NFL taking away Redskins cap space

[Dirtbag59]

Please tell me they're doing something. This penalty is just so asinine especially considering the teams that spent well below the cap floor as well as the teams like the Bears among others that frontloaded the hell out of contracts.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Please tell me they're doing something. This penalty is just so asinine especially considering the teams that spent well below the cap floor as well as the teams like the Bears among others that frontloaded the hell out of contracts.

I don't think what the Bears did is anywhere near on the same level as what we did (specifically because the Bears signed Peppers in 2010 whereas we restructured contracts of players we signed in previous seasons), but I still don't think what we did justified the actions that resulted in any way. The penalty that we incurred is patently absurd and arbitrarily handed down. Like I said, I don't think it will stand, but the damage is already done.

[FRPLG]

I cannot, for the life of me, understand the value system that some people have.

The league essentially admitted that they colluded. It is laughable to contend otherwise. If you cannot understand how the owners colluded or somehow think that the Skins should have just listened and not gained the competitive advantage that they HAD THE LEGAL RIGHT TO HAVE then you should bow out of the conversation because you're plain wrong.

I'd even go as far to say this. We got hammered the most but Dallas should be simply livid to point of murder. This jealously-driven act of revenge put them into a much tighter spot than us. Count this as the only time I will probably ever cheer for any of those donkeys in Dallas on anything.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Their warnging amounts to a bully telling you you better go along with him stealing candy from his teacher and if don't he will punish you. So you don't and now he's punishing you.

Everyone wants to sit on the owners having and agreement. and we ignored it. How about sitting on the fact the agreement was against the law and the Skins chose not to break the law? What weird mind allows fans to believe it's ok to go along with the whole or group even if it's against the law?

Thats like getting pulled over for speeding and your excuse is "I was going the speed of the rest of the traffic." No, you were breaking the law and he stopped you. The NFLPA should never have agreed to whatever the Exec commity requested. I doubt the CAP would have gone down but had it there might have been another collusion issue. How is it not if the owners threaten to lower the CAP unles the NFLPA agrees to not file suit? That practically strong arming the players union. Just to spank two teams who chose not to break the law and follow the crowd in collusion.

Good post but I want to clarify one thing. The NFLPA agreed to the punishment of the skins/cowboys now that the deal is done and the effect of the new CBA would have pushed this years cap well below last year's. There is NO WAY the NFLPA accepts this punishment while the CBA was being negotiated.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Good post but I want to clarify one thing. The NFLPA agreed to the punishment of the skins/cowboys now that the deal is done and the effect of the new CBA would have pushed this years cap well below last year's. There is NO WAY the NFLPA accepts this punishment while the CBA was being negotiated.

This is true. Unfortunately, the NFLPA had no choice but to agree to a dirty deal by the NFL. Plain and simple. Still though, I don't see if stopping those teams from suing the NFL.

[JWsleep]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

This is true. Unfortunately, the NFLPA had no choice but to agree to a dirty deal by the NFL. Plain and simple. Still though, I don't see if stopping those teams from suing the NFL.

Again, if I'm London Fletcher, I sue. They took money right out of his pocket.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

Again, if I'm London Fletcher, I sue. They took money right out of his pocket.

He probably can't. Not just b/c of the speculative nature of the damages (He would pretty much need a statement from the Skins saying "We would have offered you X, but due to salary cap restrictions resulting solely from the NFL's sanction, we can only offer you Y". Pretty sure that is not forthcoming).

As a member of the NFLPA, the NFLPA's agreement to the salary cap arrangements would, most likely, cut off his legal remedy.

Clearly he, and other potential Redskins are likely harmed, BUT the players organization agree to allow the harm to happen.

I'm pretty much with CRed on this one. After D. Smith's reelection and the owners meeting, the league will rework this and, IMHO, simply say - "Okay, what's done is done this year, but next it will go back to normal and their will be no further penalty."

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

He probably can't. Not just b/c of the speculative nature of the damages (He would pretty much need a statement from the Skins saying "We would have offered you X, but due to salary cap restrictions resulting solely from the NFL's sanction, we can only offer you Y". Pretty sure that is not forthcoming).

As a member of the NFLPA, the NFLPA's agreement to the salary cap arrangements would, most likely, cut off his legal remedy.

Clearly he, and other potential Redskins are likely harmed, BUT the players organization agree to allow the harm to happen.

