[HoopheadVII]

Now, that said, I went back and thought about the penalty itself and looked at the Haynesworth situation.

The thing we should be jumping up and down about is that the Skins are being punished for a player that wouldn't have been on their books for 2011 if the League had at least given them any idea of the magnitude of what punishment was coming.

For example, if the League had said at the time, "you can have the Haynesworth contract, but the signing bonus will be prorated across the life of the contract as if there were no voidable clause", the Redskins would have traded or cut him before the end of the 2010 League Year. That would have put all of the salary cap hit for Haynesworth's signing bonus into 2010 anyway.

Then, we're left with Hall. Even if you treat his $15m roster bonus in 2010 as a signing bonus, it counts as $3m towards the cap in 2010-2014.

Basically, if the Skins hadn't tried to push the salary cap hit from these two contracts into 2010, the net effect is that the Skins would be carrying an extra $3m in cap hit in 2012, 2013, and 2014. That's it - $3m x 3 years. Not $18m x 2 years.

The punishment doesn't fit the crime - and that's what we should be jumping up and down about.