Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Evilgrin;992370]Didn't the league risk it in the first place, by penalizing us. Snyder isn't gonna do anything, they know he won't go nuclear.[/quote]

Right, he isn't going nuclear, we aren't going to get it negated, so we as fans just need to let it drop.

That said, I wonder if the NFL Exec committee could do something like re-finance the penalty, and make it 9mill this year and 9mill next. Problem is I think they would have to repartition all the splits that the other teams are getting.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=NC_Skins;992371]Are we still talking about this? The cap money is good as gone. It's not coming back. Not now, not later, but never. It would take Danny and Jerry killing their cash cow (we call it the NFL) in order to get any sort of justice out of this. [B]The bottom line is, Danny and Jerry (or any other owner) care more about making money, than they do about principles or winning[/B].[/quote]

Thats a completely ridiculous statement and shows you have no idea what youre talking about.

In getting rid of those contracts, Snyder actually PAID OVER 100MM in money to bad players in lump sums, just to get them off the team and free up cap space... so he could spend even MORE OF HIS MONEY on new players who could help the team win.

If Snyder cared more about money than winning, he would have, for example, made fat albert play out his contract, or not dump the money in the uncap year, carrying dead money in future years, which would save him money as he wouldnt be able to spend it on new players.

You said it yourself - the cap money is gone. Snyders only option would be to file a case in against the league in court - one which they'd most certainly lose. And if they won, and the court ruled the league had committed collusion against the union, it would be disasterous for the league. Its a no-win situation.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;992366]The thing is, all 32 teams were told NOT to use the uncapped year to dump bad contracts and were warned (in writing) that there would be penalties for teams that did. 28 teams followed that direction and 4 teams were penalized for not colluding. The skins and cowboys did this to an extreme degree, so they were penalized most.

It sucks, and its not "right" but it is what it is. If there's any consolation, its the fact that the skins would be carrng more than 18MM in dead cap in 2012 and 2013 seasons if they hadnt broken the rule. Ultimately, the penalties suck, but we're better off than we would have been if there had been a salary cap.[/quote]
That is not how I recall it. Obviously these unwritten rules for the uncapped year were verbal because they were illegal, so they were not written anywhere. Which why this punishment should never been enforced. So it is tough to confirm the truth of what the rules were.
But I recall the warning being.....in the uncapped year teams could not go crazy exceeding the prior years cap limit [B]to acquire new players through free agency.[/B] I remember a ton of talk about the concern of some wealthy teams (Cowboys & Redskins) might take advantage of the situation to stock their roster with talented free agents. Not once did I ever hear anything about not being allowed to restructuring contracts to accelerate dead money or to free up future years cap money which is what the Redskins did. . I think that is where the I have a major problem with this whole thing. Uncapped means Uncapped.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

Waiting for this thread to be titled "Good news: This thread is now locked because we're not getting any money back"

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;992376]Thats a completely ridiculous statement and shows you have no idea what youre talking about.

In getting rid of those contracts, [B][U]Snyder actually PAID OVER 100MM in money to bad players in lump sums, just to get them off the team and free up cap space[/U][/B]... so he could spend even MORE OF HIS MONEY on new players who could help the team win.[/quote]

No idea what I'm talking about yet you post the highlighted. Can you enlighten me when Snyder shelled out over 100MM in the 2010 off-season? Last I checked, they reworked D-hall and Albert's contracts that totaled 36 million. *Gasp* That's the same amount we were penalized. So where is the rest of 100MM you speak of and which bad players did he get rid of? The answer is none. Dhall is still here and Albert would STILL be here if he had played ball. It's not they gave them that type of money and cut them just to rid themselves of the players. Here is another fun fact, that money he gave them was guaranteed money. He owed it regardless so the only thing he did was help ease the salary cap for the future.


