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

Same Stories Different Drama

[url=http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Report-Redskins-considering-challenging-NFL-over-cap-penalties.html]Report: Redskins considering challenging NFL over cap penalties | National Football Post[/url]

[QUOTE]According to a report in the Washington Post by Mark Maske and Mike Jones, the Redskins could ask a judge for an injunction because they would be irreparably damaged by the start of the new league year.
[/QUOTE]

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

[quote=SFREDSKIN;995455]While we are bashing the Mara's, why not:

[url]http://www.lohud.com/article/20130225/NEWS02/302240017[/url][/quote]

That's a funny story; seems like a really nice family. I did a lot of partying on Fairfield Beach Road where this incident occurred; lots of good times, lots of pissed off locals, never saw anyone get his skull cracked open with a bottle though.

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

Pull the pin

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

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5um6HM89AlY&feature=youtube_gdata_player]Goodell Talking Redskins Fine - YouTube[/url]

This is starting to snow ball around the Internet.

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

[quote=HailGreen28;995461]It all sounds like fanciful thinking to me. OTOH, I wish the Redskins had gotten an injunction the very next day after Mara and Goodell started this crap: The cap penalty on the literal eve of free agency last year.

Sure it would have made practically all the other owners mad at us. (And if there's any justice, anger at Mara too when he starts flapping his pale gums.) But seeing how the group went along with screwing us anyways, in hindsight there was no reason for us to play nice on this. Where we and the cowboys got punished for not engaging in collusion against the players.[/quote]

The way I look at it Goodell and Mara started the BS, and decided to try and play tough. Through all of this the Redskins have tried to play nice, filed a grievance, waited while the NFLPA file their complaint, waited while the NFLPA appealed the case, and no give on the NFL's side.

It's definitely time to go nuclear, file whatever they need to file to screw over Free Agency, then file whatever they need to file that keeps it out of the NFL's friendly court system and puts in possibly in the bulls eye of the Department of Labor or the Department of Justice. Maybe then if all the owners have to worry about their sacred business being watched by big government maybe then they will cave and give the penalty back in order to keep their business out of big governments reach.

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

I'd be interested to know what their legal theory is.

Yes, they would be irreparably harmed. As best as I can tell, it would have to be a breach of contract against the other owners or a tortuous interference with contract.

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

Free Agency should get REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL fun.

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

Now Goodell is either flat out lying or the NFLPA's life is going to get real bad. If they in fact agree to keep salaries lower, as RG asserts, then Jesus that is some serious crap. I mean that has to be some kind of legal breach of contract correct? The fact that RG is starting to mount some kid of counter attack makes me think they're starting to realize Danny isn't inclined to just are ths bs. My vote is that RG is a lying sack of crap and that the conspiracy in this case leads me to thinking that the nuclear option doesnt have quite the down side that I had originally thought.

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

[quote=Chico23231;995438][url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/25/redskins-considering-nuclear-option-to-restore-cap-space/]Redskins considering nuclear option to restore cap space | ProFootballTalk[/url][/quote]


*rolls eyes*


I'll believe it when I see it. Danny is blowing smoke. I think it's a shame he went full out suing some shitty newspaper for writing a negative article about him, yet doesn't do jack shit when real action is needed. He doesn't have the balls to open pandoras box. Talking and acting tough to beat reporters is one thing, it's entirely another matter when it's people with equal or higher clout than him.

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

[quote=NC_Skins;995486]*rolls eyes*


I'll believe it when I see it. Danny is blowing smoke. I think it's a shame he went full out suing some shitty newspaper for writing a negative article about him, yet doesn't do jack shit when real action is needed. He doesn't have the balls to open pandoras box. Talking and acting tough to beat reporters is one thing, it's entirely another matter when it's people with equal or higher clout than him.[/quote]

Yeah I'll believe it when I see it also but he can file the paperwork, put a hold on Free Agency, and still decide if he wants to proceed or drop everything. and all he would have done is hold up Free Agency.

or he could file a law suit and the owners can call his bluff and see if he continues with the suit. The big issue the owners don't want is for the Department of Labor or Department of Justice to get involved or to take away the owners freedoms they now have. That alone should be scaring the other owners and making them think twice.

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

Its just as detrimental to Snyder as it is to the other owners that the books and messages from that year stay hidden. If you decide to "stick it to the man", are you going to do that by putting dynamite in your own house and blowing it up?

