Romo’s reward reason doesn’t tell a whole story

Getty Images

Tony Romo was a good quarterback and could be an even improved analyst, though he’s not a really good B.S. artist, yet. (All due respect.)

The thought that a Cowboys cut Romo so that he wouldn’t have to repay $5 millions in reward money doesn’t reason water. If Romo had retired, a Cowboys wouldn’t have been compulsory to collect a penny.

Last year, using behind Marshawn Lynch late from a Seahawks, though a Seahawks didn’t need him to compensate behind (coincidentally) $5 million in previously-paid reward money. The difference, however, is that with Lynch now deliberation a return, he has to navigate a existence that a Seahawks still reason his rights. Romo, by removing released, didn’t have to do that.

A identical thing happened 3 years ago, when the Falcons expelled parsimonious finish Tony Gonzalez since he had unsuccessful to retire before a vital reward remuneration was due underneath his contract. While Gonzalez never retired, removing an undisguised recover would have done it most easier for Gonzalez to come back, if he’d ever motionless to do so.

For Romo, because not have limit flexibility? It’s distinct that he wouldn’t plead presumably returning to play while he’s rising a broadcasting career, though it’s also accurate that today’s register pierce gives Romo a most clearer and easier way to return, if he ever wants to.

The release allows a Cowboys to widespread a top assign outset from Romo’s depart over dual years. And if that were a settled reason for a action, it would have done a lot some-more sense. Tying a preference to a enterprise to give Romo $5 million in giveaway income doesn’t make sense, and it’s tough not to consternation either Romo is during slightest gripping his options open.

If he is, it’s tough to censure him. Even if Romo never comes back, he should operative a cleanest and simplest trail toward doing so.

Do you have an unusual story to tell? E-mail