Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;904864]Maybe so but that would be seen as vindictive and I don't believe the teams will necessarily line up for that. The skins and cowboys bring alot to the table that they also could use in that type of struggle.[/quote]

You would hope so, but I got nervous when I saw the 29-0-1 vote with Snyder and Jones out of the room.

Frankly, I thought we'd definitely win until I saw that.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;904866]Well this I agree with, but it had seemed like you were saying that the arbitrator could not overrule the league.[/quote]

I was saying that even if they win in arbitration, they're in trouble in the long run if the Commissioner and 29 owners want them punished.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=HoopheadVII;904863]I think they should go to arbitration and hope for the best. I was saying that if they lose in arbitration or win in arbitration but then get handed a different penalty, they should take it rather than suing the league in court.[/quote]

and I'd say take it to court because at this point there would be more evidence that the league is trying to continue to soley pick on the Redskins. Since they didn't win in court they would get their revenge some other way would not fair well with the league in court.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=HoopheadVII;904867]Which example? The drug testing?

If the NFLPA had fought this, they would have walked away and gone straight to draft picks before announcing it.[/quote]

Again, I am not going to keep repeating myself, and you're just spinning your tires at this point.

Many things that are supposed to be in a commissioner's sole discretion end up being adjudiucated in court. It's not the Hammer of Thor or the One Ring you keep pretending it is.

Not going to bother continuing to discuss it.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=SBXVII;904869][url=http://deadspin.com/5896817/its-good-that-the-nfl-is-punishing-washington-and-dallas-for-breaking-no-rules]It's Good That The NFL Is Punishing Washington And Dallas For Breaking No Rules[/url]

His last comment is exactly how I feel now.[/quote]

I like the sentiment, and I love the NFL getting hammered in the press over this, but that's a lazy article written by someone who hasn't bothered to actually look at the details of the case before writing something sensationalistic.

That said, more hammering the NFL in print over this, please.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=biffle;904873]Again, I am not going to keep repeating myself, and you're just spinning your tires at this point.

Many things that are supposed to be in a commissioner's sole discretion end up being adjudiucated in court. It's not the Hammer of Thor or the One Ring you keep pretending it is.

Not going to bother continuing to discuss it.[/quote]

Is your example that "sole discretion" doesn't apply to modifying the salary cap? I agree - and no one ever said he had sole discretion over that. That's why he agreed the modification of the CBA with the NFLPA before he announced anything. And that's why he let one of the owners (Mara) take front and center on it. On the Saints bounty issue, he took front and cented because it was entirely within his authority.

The NFL bylaws give him sole discretion over specific things with specific authority. Within the context of those specific things within that authority, he has sole discretion. The Bylaws even say that the Executive Committee (made up of 32 owners) doesn't have the authority to reduce penalties the Commissioner imposes within his specific authority (including removing draft picks for competitive violations).

No one ever said he had any authority to modify the CBA.

[QUOTE=HoopheadVII;904870]You would hope so, but I got nervous when I saw the 29-0-1 vote with Snyder and Jones out of the room.

Frankly, I thought we'd definitely win until I saw that.[/QUOTE]

I don't think the 29 vote count should reflect as strongly as you are giving it. First only 6 owners would need to be swayed on any future issue, pretty sure that JJ and DS could sway a few if they really wanted to. Second, this was an after the fact vote where every voter had something to gain-extra cap space. Third, the league needed a strong vote to go before the arbitrator, and there was no compelling reason to vote against it since arbitration papers were already filed.

Bottomline 6 votes is not an impossible hurdle if blatant misuse is being applied by the commissioner or exec committee.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

I didn't think the vote count would be different. It'll be interesting to watch this play out. The skins and cowboys have tons of cards to play, but there is definitely risk.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

Why would anybody put any credence in this vote? LOL! What did you expect them to do? No sir, we don't want an extra mill on our salary cap.....HAHAHAHA.....

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

Since this is a Skins message board and we're all skins fans, we're pretty upset about the cap penalty. I think the penalty was vindictive, poorly timed and doesn't make any sense with the uncapped year. Hope the arbitration rules in our favor.