I dont fault him for bluffing, but I dont expect the NFL to do anything other than call that bluff. And I expect Danny to get the bomb squad in there to clear the dynamite before it goes off.

As much as people keep saying that hes not afraid to sue, hes also not afraid of making money. I think the making money wins out in the end.

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

[quote=Skinzman;995490]Its just as detrimental to Snyder as it is to the other owners that the books and messages from that year stay hidden. If you decide to "stick it to the man", are you going to do that by putting dynamite in your own house and blowing it up?

I dont fault him for bluffing, but I dont expect the NFL to do anything other than call that bluff. And I expect Danny to get the bomb squad in there to clear the dynamite before it goes off.

As much as people keep saying that hes not afraid to sue, hes also not afraid of making money. I think the making money wins out in the end.[/quote]

It's interesting that this comes out after the combine. Can you imagine how much lobbying and politicking the Redskins were doing. I would guess that they were planting seeds of how a legal strategy would play out as well. Even the threat of a lawsuit is a pretty big stick in a fraternity of 32 powerful men and women. I wonder if they got a sense at the combine that this strategy would work, or if it's pure throw everything at the wall and see what sticks time.

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

[quote=CultBrennan59;995478][url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5um6HM89AlY&feature=youtube_gdata_player]Goodell Talking Redskins Fine - YouTube[/url]

This is starting to snow ball around the Internet.[/quote]

You beat me to it. @HTTR24-7 has been blowing his twitter up with this link and convo. My feeling is its too little too late with Judge Doty turning down our appeal twice. But if Goodell is saying that the league and teams agreed to "punish teams" that took advantage of the uncapped year through certain contract avenues that created an advantage for them, that seems like a problem to me. If you are going to say that they it can't be an uncapped year. And regardless if the teams were made aware of this ahead of time, if they league signed off on the contract/renegotiation, how can they go back and penalize the team?

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

[YT]5um6HM89AlY&[/YT]


ES member (huly) asking Goodell about capgate. Listen to his explanation. He said the owners AND the NFLPA were told about this "competitive balance". Riiiiiight. SO you are going to tell the NFLPA prior to the lockout that you are indeed going to collude even though there is no salary cap.

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

[quote=NC_Skins;995500][YT]5um6HM89AlY&[/YT]


ES member (huly) asking Goodell about capgate. Listen to his explanation. He said the owners AND the NFLPA were told about this "competitive balance". Riiiiiight. SO you are going to tell the NFLPA prior to the lockout that you are indeed going to collude even though there is no salary cap.[/quote]

Right...there is about zero chance this is true...I mean I cannot conceive of this current NFLPA agreeing to any such thing. Why the hell would they? Makes less than zero sense.

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

[quote=FRPLG;995517]Right...there is about zero chance this is true...I mean I cannot conceive of this current NFLPA agreeing to any such thing. Why the hell would they? Makes less than zero sense.[/quote]

The hope is that this video, coupled with the threat of litigation, can continue to create buzz/noise on this issue for another day or two. I think Graziano RT'd someone who sent him this link last night. Will be interesting to see if other outlets pick this up - my hope is that they do.

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

[quote=FRPLG;995517]Right...there is about zero chance this is true...I mean I cannot conceive of this current NFLPA agreeing to any such thing. Why the hell would they? Makes less than zero sense.[/quote]

So ... the NFLPA knew of the collusive agreement to keep "competitive balance". Yet, during the bitter lockout in which the NFLPA argued collusion about several specific factors this was never mentioned. Further, once (and only once) it became public, the NFLPA filed a lawsuit alleging that this agreement about "competitive balance" was unknown to them and represented a breach of the prior CBA. Finally, the NFL's response was not "We told them, they knew about it so they shouldn't be upset"; it was "Hey too bad so sad, you waived all your claims - even the one you didn't know you had."

Wow. Revisionist history is one thing. This is "1984" un-person stuff.

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

[quote=Skinzman;995490]Its just as detrimental to Snyder as it is to the other owners that the books and messages from that year stay hidden. If you decide to "stick it to the man", are you going to do that by putting dynamite in your own house and blowing it up?

I dont fault him for bluffing, but I dont expect the NFL to do anything other than call that bluff. And I expect Danny to get the bomb squad in there to clear the dynamite before it goes off.

As much as people keep saying that hes not afraid to sue, hes also not afraid of making money. I think the making money wins out in the end.[/quote]

Lets look at worst case scenarios....