[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;992376]If Snyder cared more about money than winning, he would have, for example, made fat albert play out his contract, or not dump the money in the uncap year, carrying dead money in future years, which would save him money as he wouldnt be able to spend it on new players.[/quote]

Dan can't make Albert play like he should. He was still giving Haynesworth that 20+ mil whether he liked it or not. You can thank Vinny for that gem, and Dan for signing off on it. So why would you want to keep the guy on your team knowing he was going to half ass it? If anything, it would be more of a slap in the face to keep him around. You are a bit misguided about the salary because there is a salary cap floor he HAS to spend.


As far as owners spending money on players, of course they spend money on players. They have to have a draw to hype up the fan base and put excitement in the stands. A shiny new player means more jerseys to sell. Whether that be McNabb or Tebow, it's a draw for the fans. You got to spend money, to make it.

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/07/mcnabb_still_second_in_nfl_jer.html]D.C. Sports Bog - McNabb still second in NFL jersey sales[/url]

Make no mistake about it, Snyder wants to win. Winning means more revenue and Dan likes that a lot. I give it to him because he's passionate and he truly is a Skins fan to heart. That said, if Dan had to choose between making money or winning, he'd choose the money. This isn't exclusive to just Dan, as I said all the owners. These guys don't buy these teams to win super bowls. They buy the teams to make a shit ton of money and to see their investment grow. That said, the investment grows much faster with a winning team.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

This is a discussion that seems to have run its course.

One point I never see mentioned is that, while we got a $36 million cap penalty spread over two years, I believe that "dumping" the Haynesworth and Hall contracts created substantially more cap space than the $36 million. ( I would love to have our cap experts verify the numbers)

I'm not saying that the timing of the penalty just before free agency didn't hurt or that we wouldn't have tried to spread the $$$ over a number of years to mitigate the effect, or that they weren't absolutely wrong in penalizing us for assuming that a capless year meant just that.

But lost in the discussion seems to be the fact that the Redskins did create a cap benefit for themselves in the process. Just my 2 cents worth...

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;992401]Waiting for this thread to be titled "Good news: This thread is now locked because we're not getting any money back"[/quote]

Exactly. lol

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;992366]The thing is, all 32 teams were told NOT to use the uncapped year to dump bad contracts and were warned (in writing) that there would be penalties for teams that did. 28 teams followed that direction and 4 teams were penalized for not colluding. The skins and cowboys did this to an extreme degree, so they were penalized most.

It sucks, and its not "right" but it is what it is. If there's any consolation, its the fact that the skins would be carrng more than 18MM in dead cap in 2012 and 2013 seasons if they hadnt broken the rule. Ultimately, the penalties suck, but we're better off than we would have been if there had been a salary cap.[/quote]

Um, I understand why we got punished. I still don't think its fair or right which is what I mean when I say I don't get it.

Here's the bigger issue I have yet again: the memo from head quarters was technically illegal. Sending the memo was head quarters requesting all 32 teams to violate an agreement that neither side would collude. 2 teams chose not to violate an agreement the NFL and NFLPA. Because those two teams chose not to play ball head quarters decided a punishment should be given. But to punish would be giving the NFLPA all the proof they needed of collusion by the owners to keep costs down. So the NFL makes an addendum to the rule, they have the NFLPA sign it or lose out on $$$(which is black mail by the way), and then they punished the two teams yet again violating their own rules that it should have been brought before the league of owners prior for a vote on if they should punish...majority rule. After the punishment was doled out they then held their owners meeting and presented that they would spread the wealth around if the other teams voted for the punishment, essentially making the vote issue some what moot.

And the reason they keep losing the battle? Because supposedly it does not matter in the court of law that your being "black mailed" into agreeing to something, nor does it matter that head quarters broke the law first with the memo to collude because the NFLPA supposedly gave up their rights to complain. Personally I think the courts should look at the issue like an accident... the first illegal act is the responsible party. And in this case that would be when the NFL sent out the memo or verbally informed the owners not to spend or cut expenses. The key here is there were no rules. The rules expired. I understand there was a verbal contract but the NFLPA was not apart of that decision and would not have agreed to the owner not spending or cutting expenses.

