Analyzing why Romo is/isn’t worth $17 million

Tony Romo, per a New York Post report, agreed to a deal to stay at CBS as its lead NFL analyst partnered with Jim Nantz for $17 million a year, a jawdropping figure when you look at how he’s out-earning some current star NFL players in the process.

It’s a humongous chunk of change to spend on a broadcaster, and it’s ignited some debate, including with some folks at For The Win: Is Romo

really worth all of that money, despite the fact that he’s been a hit on the air ever since he left the NFL and went to the booth right away? Our Charles Curtis and Steven Ruiz discuss below.

He’s worth every penny

It seems like no matter what controversy or problems there are in the NFL, fans will watch. That much is true.

It’s also true that there’s some value to having respect from those same fans for your booth. A broadcasting team is only great when they’re seen, heard and the criticism is at a minimum.

That’s why ESPN went so hard after Romo. Seemingly every Monday night the past two seasons, social media was filled with roasts of Booger McFarland. He’s been at the center of multiple memes, with NFL fans just waiting for him to trip up so they can tweet about him.

No, that doesn’t stop fans from avoiding “Monday Night Football” or playoff games. It won’t hurt the bottom line. But it does mean the network that’s supposed to be known as the Worldwide Leader is the butt of jokes for a few hours.

CBS found magic between Romo and Nantz that it’s now paying a premium for. It’s worth it when the overall feeling about watching a CBS lead game is, “Man, I love hearing what Romo teaches me about each team every week,” and the feeling about watching ‘MNF’ might be, “I wish I could mute this thing.” – Charles Curtis

CBS paid way too much money

Oh, I like this question because it will give me some practice before the start of free agency when I’ll hate every deal and call every single one an overpay. *clears throat*

WHAT IS CBS THINKING HERE? $17 MILLION? THAT’S TOO MUCH. ROMO ISN’T EVEN CLUTCH!

Look, I like Tony Romo. He’s already established himself as one of the better on-air analysts in the NFL. I’m not denying that he’s very talented; but, for me, commentators are like running backs in that even the great ones don’t move the needle enough to warrant such an overpay.

Especially for Sunday games! This isn’t “Monday Night Football,” which takes a bit of effort to watch. Think about it, you just spent the previous day watching football for 12 hours and now you’re exhausted from work … it can be a chore to watch ANOTHER football game at that point. Especially if it’s like Dolphins-Steelers. Maybe you need a little extra motivation, like an entertaining commentator, to tune in.

But not on Sunday.

That’s THE day for football. We’re watching no matter what, regardless of who’s on the call. And Romo is typically assigned to the best game CBS has that week. Half the time, it’s the nationally televised game, which means, in most markets, it’s the only game on air. So if people already have to watch, what benefit is Romo providing?

Remember Phil Simms? There was a whole Twitter account created just to make fun of how bad he was at his job. And guess what? We all still watched. It did not make a difference. Romo will not make a significant difference.

Of course, none of this really matters. It’s not our money and there’s no salary cap for the NFL’s broadcast partners. If CBS thinks Romo is worth $17 million a year, then, by all means, pay that man. I’m just here to tell *does a quick Google search* George Cheeks, CEO of CBS, he could be spending his money more efficiently. How about ”Old Sheldon”? That’d make some money. – Steven Ruiz