1- All the owners end up hating Snyder. Not voting for his ideas later.
2- Department of Labor or Justice get involved.
3- The NFL not being exempt from labor laws.

I honestly can't fathom anything else, but I'm sure the owners are happy to be exempt from some of the labor laws and being able to do business as they please. I figure the worst that can happen is the NFL would lose that freedom and would have to do business like all other businesses and unions. That alone would go a long way in keeping both sides more honest.

So for me to weight if its worth it to go nuclear and possibly get our CAP space back.... I'd have to say yes it's worth it. Personally I think there needs to be someone keeping an eye on both sides that has no interest, someone who is not swayed to lean towards the owners in judgement (Dotty), and someone to make sure a fair punishment is delt as well as punishing everyone involved. In this case, yeah maybe the Skins do deserve a punishment although I don't agree with it, but certainly the other owners deserve to be punished for unfair practices against the NFLPA.

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

Well getting an injunction is quite different than running this thing all the way to a trial.

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

[quote=JoeRedskin;995525]So ... the NFLPA knew of the collusive agreement to keep "competitive balance". Yet, during the bitter lockout in which the NFLPA argued collusion about several specific factors this was never mentioned. Further, once (and only once) it became public, the NFLPA filed a lawsuit alleging that this agreement about "competitive balance" was unknown to them and represented a breach of the prior CBA. Finally, the NFL's response was not "We told them, they knew about it so they shouldn't be upset"; it was "Hey too bad so sad, you waived all your claims - even the one you didn't know you had."

Wow. Revisionist history is one thing. This is "1984" un-person stuff.[/quote]

Basically the NFL/Owners are back peddling and making stuff up. Lets look at it another way.... If there was an agreement between the NFL/NFLPA and the Skins reworked two players contracts then wouldn't it have been prudent for the NFL to simply deny the contracts and tell the Skins to rework them again because it goes against the "Spirit" of the uncapped year? Then no one would be docked CAP and those contracts could have been worked out another way.

No, in this case, the owners made an agreement amongst them selves to not spend in order to keep costs down, keep spending down when they were trying to tell the players that there was no money to work with, and to deny the contracts the Skins submitted would give the NFLPA proof that the owners had an agreement (collusion) with their knowledge. So the contracts were approved, CBA agreed to and signed, and because the owners were pissed that the Skins didn't go with the program they decided to punish two of their members for not playing along, but to do that they needed to black mail the NFLPA into thinking that if they didn't allow the punishment or sign the adendum to the CBA then they would lose money. and.... the only way for the NFLPA to get proof that there was collusion was for them to sign the agreement anyway. Then some judge (Dotty) denies all claims because ..... the NFLPA signed their rights away.

I think someone (big government) needs to keep the owners and Dotty in check.

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

[quote=SBXVII;995526]Lets look at worst case scenarios....

1- All the owners end up hating Snyder. Not voting for his ideas later.
2- Department of Labor or Justice get involved.
3- The NFL not being exempt from labor laws.

I honestly can't fathom anything else, but I'm sure the owners are happy to be exempt from some of the labor laws and being able to do business as they please. I figure the worst that can happen is the NFL would lose that freedom and would have to do business like all other businesses and unions. That alone would go a long way in keeping both sides more honest.

So for me to weight if its worth it to go nuclear and possibly get our CAP space back.... I'd have to say yes it's worth it. Personally I think there needs to be someone keeping an eye on both sides that has no interest, someone who is not swayed to lean towards the owners in judgement (Dotty), and someone to make sure a fair punishment is delt as well as punishing everyone involved. In this case, yeah maybe the Skins do deserve a punishment although I don't agree with it, but certainly the other owners deserve to be punished for unfair practices against the NFLPA.[/quote]

You forget about Scenario 2A... The Justice department getting involved, and getting a collusion charge to be done through the Govt. The NFL loses said collusion case and has to pay 2-3 bil to the players, that is instantly tripled. The owners also want nothing to happen to the EXTREMELY owner friendly CBA.

Doubt it would ever happen, but being found guilty of collusion is no easy sentence that the other owners are laughing over. If those are truly the worst case scenarios, then Snyder would have already sued, and the NFL would have already counter sued. Court options are a last resort scenario here for a reason.

P.S. there is a reason the players choose to go to Doty and the owners choose other courts. And it has nothing to do with Doty being pro-owners.

