Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Hopefully, my last entry on this, because until it's ruled on we just keep banging heads.

The fact that the 2006 CBA had several clauses defining illegal actions that were agreed upon by the NFL and NFLPA may or may not prove it was a shared concern. BUT what it DOES prove is that our actions met the letter of the law as it was written in 2006. To extrapolate out and say that somehow the CBA as written proves a spirit or intent on the NFLPA's part is ludicrous. We did not use a heretofore unused scheme. Option bonuses and voidable options were expressly allowed in the salary cap era, and NOT expressly disallowed in the uncapped year.

IF the NFLPA agreed on the principle, then in the 2006 CBA, or at some later date prior to the beginning of the uncapped league year, the NFL should have gotten an amendment to the CBA stating that the uncapped year should not be used to play tricks with the salary cap going forward. BUT, the NFLPA's express position was that if the salary cap died, it was not coming back. And if it hadn't come back, which was a valid possibility at the time the contracts in question were written, then there would have been no issue as to the salary cap techniques used.

Bottomline, there is no elastic clause in the 2006 CBA that says " and other salary cap manipulations that a team may use". It clearly defines which were illegal, and any other techniques used before, and again after the uncapped year, should be presumed legal and valid, and not subject to league sanction.

Awaiting Mara's[hoophead] response

I agree with what you wrote above. What the Skins did was not expressly disallowed by the CBA. I get what the Skins did and why.

I think the punishment is harsh and the process was ridiculous. The best way to handle it would have been for the Commissioner to pick up the phone and say, "Danny, you're trying to do something here we agreed we wouldn't do. I'm not going to disapprove it, but it's going to make other owners angry. If they push back enough, I may eventually have to take action, and you may not like it. Do you want to re-do this?"

Dropping it two years later, with a punitive amount, on the brink of free agency sucks.

The only points I'd add are:

1) Agreeing to not do this was not collusion

2) The NFLPA did not have a problem with agreeing to limit how much salary cap hit could be shifted into an uncapped year

3) Given the structure of the NFL and the powers given to the Commissioner, the Skins were playing with fire if they intentionally and obviously went against this apparent agreement between owners

I went into this thinking the Skins had a great case, the Commissioner and Mara had screwed up, and we were going to get something back. After reading the NFL Bylaws, the 2006 and 2010 CBAs, and seeing the owners 29-2-1 vote, I think our best case is that they agree to reduce the penalty to make this go away quietly.