Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat
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.
|
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.