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

[quote=FRPLG;995528]Well getting an injunction is quite different than running this thing all the way to a trial.[/quote]

Correct. The injuction is just to stop FA. Maybe even to have it put on hold until after a trial if the Redskins are actually filing. But the Skins can file and threaten to go through with a long trial with out an injuction or holding up FA.

The NFL does not want to hold up anything, FA, draft, etc. etc. Although the other owners probably are not scared.... I bet they also dont' want to have the FA period held up either. I'd file the injuction and file the law suit. As it gets closer to FA time I'd play chicken and see if the NFL caves. If they do good for the Skins, if they don't then you still have all the way up until court date of your law suit.... which could be set for June or August, or Sept. and even then you can always post pone the court case a couple of times which would further delay FA.

I'm hoping Snyder has his minions all over these boards listening to his fan base basically wanting him to get some balls against the other owners and pull the pin on the hand grenade and go nuclear.

If he does not think he has enough later to win he can always drop the issue and move on, but the thought of all the other owners pissed that he held up FA makes me happy.

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

I dunno, Snyder's ego gets in the way of smart decision making.

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

[quote=Skinzman;995534]You forget about Scenario 2A... The Justice department getting involved, and getting a collusion charge to be done through the Govt. The NFL loses said collusion case and has to pay 2-3 bil to the players, that is instantly tripled. The owners also want nothing to happen to the EXTREMELY owner friendly CBA.

Doubt it would ever happen, but being found guilty of collusion is no easy sentence that the other owners are laughing over. If those are truly the worst case scenarios, then Snyder would have already sued, and the NFL would have already counter sued. Court options are a last resort scenario here for a reason.

P.S. there is a reason the players choose to go to Doty and the owners choose other courts. And it has nothing to do with Doty being pro-owners.[/quote]

You right and basically what I said about the Justice Department. or atleast what I was trying to say. All the other owners are happy with how the system is now and don't want big government involved with their system. Maybe there would be some new rules governing players and their contracts or owners having to have insurance on each player or retirement I don't know. But that alone should be enough to scare the other owners. Worst case scenario the Skins win and the Justice department decides to step in and the NFL loses it's exemptions. Best case scenario the other owners give the CAP back and Snyder calls off the law suit and injuction and allows the NFL to operate as normal.

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

[quote=SBXVII;995526]Lets look at worst case scenarios....

1- All the owners end up hating Snyder. Not voting for his ideas later.
2- Department of Labor or Justice get involved.
3- The NFL not being exempt from labor laws.

I honestly can't fathom anything else, but I'm sure the owners are happy to be exempt from some of the labor laws and being able to do business as they please. I figure the worst that can happen is the NFL would lose that freedom and would have to do business like all other businesses and unions. That alone would go a long way in keeping both sides more honest.

So for me to weight if its worth it to go nuclear and possibly get our CAP space back.... I'd have to say yes it's worth it. Personally I think there needs to be someone keeping an eye on both sides that has no interest, someone who is not swayed to lean towards the owners in judgement (Dotty), and someone to make sure a fair punishment is delt as well as punishing everyone involved. In this case, yeah maybe the Skins do deserve a punishment although I don't agree with it, but certainly the other owners deserve to be punished for unfair practices against the NFLPA.[/quote]

First, you realize that Doty has been a big friend of the NFLPA for years and that, in the latest CBA, the NFL insisted that cases under the new CBA would not be heard by him. He gave the friendliest rulings he could in not dismissing the NFLPA's collusion case outright in light of the waiver clause. Most judges would likely have dismissed the NFLPA's claim without argument.

Second, and as others have mentioned, this case would have [I]nothing[/I] to do with the NFLPA and labor laws. That case has been adjudicated and dismissed. Period. Done. Finito. As part of the settlement of all outstanding claims, in reaching the new CBA, the NFLPA gave up all rights to claim they had been treated unfairly during the negotiations.

Finally, to see what legal theories Snyder is relying on, I would want to go back to there original appeal in front of the arbiter. As I recall, they advanced certain theories that the arbiter said "this is the wrong forum for that argument". If I am remembering it correctly, it is those theories that Snyder would be bringing now. I have to believe it comes down to a breach of contract or a tortuous interference with business by his partners. Those are each claims which would be independent of the arbiter and NFLPA claims. It's been a while since I looked at them, and really have no evaluation of their merit, but, clearly, people being paid a lot more than me have found a credible basis to bring a civil suit on this issue.

