Dallas Cowboys: Economics of Tony Romo, Dak Prescott, Amari Cooper

NAPA, CALIFORNIA - SEPTEMBER 26: Tony Romo Dallas Cowboys (Photo by Jonathan Ferrey/Getty Images)
NAPA, CALIFORNIA - SEPTEMBER 26: Tony Romo Dallas Cowboys (Photo by Jonathan Ferrey/Getty Images) /

Today we discuss the recent outrage revolving around compensation earned by former and current Dallas Cowboys, Tony Romo, Dak Prescott, Amari Cooper, and Byron Jones

It’s contract season in the NFL. Whether you’re a current Dallas Cowboys player looking for a new deal or a former Cowboys player looking for a broadcasting contract, ’tis the season.

But for some reason the economically illiterate are obsessed with arbitrarily appraising the value of these players. Ignoring market factors and incorrectly applying a heavy dose of right and wrong.

Statements and phrases like, He’s not worth thatNFL players are paid way too much to just play a game, How can someone who just talks about the game get paid more than those who actually play the game,  and If__ only gets paid __ how is __ getting paid __, are heard everywhere these days.

This offseason, many of these discussions are revolving around Dallas Cowboys (both former and current). Dallas has most of their top-end players hitting the market this spring — inherently meaning market setting prices are on the way.

Supply and demand isn’t a hard concept to grasp. It’s quite literally Economics 101.

In the ever-inflating climate of the NFL, the market gets reset virtually every year at every position. It’s nothing new and the nature of the beast, but some people can’t seem to wrap their minds around it.

What Dak Prescott gets paid annually has less to do with how he rates as a QB and more to do with the position he plays and the demand within the market. Same for Amari Cooper and Byron Jones. They may not be top-2 players in their respective positions but they are the best ones hitting the market this year so they’re all but assured to be paid in the top-2.

Supply and demand isn’t a hard concept to grasp. It’s quite literally Economics 101. Worth is basically based on replaceability (or perceived replaceability).

When Chad complains Dak is asking for too much money and the Dallas Cowboys should offer a below market contract – take it or leave it, he’s saying he either doesn’t want Dak Prescott his QB or he has no idea how markets work.

When Karen complains players are getting paid too much compared to noble professions like teachers and care takers, she either doesn’t understand how truly rare and remarkable professional athletes are or she has no concept of replaceability.

It’s not just about how good someone is or how important their job is, it’s about revenue produced and overall replaceability. You’d think players would understand this since they are the ones being directly impacted by it, but apparently not…

Michael Thomas recently spoke out against Tony Romo becoming the highest paid broadcaster in the NFL.

"“No way the announcer should be making more than 90% of the players”, said Thomas."

When the second highest paid receiver in the NFL drops the “should” on someone else’s openly negotiated contract agreement, you know far too many people are using their hearts to decide what’s right and wrong rather than their brains. Because if we’re applying a “should” then how can we morally excuse a person who plays sports for a living making more than any other profession? By that logic the busboy should be making more than them.

But that’s not how the world works. A competitive marketplace adapts instantly to the environment. The market is what’s right because it empowers buyers to set it.

Next. 3 inexpensive veterans to replace Amari Cooper. dark

We spend so much time arguing about what other people make and deserve, we’re missing out more fruitful topics for debate. Worth is based on the market. Simple as that. Let’s talk about the game.

  • Published on 03/02/2020 at 12:01 PM
  • Last updated at 03/02/2020 at 12:10 PM