[B]BUT - I want to make sure we all realize that [U]we actually cheated[/U], and Gooddell is technically right. [/B]

They apparently had a gentleman's agreement between owners (even if it was illegal) -- and we pulled a NY Yankees move and just outspent the other teams in the uncapped year. We bought up Haynesworth/Hall's contract so we could GAIN AN ADVANTAGE. I mean, I'm happy if it works because I'd be glad we're a better team -- but frankly speaking, any free agents we obtain would be because we outspent every other team in an era where you're not supposed to do that. We had to spend more to compete, to make up for front office ineptitude and crazy ownership.


Don't get me wrong -- I love it, want to be a good team. But at the same time, cheating to get there.. well, I'll let this one slide.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

hows this cheating again? explain.

immoral? maybe, but how many others did something similar?

illegal? no. and thats the bottom line bitches.

[QUOTE=ethat001;904897]Since this is a Skins message board and we're all skins fans, we're pretty upset about the cap penalty. I think the penalty was vindictive, poorly timed and doesn't make any sense with the uncapped year. Hope the arbitration rules in our favor.

[B]BUT - I want to make sure we all realize that [U]we actually cheated[/U], and Gooddell is technically right. [/B]

They apparently had a gentleman's agreement between owners (even if it was illegal) -- and we pulled a NY Yankees move and just outspent the other teams in the uncapped year. We bought up Haynesworth/Hall's contract so we could GAIN AN ADVANTAGE. I mean, I'm happy if it works because I'd be glad we're a better team -- but frankly speaking, any free agents we obtain would be because we outspent every other team in an era where you're not supposed to do that. We had to spend more to compete, to make up for front office ineptitude and crazy ownership.


Don't get me wrong -- I love it, want to be a good team. But at the same time, cheating to get there.. well, I'll let this one slide.[/QUOTE]

No we didn't cheat and Goodell/Mara is/are technically wrong. No one knows what was said but if we had agreed there wouldn't have been multiple warnings. My guess is we said, if it goes uncapped we will be doing everything possible to fix the bad deals the previous FO structured, but we will abide by all written rules. That is not cheating in any sense of the word.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

a loophole is a loophole whether its morally right or wrong.

people can look sideways at you for morals, but no one can put you in jail for it.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;904908]No we didn't cheat and Goodell/Mara is/are technically wrong. No one knows what was said but if we had agreed there wouldn't have been multiple warnings. My guess is we said, if it goes uncapped we will be doing everything possible to fix the bad deals the previous FO structured, but we will abide by all written rules. That is not cheating in any sense of the word.[/quote]

Exactly! The rules stated 2010 was an uncapped year. There was no cheating done by the Redskins. A gentlemen's agreement means absolutely nothing.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

right, its kind of like saying, "sure im not going to hit on your ex" but then you do and its like "aw im soooo mad at you, grrrr" but guess what? nobody is getting punished except for a few bad feelings.

thats how this SHOULD work out.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[IMG]http://sportsradiointerviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/mara-goodell.jpg[/IMG]
Goodell: Yep
Mara: Yup

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

i bet mara has his hand on goodells ass...

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=ethat001;904897]Since this is a Skins message board and we're all skins fans, we're pretty upset about the cap penalty. I think the penalty was vindictive, poorly timed and doesn't make any sense with the uncapped year. Hope the arbitration rules in our favor.

[B]BUT - I want to make sure we all realize that [U]we actually cheated[/U], and Gooddell is technically right. [/B]

They apparently had a gentleman's agreement between owners (even if it was illegal) -- and we pulled a NY Yankees move and just outspent the other teams in the uncapped year. We bought up Haynesworth/Hall's contract so we could GAIN AN ADVANTAGE. I mean, I'm happy if it works because I'd be glad we're a better team -- but frankly speaking, any free agents we obtain would be because we outspent every other team in an era where you're not supposed to do that. We had to spend more to compete, to make up for front office ineptitude and crazy ownership.


Don't get me wrong -- I love it, want to be a good team. But at the same time, cheating to get there.. well, I'll let this one slide.[/quote]
?????????
I think there is at least one thing that EVERYONE, even the NFL, agrees with. We broke no rules. You have a skewed view of the world if you think failing to engage in collusion constitutes cheating. That is some craziness.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

Haha. I knew the post would generate discussion. I should clarify with a more careful choice of words - what I meant was: again [U]I don't believe we broke any rules[/U]. I don't think we should lose any cap money.