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

[quote=JoeRedskin;995540]First, you realize that Doty has been a big friend of the NFLPA for years and that, in the latest CBA, the NFL insisted that cases under the new CBA would not be heard by him. He gave the friendliest rulings he could in not dismissing the NFLPA's collusion case outright in light of the waiver clause. Most judges would likely have dismissed the NFLPA's claim without argument.

Second, and as others have mentioned, this case would have [I]nothing[/I] to do with the NFLPA and labor laws. That case has been adjudicated and dismissed. Period. Done. Finito. As part of the settlement of all outstanding claims, in reaching the new CBA, the NFLPA gave up all rights to claim they had been treated unfairly during the negotiations.

Finally, to see what legal theories Snyder is relying on, I would want to go back to there original appeal in front of the arbiter. As I recall, they advanced certain theories that the arbiter said "this is the wrong forum for that argument". [B]If I am remembering it correctly, it is those theories that Snyder would be bringing now. I have to believe it comes down to a breach of contract or a tortuous interference with business by his partners. Those are each claims which would be independent of the arbiter and NFLPA claims. It's been a while since I looked at them, and really have no evaluation of their merit, but, clearly, people being paid a lot more than me have found a credible basis to bring a civil suit on this issue.[/B][/quote]

I would think he brings federal antitrust claims along with state law tortious interference claims. If I were him/on his legal team, I would want to bring the case in a DMV area court (preferably VA). Never underestimate the impact a fan on the bench can have on a case; see Judge Berrigan (EDLA) in the Vilma v. Goodell litigation...

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

[quote=Skinzman;995534]You forget about Scenario 2A... The Justice department getting involved, and getting a collusion charge to be done through the Govt. The NFL loses said collusion case and has to pay 2-3 bil to the players, that is instantly tripled. The owners also want nothing to happen to the EXTREMELY owner friendly CBA.

Doubt it would ever happen, but being found guilty of collusion is no easy sentence that the other owners are laughing over. If those are truly the worst case scenarios, then Snyder would have already sued, and the NFL would have already counter sued. Court options are a last resort scenario here for a reason.

P.S. there is a reason the players choose to go to Doty and the owners choose other courts. And it has nothing to do with Doty being pro-owners.[/quote]

Also I doubt the NFL would file a counter suit because I'm sure they feel pretty confortable that they have won each time the issue has come to court. Dotty is not pro player he is contract friendly and owner friendly. Which is why the Skins lost their appeal, and why the NFLPA lost their case. God forbid he rule against the owners and what then? would he have to face the fact the owners negotiated in bad faith and the whole CBA is null and void? Then the two sides would have to start over in regards to a new CBA tying him up for long hours and meeting and more negotiations? Heck no it's easier to simply side with the owners and ignore the facts: the owners colluded, negotiated in bad faith, black mailed the NFLPA, and punished two teams for not violating any CBA.

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

I am not an anti-trust lawyer and that is one of those arcane areas that requires expertise in areas I just don't have to evaluate. I would agree, of course, getting a home Court judge is a big thing. Hell, not sure of the make-up of the VA Bench, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that one or two judges appointed by Bruce's brother are still sitting.

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

Does Goodell's response expose them to anything? I would just think in the interest of seeming to be ethical, they wouldn't give that type of response? Irregardless of any threat of legal action.

Anyone ever watch the "don't talk to the police" videos? You'd think that people like Goodell would practice that kind of discretion all the time.

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

[quote=NC_Skins;995500][YT]5um6HM89AlY&[/YT]


ES member (huly) asking Goodell about capgate. Listen to his explanation. He said the owners AND the NFLPA were told about this "competitive balance". Riiiiiight. SO you are going to tell the NFLPA prior to the lockout that you are indeed going to collude even though there is no salary cap.[/quote]

Someone should have hurled a Docker.

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

[quote=CrustyRedskin;995553]Someone should have hurled a Docker.[/quote]

Hahaha now that you say that, it reminds me of the footage of bush's speech a few years back when someone hurled that shoe at him lol.

