Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

It all goes back what I said earlier. If the teams can just simply vote to punish a team or teams anytime they want to for whatever reason they want, then why even have a CBA? If you're not going to follow the agreement like it's laid out, what's the purpose of it? That's quite illogical, to assume the teams can have a majority vote to penalize a team for actions they did years ago under a different CBA. Why would any owner want to go along with this willingly, knowing the same thing could easily happen to them as well.

The most logical solution goes back to this: The 'skins and 'boys did what they did in 2010, which was an uncapped season under the old CBA - which was current during 2010. This vote that Hoop keeps putting all of his apples into really doesn't have any credence of legality, but moreover, was just a formality. Just like the leagues move to ask for dismissal was a formality. The long and short of it is simply those two clubs did nothing wrong; they followed the CBA to the letter, they did not collude.

The CBA governs the working relationship between the teams and the players...not the owners and the owners.

The most logical solution goes back to this: The 'skins and 'boys did what they did in 2010, which was an uncapped season under the old CBA - which was current during 2010. This vote that Hoop keeps putting all of his apples into really doesn't have any credence of legality, but moreover, was just a formality. Just like the leagues move to ask for dismissal was a formality. The long and short of it is simply those two clubs did nothing wrong; they followed the CBA to the letter, they did not collude.

All of which I believe is probably irrelevant. I hope I am wrong but based on what Hoop has laid out and my basic understanding of how this process will work it doesn't matter whether we did anything wrong or not. The owners can do whatever they want. That doesn't mean it wasn't a pretty sh*tty thing to do. It also doesn't mean they won't choose to do more sh*tty things in the future.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

All of which I believe is probably irrelevant. I hope I am wrong but based on what Hoop has laid out and my basic understanding of how this process will work it doesn't matter whether we did anything wrong or not. The owners can do whatever they want. That doesn't mean it wasn't a pretty sh*tty thing to do. It also doesn't mean they won't choose to do more sh*tty things in the future.

That doesn't make very good, logical, business sense though. Not saying that isn't the case at all, but what would stop teams from ganging up on a team and stripping them of salary any time they want for any reason, good, bad, or ugly? There HAS to be some safety net in place to keep teams from frivolous acts?

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

That doesn't make very good, logical, business sense though. Not saying that isn't the case at all, but what would stop teams from ganging up on a team and stripping them of salary any time they want for any reason, good, bad, or ugly? There HAS to be some safety net in place to keep teams from frivolous acts?

Which is what the Arbitrator is for then there is filing suit against 30 owners.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

That doesn't make very good, logical, business sense though. Not saying that isn't the case at all, but what would stop teams from ganging up on a team and stripping them of salary any time they want for any reason, good, bad, or ugly?

I don't disagree...and I have said as much either earlier in this thread or in the original thread on this topic. What "makes sense" and is "fair" though is irrelevant. Here we are in the middle of getting screwed in a way that isn't fair and doesn't make much sense at all. The owners have given us lemons. Right now we are slowly approaching the decision point between making lemonade or finding some grenades and painting them like lemons and giving them back to the other owners.

There HAS to be some safety net in place to keep teams from frivolous acts?

Why? It's their league. You and I and everyone else can WANT there to be. We can HOPE that someone comes to their senses and puts an end to this idiocy but hopes and wants mean nothing in this case.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

It all goes back what I said earlier. If the teams can just simply vote to punish a team or teams anytime they want to for whatever reason they want, then why even have a CBA? If you're not going to follow the agreement like it's laid out, what's the purpose of it? That's quite illogical, to assume the teams can have a majority vote to penalize a team for actions they did years ago under a different CBA. Why would any owner want to go along with this willingly, knowing the same thing could easily happen to them as well.

The most logical solution goes back to this: The 'skins and 'boys did what they did in 2010, which was an uncapped season under the old CBA - which was current during 2010. This vote that Hoop keeps putting all of his apples into really doesn't have any credence of legality, but moreover, was just a formality. Just like the leagues move to ask for dismissal was a formality. The long and short of it is simply those two clubs did nothing wrong; they followed the CBA to the letter, they did not collude.

The CBA doesn't have anything to do with how the League can discipline it's member Clubs. It authorises an arbitrator to enforce certain provisions and settle disputes.