BUT we did to spend more than others in the league ([U]within the rules[/U]) to get rid of a bad contract we signed (Haynesworth). We normally would not have been allowed to do this, and this gave us a competitive advantage -- which to my knowledge was completely [U]within the rules[/U].

Just saying, it is odd that others did not restructure their contracts and create tons of cap room.. Although we stayed [U]within the rules[/U], we did do more than most other clubs, and [B]certainly gained an advantage which we did not have before doing so.[/B]

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=ethat001;904968]Haha. I knew the post would generate discussion. I should clarify with a more careful choice of words - what I meant was: again [U]I don't believe we broke any rules[/U]. I don't think we should lose any cap money.


BUT we did to spend more than others in the league ([U]within the rules[/U]) to get rid of a bad contract we signed (Haynesworth). We normally would not have been allowed to do this, and this gave us a competitive advantage -- which to my knowledge was completely [U]within the rules[/U].

Just saying, it is odd that others did not restructure their contracts and create tons of cap room.. Although we stayed [U]within the rules[/U], we did do more than most other clubs, and [B]certainly gained an advantage which we did not have before doing so.[/B][/quote]

I think it's more like this:

- CBA is negotiated in 2006 with potential uncapped year at end

- Uncapped year means teams can spend whatever they want that year

- NFL and NFLPA agree in principle that uncapped year can't be used to dump salary cap hit from previous or later capped years

- Several specific rules are written into 2006 CBA to prevent this

- League exercises early termination option and 2010 becomes uncapped year

- League reminds clubs of agreed principle that uncapped year can't be used to dump salary cap hit. Apparently multiple times.

- Skins find way to dump future salary cap hit into uncapped 2010 in new way not previously considered.

- Multiple other owners complain to Commissioner

- Commissioner leaves it for later because he's more concerned with getting new CBA done

- Commissioner eventually takes action. Since the action the owners want him to take is outside his direct authority, he gets MCEC to agree it with the NFLPA and let an owner be the face of it.

- Chaos ensues

Frankly, I hope enough chaos ensues that they will reduce the penalties to put an end to it. I think that's our best case scenario (other than this escalting to the point where Snyder is forced to sell the Skins).

However, they are not punishing the Skins for spending too much in an uncapped year. They are punishing the Skins for violating a principle apparently agreed with the NFLPA and apparently agreed amongst the owners.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=HoopheadVII;904983]Frankly, I hope enough chaos ensues that they will reduce the penalties to put an end to it. I think that's our best case scenario ([B]other than this escalting to the point where Snyder is forced to sell the Skins[/B])[/quote]

You have made some good points regarding this cap mess; however, would you please come to your senses and drop your ridiculous assertions that the other NFL owners might force Dan Snyder out as an owner or take away the draft pick that would enable the Skins to acquire either RGIII or Luck if Snyder doesn't take his medicine like a good boy. The sky is not falling. Neither of those things will ever happen.

I could give you many reasons why those things won't happen but I'll just give you a few.

One: No NFL owner in his right mind would want to set the precedent of voting out another owner because to do so opens the door to his possibly being voted out in the future.

Two: Just because most of the owners are lined up against the Skins and Cowboys on this particular issue doesn't mean that they are all enemies of Dan Snyder and/or Jerry Jones. They both, no doubt, have friends among the other owners.

Three: If the NFL ever contemplated the things you keep bringing up, then they would be in for the legal fight of their lives - and they know it. Any extreme action against Dan Snyder brought on by the cap dispute would necessarily bring Jerry Jones into the fight on Snyder's side because he would perceive that as a threat to himself.

Four: If this cap issue were to escalate into full-scale war, both Snyder and Jones have friends in Congress who they could get involved, if necessary, to give the NFL a huge headache, if not worse.

There is no evidence to suggest that either Dan Snyder's ownership of the Redskins or this year's second overall draft pick is at stake here, so just drop it.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=PWNED;904912]a loophole is a loophole whether its morally right or wrong.

people can look sideways at you for morals, but no one can put you in jail for it.[/quote]

Friends can count on your word. Colleagues should count on written contracts. If they didnt write it down, there was a reason(illegal).