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

[quote=JoeRedskin;995548]I am not an anti-trust lawyer and that is one of those arcane areas that requires expertise in areas I just don't have to evaluate. I would agree, of course, getting a home Court judge is a big thing. Hell, not sure of the make-up of the VA Bench, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that one or two judges appointed by Bruce's brother are still sitting.[/quote]

Redskins outside counsel: Fred "Flagellant" Davis

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

[quote=SBXVII;995543]Also I doubt the NFL would file a counter suit because I'm sure they feel pretty confortable that they have won each time the issue has come to court. [B]Dotty is not pro player he is contract friendly and owner friendly. Which is why the Skins lost their appeal, and why the NFLPA lost their case.[/B] [/quote]

Sorry, this is just wrong. Doty has historically been very player friendly and it has long been one of the owners' goals to get him removed from hearing appeals on CBA issues. It is why he was written out of the new CBA.

[quote=SBXVII;995543]God forbid he rule against the owners and what then? would he have to face the fact the owners negotiated in bad faith and the whole CBA is null and void? Then the two sides would have to start over in regards to a new CBA tying him up for long hours and meeting and more negotiations?[/quote]

No. He ruled against them because that was what the law required. As a matter of law, The NFLPA the players had waived their claims - known and unknown - of collusion for anything that occurred prior to the new CBA being signed.

[quote=SBXVII;995543]Heck no it's easier to simply side with the owners and ignore the facts: the owners colluded, negotiated in bad faith, black mailed the NFLPA, and punished two teams for not violating any CBA.[/quote]

Everything you say is true. The owners colluded and negotiated in bad faith - but then the NFLPA affirmatively waived their claims against the owners for all claims when they signed the new CBA. If they believed that more claims were out there, they shouldn't have waived them. They did so as part of a settlement. Once you say, "Okay, I am done suing you." You can't go back and say "Well, except for this."

As for "blackmailing" the NFLPA, I would suggest it was more of a [I]quid pro quo[/I]. The NFLPA came to them first and said "Hey, can we make an arrgangement to get more cap space this year??" to which the NFL said "Sure .... just sign here and let us punish these two teams who refused to join in this, heretofore, unknown collusion against you and you may have some extra cap space this year."

As for the acts before the new CBA, they were fully and legally waived. As for the bad acts afterwords, the penalties were imposed in a procedurally correct fashion (per the arbiter) and were arrived at through a [I]quid pro quo[/I] bargain with the union.

The key was the waiver. Without it, the NFL had no leg to stand on. With it the union and Snyder, as far as any appeals concerning violations of the CBA, are legally without remedy.

Also, the NFLPA could have said "Nope, we won't sign off on this. These two teams will spend their money on players and taking cap space away from them harms players." The NFLPA leadership did not do this and simply caved so that they would look better in front of their constituents.

While the owners played hard ball all throughout, I would suggest that the players were ultimately ill served by their leadership. The players gave up a lot of legal issues that seemed like small potatoes at the time but that have come back to haunt them (the Commissioner's authority on sanctions, the waiver) in order to get a shortened work year.

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

[quote=CrustyRedskin;995553]Someone should have hurled a Docker.[/quote]

LOL, this is not a third world country....Docker? you might as well have said a Crock. lol. No they should be throwing Timberlands. lol. Boot would be better anyway.

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

[quote=SBXVII;995561]LOL, this is not a third world country....Docker? you might as well have said a Crock. lol. No they should be throwing Timberlands. lol. Boot would be better anyway.[/quote]

:rofl: a crock!!!

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

[quote=JoeRedskin;995559]Sorry, this is just wrong. Doty has historically been very player friendly and it has long been one of the owners' goals to get him removed from hearing appeals on CBA issues. It is why he was written out of the new CBA.



No. He ruled against them because that was what the law required. As a matter of law, The NFLPA the players had waived their claims - known and unknown - of collusion for anything that occurred prior to the new CBA being signed.



Everything you say is true. The owners colluded and negotiated in bad faith - but then the NFLPA affirmatively waived their claims against the owners for all claims when they signed the new CBA. If they believed that more claims were out there, they shouldn't have waived them. They did so as part of a settlement. Once you say, "Okay, I am done suing you." You can't go back and say "Well, except for this."

As for "blackmailing" the NFLPA, I would suggest it was more of a [I]quid pro quo[/I]. The NFLPA came to them first and said "Hey, can we make an arrgangement to get more cap space this year??" to which the NFL said "Sure .... just sign here and let us punish these two teams who refused to join in this, heretofore, unknown collusion against you and you may have some extra cap space this year."