To me this is nondifferent then your employee embezzling from your company and the only way to prove it is to sign an agreement that you won't procecute. So you sign it because that IS your proof that a crime was committed and the courts keep looking at you and saying sorry you signed your rights away so you have no standing.

Its BS.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;992376]Thats a completely ridiculous statement and shows you have no idea what youre talking about.

In getting rid of those contracts, Snyder actually PAID OVER 100MM in money to bad players in lump sums, just to get them off the team and free up cap space... so he could spend even MORE OF HIS MONEY on new players who could help the team win.

If Snyder cared more about money than winning, he would have, for example, made fat albert play out his contract, or not dump the money in the uncap year, carrying dead money in future years, which would save him money as he wouldnt be able to spend it on new players.

You said it yourself - the cap money is gone. Snyders only option would be to file a case in against the league in court - one which they'd most certainly lose. And if they won, and the court ruled the league had committed collusion against the union, it would be disasterous for the league. Its a no-win situation.[/quote]

Disasterous yes, worth it yes. For two reasons

1- Snyder would get the pleasure of saying "I told you so".
2- the Skins would not be monitarily punished. However all the other owners most likely would get fined by the courts and the money most likely given to the NFLPA. I'd presume Goodell would lose his job and hopefully Mara would lose his position on the board.

What is the negative? All the other owners would not be happy with Snyder or JJ, but who cares the other owners really don't have love for them anyway.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=SBXVII;992836]What is the negative? All the other owners would not be happy with Snyder or JJ, but who cares the other owners really don't have love for them anyway.[/quote]

Two words: Allen Davis. Might know him better as Al. They're business partners. You don't sue your business partner and expect everything to remain productive. It won't work. It may "feel" better but that doesn't make it the smart move.

Jerry may not be liked but he is respected. He's on some of the major committees. Snyder is likely still building respect. All that is worth something.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

:bdh:

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Ruhskins;992844]:bdh:[/quote]

Look, you don't like it? think we the few who want to talk about it are beating a dead horse? Then do us a solid and don't come in the thread. Some of us still like to talk about this topic. Some of us still like to vent. If you don't.... don't look.

This is a free country, if you don't like whats on the radio guess what... YOU have the availability to change the channel. If you don't like whats on tv, guess what.... YOU have the availability to change the channel. I'm so tired of others who are offended or don't like the topic being able to dictate what the rest of society should get to listen to or watch or talk about.

PS: have a nice day.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

Then again.. If you should be allowed to rant about "this topic", you'd think that Ruhskins would be allowed to post a picture of a dead horse. You also would have the ability to skip over his post...

Just sayin..

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=ethat001;993011]Then again.. If you should be allowed to rant about "this topic", you'd think that Ruhskins would be allowed to post a picture of a dead horse. You also would have the ability to skip over his post...

Just sayin..[/quote]

Schneed10 likes this.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

...[quote=Ruhskins;992844]:bdh:[/quote]
:doh:

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

Saw this on another site. Would be nice if true.

[QUOTE]Per TK via twitter-
@TKextremeskins: 60% chance Skins get some Salary Cap money back at the upcoming Owners meeting

‏@HTTR24_7- (appears to be even more optimistic)
60.1% RT @TKextremeskins: 60% chance Skins get some Salary Cap money back at the upcoming Owners meeting.[/QUOTE]

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

HTTR24_7 gives this some validity. Def has my attention now.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Chico23231;994715]HTTR24_7 gives this some validity. Def has my attention now.[/quote]

I agree. Still, 60% is close to 50/50, so i wont get my hopes up... but its alot better than 0% which is where I thought we were.

Honestly, the penalty was very severe. The NFL made its point with the penalty last year. Why not throw us a frikkin bone in the spirit of maintaining unity and cooperation?