I'm pretty much with CRed on this one. After D. Smith's reelection and the owners meeting, the league will rework this and, IMHO, simply say - "Okay, what's done is done this year, but next it will go back to normal and their will be no further penalty."

I agree that the punishment likely will be reduced but it has to be reduced more than that. Even at "only" $18 mil. for one year, the punishment still does not fit the supposed crime.

[JWsleep]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

He probably can't. Not just b/c of the speculative nature of the damages (He would pretty much need a statement from the Skins saying "We would have offered you X, but due to salary cap restrictions resulting solely from the NFL's sanction, we can only offer you Y". Pretty sure that is not forthcoming).

As a member of the NFLPA, the NFLPA's agreement to the salary cap arrangements would, most likely, cut off his legal remedy.

Clearly he, and other potential Redskins are likely harmed, BUT the players organization agree to allow the harm to happen.

Right--I noted somewhere else that he probably doesn't have standing, given the NFLPA. But I'd damn sure want my dues back if I'm London! Sure, the NFLPA can say that the same amount of cash is out there, so London can go get it. But as someone who's captain of a team's D, he has more value to that team. And we all know that the the skins would spend the money, while it ain't going nowhere in Indy, Jax, etc.

London Fletcher just seems to be one of those good guys who gets ****ed with all the time. But I'm sure he'll be OK--let's pay the man!

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

Again, if I'm London Fletcher, I sue. They took money right out of his pocket.

LOL...Bad enough you have Giant envy and want to blame the "owners" of the other teams for all your problems ,now you tell London Fletcher to sue ,why,it's the teams choice to not pay him no other team or "owner" made that call just the Redskins.Money did'nt stop them from going after anyone else .Your buddy Graziano is just mad becuase the players threw him out of the Giants locker room.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Giantone

LOL...Bad enough you have Giant envy and want to blame the "owners" of the other teams for all your problems ,now you tell London Fletcher to sue ,why,it's the teams choice to not pay him no other team or "owner" made that call just the Redskins.Money did'nt stop them from going after anyone else .Your buddy Graziano is just mad becuase the players threw him out of the Giants locker room.

Why did the players throw Graziano out of the locker room? Did he catch them faking again?

[Brody81]

Originally Posted by Giantone

LOL...Bad enough you have Giant envy and want to blame the "owners" of the other teams for all your problems ,now you tell London Fletcher to sue ,why,it's the teams choice to not pay him no other team or "owner" made that call just the Redskins.Money did'nt stop them from going after anyone else .Your buddy Graziano is just mad becuase the players threw him out of the Giants locker room.

Please go away. Seriously, why do you enjoy tormenting Skins fans? We don't like you, we don't care about you.. I can't wait to see RG3 (who you where praying we wouldn't get) run all over your sorry ass team...

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Good post but I want to clarify one thing. The NFLPA agreed to the punishment of the skins/cowboys now that the deal is done and the effect of the new CBA would have pushed this years cap well below last year's. There is NO WAY the NFLPA accepts this punishment while the CBA was being negotiated.

If the CAP was going to fall below last years it was going to fall whether the NFLPA agreed to it or not. The owners threw out there that they would not allow the CAP to fall below last yrs if they agreed not to file a law suit. It was a cookie to keep them quiet. No way the CAP falls below last yrs just because the Skins reworked 2 contracts and Dallas reworked 1. Besides the revenue sharing is taken from the total amount earned from income not total amount paid out. Those lesser teams still would have gotten their fair share of the skimming from the top of the better managed teams.

As has been said on the radio, there were far more teams that spent below the bottom limit of the CAP also. They too effected the balance across the board... and they don't get punished. Why?

and your right had the league came out and said "we agreed not to do this and tried to punish the two teams.... the new CBA would never have been signed and it would have gone to court with the NFLPA having filed that the owners colluded. The key is the owners broke the law

How about this for a decent result. All the owners punished the Skins and Cowboys for not playing fair. Ok. It's done. Now JJ/DS need to punish the league for their breaking the law to the sum of 46 mill.

[Ruhskins]

Pansies!!!

MarkMaske ‏ @MarkMaske
Cowboys are unlikely to challenge their NFL-mandated salary cap reduction, according to a person familiar with case...

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Pansies!!!

MarkMaske ‏ @MarkMaske
Cowboys are unlikely to challenge their NFL-mandated salary cap reduction, according to a person familiar with case...

Not sure I quite get that strategy. /shrug