NFL taking away Redskins cap space

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Admittedly, I had to look up collusion. This is the 100% definition. JoeRedskin will be able to tell us for sure. It's the combination of reward to other teams, disregard for what the numbers MIGHT have been and the timing of this.

I just can't imagine this was a perfect storm. SUCH BULLSHIT.

Soo, your saying when the NFL read the contracts and approved them they didn't feel the need to deny the contracts and inform the Skins that it was collusion at the time? Instead they approved the contracts. Then instead of informing the Skins anywhere form Sept to now they wait until March 12th, the eve of Free Agency to say "oh by the way we are taking away some of your money because we made a mistake and allowed contracts to go through that were collusion? WTF?

This screams of someone being pissed that the Skins made a trade for RGIII and still have a ton of money to get a specific player that they would like to see go elsewhere. If nothing else "IF" the NFL chooses to punish the Skins then they should make it apart of NEXT yrs salary CAP and the year after not all of a sudden out of the blue right before we are planning to spend money that the NFL originally said we had.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Admittedly, I had to look up collusion. This is the 100% definition. JoeRedskin will be able to tell us for sure. It's the combination of reward to other teams, disregard for what the numbers MIGHT have been and the timing of this.

I just can't imagine this was a perfect storm. SUCH BULLSHIT.

Im thinking the way the NFL sees it is that the Redskins didnt necessarily sign a new player during 2010 to a massive FA contract. Rather they just "dumped" money of existing contracts of players that were already under contract, in order to free up money in future years and to get in good fiscal shape.

Still collusion. Still ridiculous. But i can see why other owners, even though acting cullusive, would be upset. But complete bs

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Im thinking the way the NFL sees it is that the Redskins didnt necessarily sign a new player during 2010 to a massive FA contract. Rather they just "dumped" money of existing contracts of players that were already under contract, in order to free up money in future years and to get in good fiscal shape.

Still collusion. Still ridiculous. But i can see why other owners, even though acting cullusive, would be upset. But complete bs

I will feel about 20% less pissed off if they decide we still get the penalty, but the rest of the teams don't get the money. It was basically a bunch of cry-babying over a couple of teams who had the nuts to do something that might have been immoral, but not against the written rules. Then they all get together and say, "Well, if anything shouldn't WE get a piece of that pie?"

In addition to that, if the Skins were blindsided by this news, that means it's possible they weren't included in any talks or votes.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I will feel about 20% less pissed off if they decide we still get the penalty, but the rest of the teams don't get the money. It was basically a bunch of cry-babying over a couple of teams who had the nuts to do something that might have been immoral, but not against the written rules. Then they all get together and say, "Well, if anything shouldn't WE get a piece of that pie?"

In addition to that, if the Skins were blindsided by this news, that means it's possible they weren't included in any talks or votes.

Again I thought Collusion had to do with say all the owners or all the players agreeing to do something. That something has to corner the market and bring them $$$. and whatever it is has to cause damage to someone.

Not all the owners did the same thing so it was not a group agreeing to do this. By doing this the two teams being punished (Skins and Cowboys) didn't corner the market since other teams had the availability to do the same. and who was damaged? The players received their money that was contracted to them. The Skins still gave the NFL a % of their total earnings.

To top it off there was no CBA. There were no rules other then Federal rules governing Unions if there was collusion then the Gov would be simply penalizing the two teams monitarily not the NFL. Also with out the Union how did the owners collude against the players? How can simply 2 owner collude against the 30 other owners? When there were no rules in place in regards to contracts because the CBA was disolved? Which means the CAP rules were not in place.

[Mayor]

Is the issue here that the Redskins are being fined based on how far they were over an imaginary cap? This article says that we would have been $39 million over in 2010.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Im thinking the way the NFL sees it is that the Redskins didnt necessarily sign a new player during 2010 to a massive FA contract. Rather they just "dumped" money of existing contracts of players that were already under contract, in order to free up money in future years and to get in good fiscal shape.

Still collusion. Still ridiculous. But i can see why other owners, even though acting cullusive, would be upset. But complete bs

Um, collusion or not the NFL had to sign off on the contracts. Someone at the NFL level needs to be fired for not performing their job in denying the contracts or failing to catch this last year when the deals were sent to the NFL for approval.

I really don't care how they got to free up the money.... there was no CBA. With out a CBA all the rules were not in play. Collusion would be when all the owners agree to something that basically corners the market and the players, fans, and other owners are being hurt in some manner.

#1- who's getting hurt?
#2- not all the owners did it
#3- the owners didn't corner the market

Am I wrong?

[Kindoy]

In class right now but just had to add my semi-confused, fully infuriated "WTF?!?". Can't really add much that hasn't already been said, but every part of this just pisses me off. Anyways... back to the lecture.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

So basically if this thing comes to pass without any change, can the owners just get together when a team wins the Super Bowl multiple times in a row and just say "in the spirit of parity, we're cutting your cap substantially!"?

[mredskins]

According to Redskins Nation on CSN this stinks but really doesn't derail us
You know who it does suck for big time? OJ and Sellers

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Yessir. Basically we're bent over a barrel at the most inopportune time for FA. We most likely had a plan in place and now we're scrambling due to this bullshit.

I need to calm down, I just haven't been this pissed with something Skins-related in a while.

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

This is completely unacceptable.

Reading some of the comments in the section of the PFT article. There was a guy who made the case that this is the best evidence brought forward so far where the league is in collusion.

The owners had a wink wink deal in place to not forgo some money in the uncapped year, but these two owners did it anyway because there was no document binding them not too. If this gets to a legal case, there can be a very good case made by our team to get these fines reduced or dropped.

What is really getting in my crawl is that the other 28 teams in the NFL get to spend our money? WTF is that. We are going to reward everyone else for what the Skins and Boys did wrong.

This is ridiculous and has just ruined our chances of competing any time soon.

[CapitalDefense]

TOS says our FO was blindsided by this

TOS = The Other Site

[biffle]

The union signed off on punishing the teams that didn't illegally conspire to hold their compensation down in 2010?

Classy, real classy.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by biffle

The union signed off on punishing the teams that didn't illegally conspire to hold their compensation down in 2010?

Classy, real classy.

YES, and you would think with ALL THE GRANDSTANDING De Smith did during the lockout that he would at least have the guts to do something about this but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

YES, and you would think with ALL THE GRANDSTANDING De Smith did during the lockout that he would at least have the guts to do something about this but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

They got paid off. They put a price tag on sanctioning the illegal activity the league entered into against them, and more than that, made sure that the only teams that didn't engage in it got punished for doing so.

It's going to be hard to ever be on the union's side again after this.