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

the players union should get behind it to remove as much as possible. Shit they know we gonna spend that money

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Chico23231;994717]the players union should get behind it to remove as much as possible. Shit they know we gonna spend that money[/quote]

The NFLPA doesnt really care much tbh. Since the cap went down a decent amount due to the CBA, one thing the NFLPA did get right is in the first two years of the current CBA, the NFL reimburses the players any money spent under a salary floor. It is not an individual team floor that we normally see but a floor league wide. I could be wrong, but I believe that number is in the high 90% in terms of percentage of the salary cap that the owners are responsible for reimbursing to the NFLPA if they spend lower than that.

Basically the players get paid regardless of whether the owners go real cheap when there is no individual team cap floor (which I think starts in season 3 of the current CBA).

Editing to add: Now that I think about it, they pulled extra money from when the future TV contracts go into effect to make up for the lost cap space due to the CBA. I doubt the NFL is going to agree to extend that clause about total money to the money pulled forward. With the extra cap space created by that, that may make that clause somewhat obsolete due to enough being already paid to go over that clause amount. So any extra... 5 or 10 mil or whatever... spent by the skins will be over and above that clause. Meaning it adds to what the players make this year. Then the NFLPA would be on board im sure.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Skinzman;994723]The NFLPA doesnt really care much tbh. Since the cap went down a decent amount due to the CBA, one thing the NFLPA did get right is in the first two years of the current CBA, the NFL reimburses the players any money spent under a salary floor. It is not an individual team floor that we normally see but a floor league wide. I could be wrong, but I believe that number is in the high 90% in terms of percentage of the salary cap that the owners are responsible for reimbursing to the NFLPA if they spend lower than that.

Basically the players get paid regardless of whether the owners go real cheap when there is no individual team cap floor (which I think starts in season 3 of the current CBA).[/quote]

I think that Chico's point - and I agree with it - is if the money is in Snyder's hands, we will spend 100% of our cap, not just 90%.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

PFT had an interesting article the other week where Florio proposed a system where teams could trade cap space, just like they can trade draft picks and players. I think that would be a neat idea - not sure how it would work though.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Lotus;994727]I think that Chico's point - and I agree with it - is if the money is in Snyder's hands, we will spend 100% of our cap, not just 90%.[/quote]

First, check out my edit.

To that point, it doesnt matter. If other teams do spend 90% and we spend 100%, the league would have still reimbursed the union the difference as its a league wide floor. Meaning overall, the players still make the same money because that money would have been paid anyways at the end of the year.

If the skins get 5 mil back but the league is 50 mil below that number, they only reimburse 45 mil to the players. If they give nothing back to the skins, the league reimburses the players 50 mil. Either way, the players piece of the pie never got bigger. It remained the exact same. The only way the NFLPA gets on board is if the extra cap space goes above that clause amount, because then it does add to the players piece of the pie.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=SBXVII;994713]Saw this on another site. Would be nice if true.[/quote]

So when is the owners meeting?

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

@HTTR24_7: @Mr_Reynolds81 I was just joking with @TKextremeskins .Everyone wants percentages for everything. I have no Idea if they will get cap relief

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Chico23231;994717]the players union should get behind it to remove as much as possible. Shit they know we gonna spend that money[/quote]

If I understand it correctly ,the cap went to the other teams in the NFL so wouldn't they spend it as well and why would they give something back?

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Giantone;994737]If I understand it correctly ,the cap went to the other teams in the NFL so wouldn't they spend it as well and why would they give something back?[/quote]

Yes but plenty of teams did not spend the money.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Giantone;994737]If I understand it correctly ,the cap went to the other teams in the NFL so wouldn't they spend it as well and why would they give something back?[/quote]

Two words: Mike Brown.

Some owners don't spend. Giving them more cap space does not mean more money in the pockets of players.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

I'm just going to go into the meetings with a negative attitude, "prepare for the worst hope for the best" If we don't get any money back= more focus on the draft (the right way to build a team). If we do get the money back= great! we can get a better Free Agent and more on the draft

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;994753]I'm just going to go into the meetings with a negative attitude, "prepare for the worst hope for the best" If we don't get any money back= more focus on the draft (the right way to build a team). If we do get the money back= great! we can get a better Free Agent and more on the draft[/quote]

I agree with this, couldnt have put it better.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Chico23231;994715]HTTR24_7 gives this some validity. Def has my attention now.[/quote]


No, he doesn't he was joking.



