Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Wow. Things are starting to get fishy. And very interesting. Shocker, someone in a high end organization is lying.
NFLPA: We did not agree to 'collusion' in advance | CSN Washington

Ha ha, yeah Goodell, thats why the NFLPA filed a law suit against the NFL cause they agreed to collude with the owners and allow the NFL to punish anyone who failed to go along with the program. lol.

Goodell you kill me. It would have been funnier had it been said on April 1st.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

The way I look at it Goodell and Mara started the BS, and decided to try and play tough. Through all of this the Redskins have tried to play nice, filed a grievance, waited while the NFLPA file their complaint, waited while the NFLPA appealed the case, and no give on the NFL's side.

It's definitely time to go nuclear, file whatever they need to file to screw over Free Agency, then file whatever they need to file that keeps it out of the NFL's friendly court system and puts in possibly in the bulls eye of the Department of Labor or the Department of Justice. Maybe then if all the owners have to worry about their sacred business being watched by big government maybe then they will cave and give the penalty back in order to keep their business out of big governments reach.

Yeah, kudos to the Skins for taking the High Road up to this point.

Really wish someone could have followed up Huly's question with something Goodell glossed over: "Mr. Goodell, in 2010, when the Redskins and Cowboys submitted the contracts in question for NFL front office approval: Why did the NFL management approve those contracts at that time?"

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Yeah, kudos to the Skins for taking the High Road up to this point.

Really wish someone could have followed up Huly's question with something Goodell glossed over: "Mr. Goodell, in 2010, when the Redskins and Cowboys submitted the contracts in question for NFL front office approval: Why did the NFL management approve those contracts at that time?"

and this is the question I'd love for Goodell or Mara to answer. In a public setting. I mean everyone already knows the answer. What I hate is the NFL playing the "30" owners were duped by two and those two should be punished. No Goodell, two owners restructured contracts knowing the leauge would be forced to go along with them or get into trouble. Someone at the NFL agreed to the contracts when they had every opportunity to deny them but didn't. Why? and because of your mistake you wanted to punish the two teams? That screams of unfair business between owners.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

The more I think about it. The more I think that Snyder has a legit claim. It would air a LOT of dirty laundry and he may or may not succeed, but I am betting there is something actionable.

Great analysis Joe.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

i'm really starting to sour on the NFL's arrogance. This issue aside, yesterday i learned the league, which makes billions of dollars a year, doesnt pay taxes. That just doesnt seem right, especially when the federal government is laying off thousands of workers to cut expenses. Maybe some of those people would still have jobs if the NFL paid taxes like every other sports league in the country.

Yesterday, i also read that several NFL teams asked a player at the combine questions regarding his sexual orientation. I'm pretty sure thats illegal. Can you imagine the uproar if Microsoft, Walmart, or some other large company asked individuals questions about their sexual orientation on a job interview? Yet the NFL does it, and they dont give a crap.

Sooner or later, the arrogant manner they go about conducting business is going to get them in trouble. Theyre going to lose their tax exempt status or get the crap sued out of them for overt discrimination or something else. And i'm going to love it.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

i'm really starting to sour on the NFL's arrogance. This issue aside, yesterday i learned the league, which makes billions of dollars a year, doesnt pay taxes. That just doesnt seem right, especially when the federal government is laying off thousands of workers to cut expenses. Maybe some of those people would still have jobs if the NFL paid taxes like every other sports league in the country.

Yesterday, i also read that several NFL teams asked a player at the combine questions regarding his sexual orientation. I'm pretty sure thats illegal. Can you imagine the uproar if Microsoft, Walmart, or some other large company asked individuals questions about their sexual orientation on a job interview? Yet the NFL does it, and they dont give a crap.

Sooner or later, the arrogant manner they go about conducting business is going to get them in trouble. Theyre going to lose their tax exempt status or get the crap sued out of them for overt discrimination or something else. And i'm going to love it.

Given recent events, I was wondering about that. Yes, that is illegal to do, NFL or not.

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

That is a basic employee hiring law. BUS Law 101

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by artmonkforhallofamein07

That is a basic employee hiring law. BUS Law 101

Apparently the government doesn't care when your business is for entertainment and brings in billions of dollars in revenue streams for cities all around the U.S.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

i'm really starting to sour on the NFL's arrogance. This issue aside, yesterday i learned the league, which makes billions of dollars a year, doesnt pay taxes. That just doesnt seem right, especially when the federal government is laying off thousands of workers to cut expenses. Maybe some of those people would still have jobs if the NFL paid taxes like every other sports league in the country.