We're being punished for not doing something illegal.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

one thing that is not going to happen is DS is not going to sell the Skins over this, it's a ridiculous notion to even put it into this type of discussion. For comparison purposes, Benson ain't selling the saints, and Kraft didn't chafe at the cheating. Makes the rest of a post look less informed when that is put in as even a remote consequence.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;904994]You have made some good points regarding this cap mess; however, would you please come to your senses and drop your ridiculous assertions that the other NFL owners might force Dan Snyder out as an owner or take away the draft pick that would enable the Skins to acquire either RGIII or Luck if Snyder doesn't take his medicine like a good boy. The sky is not falling. Neither of those things will ever happen.

I could give you many reasons why those things won't happen but I'll just give you a few.

One: No NFL owner in his right mind would want to set the precedent of voting out another owner because to do so opens the door to his possibly being voted out in the future.

Two: Just because most of the owners are lined up against the Skins and Cowboys on this particular issue doesn't mean that they are all enemies of Dan Snyder and/or Jerry Jones. They both, no doubt, have friends among the other owners.

Three: If the NFL ever contemplated the things you keep bringing up, then they would be in for the legal fight of their lives - and they know it. Any extreme action against Dan Snyder brought on by the cap dispute would necessarily bring Jerry Jones into the fight on Snyder's side because he would perceive that as a threat to himself.

Four: If this cap issue were to escalate into full-scale war, both Snyder and Jones have friends in Congress who they could get involved, if necessary, to give the NFL a huge headache, if not worse.

There is no evidence to suggest that either Dan Snyder's ownership of the Redskins or this year's second overall draft pick is at stake here, so just drop it.[/quote]

The removing Dan Snyder as owner is a joke - I'm stuck hoping for either that or him being forced to sell as part of a divorce settlement a la the Dodgers.

As for the #2 pick, no way they take that. They could take other picks, and the point is that the League has Snyder by the balls in this situation.

And the real point is that the League doesn't live by normal rules. In joining the club, they have granted significant power to a Commissioner and are ultimately subject to a 3/4 majority.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

People still have a problem with Snyder?

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=Ruhskins;905062]People still have a problem with Snyder?[/quote]

Well it's not like he's a saint. Just not nearly as bad as he was before. His two frivolous lawsuits with the season ticket holder and the small newspaper are still relatively recent.

And then there were those two years where he gave Vinny full reign of the front office which I count as wholesale abuse.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=HoopheadVII;905055]The removing Dan Snyder as owner is a joke - I'm stuck hoping for either that or him being forced to sell as part of a divorce settlement a la the Dodgers.

As for the #2 pick, no way they take that. They could take other picks, and the point is that the League has Snyder by the balls in this situation.

And the real point is that the League doesn't live by normal rules. In joining the club, they have granted significant power to a Commissioner and are ultimately subject to a 3/4 majority.[/quote]

So you agree,
1) there is no way that Snyder is gone (not really even a funny joke, just a lame old rehash)

2) we aren't losing the #2 pick

So really it's just bickering about the fact that the league has a strong oversight mechanism.

In most cases that mechanism works fine, simply because it is a small group and everyone needs to parlay support at one point in time. No big deal, and the 3/4's is a super majority needed to sustain any type of decision. If something else were to come before them in that circle, that didn't have an already filed arbitration brief, I am certain that the vote would be much less unanimous. I think the fact that even the Saints and Raiders approved it, when they were somewhat punished, shows that there was more at play than just the merits of the case.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;905069]So you agree,
1) there is no way that Snyder is gone (not really even a funny joke, just a lame old rehash)

[B]2) we aren't losing the #2 pick[/B]

So really it's just bickering about the fact that the league has a strong oversight mechanism.

In most cases that mechanism works fine, simply because it is a small group and everyone needs to parlay support at one point in time. No big deal, and the 3/4's is a super majority needed to sustain any type of decision. If something else were to come before them in that circle, that didn't have an already filed arbitration brief, I am certain that the vote would be much less unanimous. I think the fact that even the Saints and Raiders approved it, when they were somewhat punished, shows that there was more at play than just the merits of the case.[/quote]

I think we are all conditioned to assume either the Redskins will screw this up somehow, or the NFL will bring the hammer down as has been the case recently. I think you are right and we select RG3 2nd overall with zero issues, but there is always going to be that lingering doubt up until the second after we draft our player at number 2.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

The Saints didn't even lose a first rounder so why would we?