As for the acts before the new CBA, they were fully and legally waived. As for the bad acts afterwords, the penalties were imposed in a procedurally correct fashion (per the arbiter) and were arrived at through a [I]quid pro quo[/I] bargain with the union.

The key was the waiver. Without it, the NFL had no leg to stand on. With it the union and Snyder, as far as any appeals concerning violations of the CBA, are legally without remedy.[/quote]

Although I'll agree your probably right with the Dotty issue, I'm not sure any of us really know the full facts regarding the meeting over the punishment. I could very easily see the NFL going to the NFLPA and suggesting that there is a problem and they need to meet. Then suggesting that it looked like the CAP would have to be lowered for whatever reason. Remember this came relatively soon after (6 months) the CBA had been signed. Why would the NFL not already know prior to the number crunching and during the CBA talks that there was a problem regarding the CAP? Instead they come up with some story and present it. Then while trying to figure something out the NFL suggests they will keep the CAP at where it is if the NFLPA will give up their rights to sue and allow the NFL to punish two of their own.

But thats my opinion since I don't know the facts either. But I doubt the owners would want for the NFLPA to stand in court and tell how they felt black mailed in order to get proof of collusion, lied to, and not have agreed on the punishment in advance ie; prior to the old CBA ending, and they wouldn't want for two teams to stand up and say "yes, the owners had an agreement to keep costs down against the players, and we felt that was not fair."

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

I am sure the owners don't want that happening either. Further, I am pretty certain I can predict how a jury would rule if any one ever finds a legal issue that actually states a claim upon which a recovery could be based.

That, however, is the crux of it right now - Crafting a legal argument that sets forth the breach of a contract or duty that will withstand a motion to dismiss. If the Skins have one, it is not jumping out at me - they, however, are convinced they do.

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

Snakes.

[url=http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8990626/dallas-cowboys-join-prospective-washington-redskins-suit-source]Dallas Cowboys won't join prospective Washington Redskins suit -- source - ESPN Dallas[/url]

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

[quote=SBXVII;995563]Although I'll agree your probably right with the Dotty issue, I'm not sure any of us really know the full facts regarding the meeting over the punishment. I could very easily see the NFL going to the NFLPA and suggesting that there is a problem and they need to meet. Then suggesting that it looked like the CAP would have to be lowered for whatever reason. Remember this came relatively soon after (6 months) the CBA had been signed. Why would the NFL not already know prior to the number crunching and during the CBA talks that there was a problem regarding the CAP? Instead they come up with some story and present it. Then while trying to figure something out the NFL suggests they will keep the CAP at where it is if the NFLPA will give up their rights to sue and allow the NFL to punish two of their own.

But thats my opinion since I don't know the facts either. But I doubt the owners would want for the NFLPA to stand in court and tell how they felt black mailed in order to get proof of collusion, lied to, and not have agreed on the punishment in advance ie; prior to the old CBA ending, and they wouldn't want for two teams to stand up and say "yes, the owners had an agreement to keep costs down against the players, and we felt that was not fair."[/quote]

There is no dispute of the facts as it pertains to the cap going down. It was going down for one reason, the players percentage of the overall revenues went down in the new CBA. The owners knew the cap was dropping, and the NFLPA knew the cap was dropping. It was going down, completely legally, that is not in question.

The NFLPA went to the NFL and asked for money to be moved forward from future years to keep the cap stable. The new TV agreements are already negotiated and they come with a fair amount more money than the current ones, but the dont go into effect for a couple more years. The NFLPA asked to have some of that TV money moved from the future into current years to keep the cap stable until those new TV contracts go into effect.

The NFL offered the union a choice. Take the lowered salary cap that everyone knows will happen (due to reasons already explained) or allow us to sanction the teams we want. We (The NFL) will allow future money to be pulled from those TV contracts and put into the years until those TV contracts go into effect to keep the cap stable. The union chose to sign off on the punishment and have the money moved forward and keep the cap stable.

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

[quote=RedskinsInNYC;995566]Snakes.

[URL="http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8990626/dallas-cowboys-join-prospective-washington-redskins-suit-source"]Dallas Cowboys won't join prospective Washington Redskins suit -- source - ESPN Dallas[/URL][/quote]

Not surprising. Carrying a $5M penalty just isn't that big a deal in the grand scheme. The risk reward ratio isn't there for the Cowboys.

Carrying $18M though is very significant, so clearly we're in a different position, one where at least threatening action makes some sense.