Yesterday, i also read that several NFL teams asked a player at the combine questions regarding his sexual orientation. I'm pretty sure thats illegal. Can you imagine the uproar if Microsoft, Walmart, or some other large company asked individuals questions about their sexual orientation on a job interview? Yet the NFL does it, and they dont give a crap.

Sooner or later, the arrogant manner they go about conducting business is going to get them in trouble. Theyre going to lose their tax exempt status or get the crap sued out of them for overt discrimination or something else. And i'm going to love it.

To be fair, thats a little misleading to just say the league doesnt pay taxes. The 32 teams do pay taxes, they just have a central office to conduct business among the 32 teams, and that is what does not pay taxes. Basically that results in each team getting a 6-7 mil tax exemption each year for "donating" money to the NFL.

I do agree with you on the big companies part, but for future reference, adding Walmart to these usually does more harm than good to your argument. Walmart considers "above minimum wage" and "health benefits" to be dirty words. They arent exactly known to be worker friendly.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

To be fair, thats a little misleading to just say the league doesnt pay taxes. The 32 teams do pay taxes, they just have a central office to conduct business among the 32 teams, and that is what does not pay taxes. Basically that results in each team getting a 6-7 mil tax exemption each year for "donating" money to the NFL.

I do agree with you on the big companies part, but for future reference, adding Walmart to these usually does more harm than good to your argument. Walmart considers "above minimum wage" and "health benefits" to be dirty words. They arent exactly known to be worker friendly.

Your right in your statement but what the article is trying to point out is that the NFL should not be listed as a "non-profit" organization. They made money above the 6-7 mill donated by each team. To include TV deals, and sales of NFL apparel. So technically the NFL should be paying taxes on the 6-7 mill as well.

[SBXVII]

I know no one want would want to piss off their fellow owners of a business or piss off board members of a company, but in this situation knowing the fact that the Redskins and Cowboys are two teams that provide the most money toward the pot of money that gets distributed to lesser teams in the organization and have been doing so for years, I find it rather funny those teams would vote to "bite the hand that feeds them" per say.

What does Snyder have to lose? The NFL is not going to kick him out, not going to take the team away from him, so what is there to lose? Snyder is not running for a lead or head position in the NFL so if he pisses off 30 other owners, who cares?

I really hope Snyder has the balls to pull this off. What the NFL did was morally wrong, illegal at the time (collusion). The NFL had ample and I repeat ample opportunity to advise the Redskins that the contracts were not going to be approved because of whatever reason and actually had the duty to do just that. Instead the NFL approved the deals. Clearly the NFL, by not denying them, did not have an issue with how those contracts were structured at the time (prior to the new CBA) so they (the NFL) should not have standing in any claim of damage or possible future damage since they approved them thus no punishment should have been put on anyone.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Your right in your statement but what the article is trying to point out is that the NFL should not be listed as a "non-profit" organization. They made money above the 6-7 mill donated by each team. To include TV deals, and sales of NFL apparel. So technically the NFL should be paying taxes on the 6-7 mill as well.

Well, does the League offices make the money, or is it distributed directly and proportionally to all 32 teams. I doubt that the League itself "makes" money, but I don't know. For example on NFL apparel, doesn't that revenue go directly to the teams, based on whatever the agreed split is. I don't think the League gets a separate percentage of sales.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

Apparently the government doesn't care when your business is for entertainment and brings in billions of dollars in revenue streams for cities all around the U.S.

My guess is that the government would care if such an issue were to be brought to court.

[Meks]

the whole thing is a joke and goodell is a crook.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Your right in your statement but what the article is trying to point out is that the NFL should not be listed as a "non-profit" organization. They made money above the 6-7 mill donated by each team. To include TV deals, and sales of NFL apparel. So technically the NFL should be paying taxes on the 6-7 mill as well.

I agree with you about whether the NFL should be considered non-profit. But there is a huge difference between saying the NFL doesnt pay taxes as compared to saying the individual teams get a 6-7 mil tax write off each year.