The NFL Bylaws do describe how the NFL can discipline its member Clubs. It provides for appeals to go to the Executive Committee (32 owners). Beyond that, a Club would have to sue in civil court.

And the vote that was made by the owners seemed to be a limited vote on a specific subject - to ratify the NFLMCs agreement with the NFLPA to modify the salary cap to punish two teams.

[los panda]

i see this being dragged out, delayed, pushed back, etc. i doubt that even if we (cowboys included in we:vomit "won" we'd get anything fair...
like taking $1.6M away from the 28 teams, giving $10M to the cowboys, and $36M to us to use in 2013 and 2014. but roy orbison encourages me to dream

[SBXVII]

and.... Hoop, I don't hate the messanger.... I hate the message. lol. although you might be right I hate the bleak message your giving us. lol. Also, even though I'm sure both sides have lawyers informing them, I hate tossing out there information the opponant could use against us. Like when the media comes on tv and says "gas companies are worried a terrorist group could highjack a gas truck and use it to blow something up", .... hello... if they were not thinking it you just now gave them the idea. lol.

Your awsome. again I just hate the negativity. How about painting this side of the fence for us so we have a positive view of you? lol.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

and.... Hoop, I don't hate the messanger.... I hate the message. lol. although you might be right I hate the bleak message your giving us. lol. Also, even though I'm sure both sides have lawyers informing them, I hate tossing out there information the opponant could use against us. Like when the media comes on tv and says "gas companies are worried a terrorist group could highjack a gas truck and use it to blow something up", .... hello... if they were not thinking it you just now gave them the idea. lol.

Your awsome. again I just hate the negativity. How about painting this side of the fence for us so we have a positive view of you? lol.

Thanks for the nice words. Honestly, this whole thing sucks, and I came into this pissing vinegar like you. Unfortunately, the more I read, the more it became obvious that the Commissioner has the power to punish the Skins for doing what they did. Fair or not.

The max punishment that I could see being fair is making Hall's 2010 bonus count $3m per year for 3 years. If they did that, my reaction would be "harsh but fair." $36m is ridiculous.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

and.... Hoop, I don't hate the messanger.... I hate the message. lol. although you might be right I hate the bleak message your giving us. lol. Also, even though I'm sure both sides have lawyers informing them, I hate tossing out there information the opponant could use against us. Like when the media comes on tv and says "gas companies are worried a terrorist group could highjack a gas truck and use it to blow something up", .... hello... if they were not thinking it you just now gave them the idea. lol.

Your awsome. again I just hate the negativity. How about painting this side of the fence for us so we have a positive view of you? lol.

As for positivity...salary cap be damned, in three days, WE GET RGIII!

I think that's the only reason I can even rationally discuss the salary cap issue.

IN 3 DAYS WE GET RGIII.

[mooby]

Damnit Hoophead, I'm really trying to like you and what you're contributing to this thread but you're making it impossible with your bubble bursting in regards to this shitty situation.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by mooby

damnit hoophead, i'm really trying to like you and what you're contributing to this thread but you're making it impossible with your bubble bursting in regards to this shitty situation.

rgiii countdown: T-3 days!

[mooby]

Originally Posted by HoopheadVII

rgiii countdown: T-3 days!

That's better .

[Giantone]

Just want to say a quick Thanks to JoeReadskin and Hoophead,they have brought alot more to light in this then I ever imagined was involved.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Just want to say a quick Thanks to JoeReadskin and Hoophead,they have brought alot more to light in this then I ever imagined was involved.

Glad someone enjoyed it

Since I'm new here, I'm not sure how strong language is appropriate, but I will say that your less-than well thought out arguments previously were what inspired me to read the documents.

And I would also say that I find Mara's behavior and comments in this matter to be less than optimal.

Finally, I would say that if I were the fan of a team blessed by Lady Luck I would spend significantly less time agitating fans of teams with lesser fortune than you seem to.

[CRedskinsRule]

It will be interesting 1) to see if the arbitrator chooses to hear the case, I wouldn't be shocked for him to say it falls outside his purview, and 2) if he does choose to hear it, how wide the discussion will be. If it will be narrowed simply to procedural issues, or if the Skins/Cowboys are able to get him to open it up to a more thorough investigation.

Of course we may not hear any of it, except the final outcome...