Peeps need to put away the tinfoil hats.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=Mattyk;905080]The Saints didn't even lose a first rounder so why would we?

Peeps need to put away the tinfoil hats.[/quote]

but they did lose a 2nd. and we used a 2nd to move forward in the draft.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=Mattyk;905080]The Saints didn't even lose a first rounder so why would we?

Peeps need to put away the tinfoil hats.[/quote]

The Saints don't have a first rounder to lose. Aren't two seconds nearly equivalent to a mid-first on the draft chart?

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=Mattyk;905080]The Saints didn't even lose a first rounder so why would we?

[B]Peeps need to put away the tinfoil hats[/B].[/quote]

I can't because I'm a Redskins' fan and the black helicopters are following me. Don't you see them? Don't you?!? DON"T YOU!!!!

<sigh>

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=ethat001;904897]Since this is a Skins message board and we're all skins fans, we're pretty upset about the cap penalty. I think the penalty was vindictive, poorly timed and doesn't make any sense with the uncapped year. Hope the arbitration rules in our favor.

[B]BUT - I want to make sure we all realize that [U]we actually cheated[/U], and Gooddell is technically right. [/B]

They apparently had a gentleman's agreement between owners (even if it was illegal) -- and we pulled a NY Yankees move and just outspent the other teams in the uncapped year. We bought up Haynesworth/Hall's contract so we could GAIN AN ADVANTAGE. I mean, I'm happy if it works because I'd be glad we're a better team -- but frankly speaking, any free agents we obtain would be because we outspent every other team in an era where you're not supposed to do that. We had to spend more to compete, to make up for front office ineptitude and crazy ownership.


Don't get me wrong -- I love it, want to be a good team. But at the same time, cheating to get there.. well, I'll let this one slide.[/quote]

and I disagree here. If this was a normal year and rules in place then yes we cheated. In this case I don't see it. were we sneaky? yes. did we play a card that left the league with their hands tied? yes. but thats DS and JJ. They knew that by doing it the league would not deny the deals cause it would show the league was colluding. My problem is the league had a choice at the time..

1- deny the deals, and face the music you colluded.
or
2- sign off on the deals, and remember who you can trust and not trust.

You don't agree to the deals because it serves you best at the time then later when it's convenient you decide to enforce a punishment.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

Artist rendition of a typical Redskin fan's house.

[IMG]http://usahitman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/black_helicopters.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=NC_Skins;905099]Artist rendition of a typical Redskin fan's house.

[IMG]http://usahitman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/black_helicopters.jpg[/IMG][/quote]

:laughing-

Doesn't anybody else see the HELICOPTERS?!

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=NC_Skins;905099]Artist rendition of a typical Redskin fan's house.

[IMG]http://usahitman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/black_helicopters.jpg[/IMG][/quote]

That giant moose behind the house is disturbing. Hopefully the helicopters shoot it down.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=mbedner3420;905082]The Saints don't have a first rounder to lose. Aren't two seconds nearly equivalent to a mid-first on the draft chart?[/quote]

They could have stripped them of a 1st rounder next year.

Again, we're not losing the 2nd overall pick. Just stop.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=Mattyk;905115]They could have stripped them of a 1st rounder next year.

Again, we're not losing the 2nd overall pick. Just stop.[/quote]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we are either, but my point is that they've lost the equivalent of a first round pick.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=mbedner3420;905117]Don't get me wrong, I don't think we are either, but my point is that they've lost the equivalent of a first round pick.[/quote]

Bottom line, they didn't lose a first rounder... and their situation is much more relevant and significant (with the cover up) vs digging back 5 years to a team that has undergone a total regime change. It's just very doubtful that any picks will be docked. A fine perhaps at the worst. The NFL's ongoing investigation is more about Gregg Williams than it is about the Redskins at this point.

Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;905105]That giant moose behind the house is disturbing. Hopefully the helicopters shoot it down.[/quote]

ROFL. I was thinking the [I]exact[/I] same thing!