. It reads …
“Tony Romo Says $74M Dak Prescott Problem Forced Micah Parsons Trade, Wants Sacrifice From Cowboys Roster’’
Wow! Did the iconic Cowboys ex-QB, now the lead voice for CBS Sports - and a player who retains an unusually close friendship with the Jones family - really say that?
If so, it would seem to mean …
1 - That Dak’s cap hit (either last year or this year) is going to be $74 million.
2 - That Dallas couldn’t afford both Dak and Parsons.
3 - That Romo might consider Cowboys who won’t “sacrifice’’ money as being selfish.
4 - That maybe Romo might not think very highly of the QB who as a rookie stole his job.
Now the good news: None of those things are quite true.
Romo was speaking at a CBS press conference at the Super Bowl when he really did say, “I think the cap is probably part of the reason that the Micah Parsons trade ended up developing, amongst other things.’’
I’ll leave that one a bit open-ended; Dallas was prepared to make him the highest-paid defensive player at $40 million per year. When negotiations went sour, was that because agent David Mulugheta demanded $47 mil per year, knowing he could get his client that in the event of a trade to Green Bay? Did Dallas balk at that idea?
Maybe Romo knows something there that the rest of us do not.
But a) I can’t find anywhere where Romo specifically mentioned Dak’s deal as an obstacle. And b) It wasn’t going to be an obstacle because Dak’s 2025 cap impact was never going to be $74 million, as the story suggests. It was $50 mil.
Now, his 2026 cap impact is presently (and temporarily) scheduled to be at $74 mil. But as I have illustrated, a “flip of the switch’’ in Prescott’s contract will soon cut that number by $31 million.
Romo is certainly right about Parsons and those “other things,’’ though. Reneging (in Jerry Jones’ view) on a napkin-scratch contract agreement and pretending to take a nap on the sideline during a game will never fade as troubling “other things.’’
What about this idea of “sacrifice’’? “The nationals and the casuals’’ still don’t get it. I trust you do. But just in case …
None of these “restructures’’ are about “sacrifice.’’ Dallas has committed massive long-term money to Prescott, CeeDee Lamb, Tyler Smith, Osa Odighizuwa and others, and baked into their contracts are “triggers’’ that at the team’s discretion can be used to chance base salary into bonus.
It’s a bookkeeping trick. Nothing more. No “negotiation.’’ No “sacrifice.’’
And this is where I’m still a bit stunned by something Romo said, as he sort of called for a financial “sacrifice’’ from Dallas players this season.
Said Tony: “They have a few guys, I think that they can move some of those numbers around. Obviously, if it stayed there, it’d be difficult to bring in a lot of guys. But I think what you do is, you basically say, “I’m going to put some of this money into next year, and I’m going to pay you 30 million this year, and we’ll put the other $46 million in the next year, things like that.’’
That’s basically correct. But that’s not “sacrifice.’’ Players aren’t volunteering to take less money. The cap is the team’s problem, not the players’ problem.
And guess who knew that quite well as a player?
That would be Tony Romo.
In 2013, Romo signed a six-year, $108 million extension with the Cowboys that made him the highest-paid player in franchise history, averaging $18 million annually through 2019.
Where was Tony’s “sacrifice’’?
And as to “restructures’’? Dallas did it almost annually with him, just as it now does with Dak … pushing money out to the point that the Cowboys were still “paying the cap’’ on the Romo contract in 2018, a full two years after he retired.
I don’t think Romo and Prescott are exactly drinking buddies, but the way Tony finally stepped aside to let the then-rookie take over in 2016 was classy. The good news from here and from Romo, though, isn’t about friendships or finances.
It’s about football.
“I think,’’ Romo said about Dak and the 2026 Cowboys, “they’re actually in a position to really make a big leap next year. I actually think they actually have a chance.’’