[quote=mbedner3420;994735][SIZE="4"][B]@HTTR24_7: @Mr_Reynolds81 I was just joking with @TKextremeskins .Everyone wants percentages for everything. I have no Idea if they will get cap relief[/B][/SIZE][/quote]

[SIZE="4"][B]
HTTR24-7.com ‏@HTTR24_7

@Rich_TandlerCSN @TKextremeskins All jokes aside that cap ship has probably sailed. Money back would be great though.[/B][/SIZE]


It's not going to happen people. Move on.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=mbedner3420;994734]So when is the owners meeting?[/quote]

I thought it was something like 3 days after FA starts.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

Yeah, likely not going to happen. I have moved on, mostly, but still don't understand why Chicago wasn't penalized for front loading their gigantic Julius Peppers contract. The dude was paid $20million in 2010 including an accelerated signing bonus that counted 33% against the 2010 season.

By my calculation, by the normal way teams structure contracts, Peppers' 2010 cap hit would be $7 million (SB/6 + Vet minimum)... yet they skate?

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=NC_Skins;994777]No, he doesn't he was joking.





[SIZE="4"][B]
HTTR24-7.com ‏@HTTR24_7

@Rich_TandlerCSN @TKextremeskins All jokes aside that cap ship has probably sailed. Money back would be great though.[/B][/SIZE]


It's not going to happen people. Move on.[/quote]

Oh I shoulda known, the good ole percentage joke. Information good, need to step up on his joke game.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Mayor;994798]Yeah, likely not going to happen. I have moved on, mostly, but still don't understand why Chicago wasn't penalized for front loading their gigantic Julius Peppers contract. The dude was paid $20million in 2010 including an accelerated signing bonus that counted 33% against the 2010 season.

By my calculation, by the normal way teams structure contracts, Peppers' 2010 cap hit would be $7 million (SB/6 + Vet minimum)... yet they skate?[/quote]

That's because the Bears are not in the same division as Mara's team.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;994729]PFT had an interesting article the other week where Florio proposed a system where teams could trade cap space, just like they can trade draft picks and players. I think that would be a neat idea - not sure how it would work though.[/quote]

I'd like to submit my resume for that accounting position with the league office...think 10 years down the road how much of a nightmare that will be to keep track of!

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;994729]PFT had an interesting article the other week where Florio proposed a system where teams could trade cap space, just like they can trade draft picks and players. I think that would be a neat idea - not sure how it would work though.[/quote]

I hate the idea of being able to trade cap space. What's the point of even having a cap then?

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=WaldSkins;994902]I hate the idea of being able to trade cap space. What's the point of even having a cap then?[/quote]

Thats like saying, "Whats the point of even having a draft if teams can trade picks."

The draft contributes as much to parity as the salary cap does. For example, lets say a cap-strapped team like the Redskins needs 10MM in room to sign multiple starters. They could trade their 2nd round pick to a team for a couple average players they thought were serviceable. Or, they could trade the the 2nd round pick to a team for 10MM in space and then sign whomever they wanted. I dont really see the difference.

[quote=Monkeydad;994844]I'd like to submit my resume for that accounting position with the league office...think 10 years down the road how much of a nightmare that will be to keep track of![/quote]

I dont see how that would be a nightmare at all. Teams are already allowed to roll unused cap from one year to the next, so the teams already have a different amount of cap space. The NFL keeps track of this now. In the scenario i described above, you'd just be taking 10MM in space for one year from one team and giving it to another.

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

I like the idea of being able to trade cap space, why the heck not?

Re: Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away
 

[quote=Mattyk;994986]I like the idea of being able to trade cap space, why the heck not?[/quote]

The answer as always - Vinny.

"Vinny Cerrato has traded two 1sts, two 2nds, and two 3rds - for $5M in cap space. The Redskins used the $5M to sign free agent safety Adam Archuleta."