Redskins 2013 Salary Cap Status

[Mechanix544]

Yes, if anything, the players get jipped out of potential earnings due to us not spedning as much as we could. Its not a fine, just a limit on what we CAN spend on all player salaries.

If you want to know who benefits, and who pays for it, well, ultimately the players take it on the chin in this situation. It took 36 million dollars away from the pot that they could have earned over a two year period.

Here is an easy way to look at it - Its like the NFL gave us an NFL credit card with a 12000 dollar limit. They then found out about our pornography and unpaid 1-900 phone call addiction which negatively impacted our credit score. So they THEN came back, after the credit card was issued, and right before Christmas, and lowered our credit limit to 10,200 dollars, thus inhibiting our right to spend 12,000 dollars on telephone blowjobs like your 31 other pervert friends.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

Yes, if anything, the players get jipped out of potential earnings due to us not spedning as much as we could. Its not a fine, just a limit on what we CAN spend on all player salaries.

If you want to know who benefits, and who pays for it, well, ultimately the players take it on the chin in this situation. It took 36 million dollars away from the pot that they could have earned over a two year period.

Here is an easy way to look at it - Its like the NFL gave us an NFL credit card with a 12000 dollar limit. They then found out about our pornography and unpaid 1-900 phone call addiction which negatively impacted our credit score. So they THEN came back, after the credit card was issued, and right before Christmas, and lowered our credit limit to 10,200 dollars, thus inhibiting our right to spend 12,000 dollars on telephone blowjobs like your 31 other pervert friends.

No the players are kept whole. They took the $36 million they told us not to spend, and spread it around to the other teams in the league, allowing them each to spend a little more to make up for it.

That's why the players agreed to go along with this BS in the first place.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

Yes, if anything, the players get jipped out of potential earnings due to us not spedning as much as we could. Its not a fine, just a limit on what we CAN spend on all player salaries.

If you want to know who benefits, and who pays for it, well, ultimately the players take it on the chin in this situation. It took 36 million dollars away from the pot that they could have earned over a two year period.

Here is an easy way to look at it - Its like the NFL gave us an NFL credit card with a 12000 dollar limit. They then found out about our pornography and unpaid 1-900 phone call addiction which negatively impacted our credit score. So they THEN came back, after the credit card was issued, and right before Christmas, and lowered our credit limit to 10,200 dollars, thus inhibiting our right to spend 12,000 dollars on telephone blowjobs like your 31 other pervert friends.

First of all, i think your analogy is crude and inappropriate for this site. Its certainly not the type of thing i want to read when i come here, especially when im at work.

Secondly, the 36 million didnt disappear. the cap dollars the league took away from the skins and the other 3 penalized teams was evenly distributed among the entire league. The only reason the Union supported the penalty, was because the league told them the penalty was the only way they'd allow the cap to stay "flat" as opposed to decreasing, which woul dhave made the union look bad.

You see, the current union leadership told the players that the cap would continue to go up by something like 10% a year, like it had been in previous years. However, under the new CBA, the cap isnt going up and isnt expected ot any time soon. If the had gone DOWN, in the first year after the new CBA was signed, the union would have faced a mutiny. The penalties against the 4 teams allowed the owners to be vindictive against teams that refused to illegally collude against the players, and it allowed the union (who was supposed to represent the players interests) to save face against their constituents.

Ultimately, the players are the ones getting screwed by all of this. The league has deceived them time and time again and its own union is weak and doesnt represent their interests.

[bigant]

Bottom line ,does anybody know who we are looking at in free agency with the little amount of money we have left? hopefully somebody that can help us i hope......... Dam losing that money stills stinks thou......

[Meks]

still think those penalties are bullshit... oh well.. onward mostly with the team we have and some draft picks.. have no choice but to be content with it... and even if I had a choice, i'm happy with continuing to improve from within our division champion 10-6 squad.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

No the players are kept whole. They took the $36 million they told us not to spend, and spread it around to the other teams in the league, allowing them each to spend a little more to make up for it.

That's why the players agreed to go along with this BS in the first place.

There is a salary cap but not a salary floor. Didn't some of the cheapskate owners stay well under the salary cap last season?

Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones would have spent right up to their cap numbers to get better players. Some of the other owners would not and, I think, did not.

The players got screwed, afterall.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

There is a salary cap but not a salary floor. Didn't some of the cheapskate owners stay well under the salary cap last season?

Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones would have spent right up to their cap numbers to get better players. Some of the other owners would not and, I think, did not.

The players got screwed, afterall.

No there still is a floor. But if a team isn't going to spend to the cap anyways then what does adding space to their limit matter? So yeah the players most likely lost out on some money overall.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

The league has deceived them time and time again and its own union is weak and doesnt represent their interests.

Their union is indeed weak. Actually more accurately they are "fake tough". But I think they're made weak by their members. They signed a crap deal for them because the players didn't really have the guts to force a true work stoppage into the season. Now they're stuck with it for 10 years. Think how pissed they're going to be in 5-6 years when the cap hasn't really gone up any.

[Coff]

Originally Posted by bigant

Bottom line ,does anybody know who we are looking at in free agency with the little amount of money we have left? hopefully somebody that can help us i hope......... Dam losing that money stills stinks thou......

I'd like to see them go after Jairus Byrd, but I haven't heard that they are. They can always open up some cap room for a least one big signing.

[Evilgrin]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Their union is indeed weak. Actually more accurately they are "fake tough". But I think they're made weak by their members. They signed a crap deal for them because the players didn't really have the guts to force a true work stoppage into the season. Now they're stuck with it for 10 years. Think how pissed they're going to be in 5-6 years when the cap hasn't really gone up any.

Demaurice Smith came in talking a big game, didn't back it up at all. The deals Upshaw made seem like hitting the lottery in comparison.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Evilgrin

Demaurice Smith came in talking a big game, didn't back it up at all. The deals Upshaw made seem like hitting the lottery in comparison.

Upshaw and Tags had a good relationship and everyone seemed to understand that working together was better for all rather than trying to squeeze one more percent from the other guy. In essence...it became a union/employer thing.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

No there still is a floor. But if a team isn't going to spend to the cap anyways then what does adding space to their limit matter? So yeah the players most likely lost out on some money overall.

One of the (many) BS aspects of the penalties is that we supposedly violated the collusive agreement not to take advantage of a cap less year. Yet, many owners benefitted by spending well under the would be cap floor during the non-capped year. I didn't see any of them getting penalized for violating
"the spirit of the salary cap" or taking "advantage of a one-year loophole."
Mara says Redskins, Cowboys are lucky they didn’t lose draft picks | ProFootballTalk

So, it was okay to take advantage of the cap less year in a manner that immediately harmed the players, BUT, it was not okay to take advantage of it in a way that would ultimately benefit the players (by giving more money to spend to the owners who actually spend it).

Mara is a douche.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

SBXVII,

Don't take this the wrong way, but you are way overthinking this.



So 107,741+18 = 125,741 projected redskins assigned expenses
120,600 = projected cap allowed number
therefore the Skins are 5,141M over right now


The 18Mill is just a number on a spreadsheet. DS didn't pay it out of his pocket per se. In fact you could say since his available cap is less he may have less cash outlay so his need to raise prices might be less. Personally I don't the two have any connection, but it seemed like you were looking at it like a pass the penalty onto the fans type deal, and that's not right at all.

No, thank you for explaining it. I looked at the first post and after some changes they had us at 19 mill below the cap. Thats not 19 mill to spend because we have to account for the 18 mill penalty. The other thing I didn't know was how far below our cap we were.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by bigant

Bottom line ,does anybody know who we are looking at in free agency with the little amount of money we have left? hopefully somebody that can help us i hope......... Dam losing that money stills stinks thou......

Based on the information provided above, i think the answer to your question is, "no one signficant." I imagine this years offseason moves will make the brandon merriweather signing look like a blockbuster deal.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

One of the (many) BS aspects of the penalties is that we supposedly violated the collusive agreement not to take advantage of a cap less year. Yet, many owners benefitted by spending well under the would be cap floor during the non-capped year. I didn't see any of them getting penalized for violating
"the spirit of the salary cap" or taking "advantage of a one-year loophole."
Mara says Redskins, Cowboys are lucky they didn’t lose draft picks | ProFootballTalk

So, it was okay to take advantage of the cap less year in a manner that immediately harmed the players, BUT, it was not okay to take advantage of it in a way that would ultimately benefit the players (by giving more money to spend to the owners who actually spend it).

Mara is a douche.

He should have his eyes taped open and be forced to watch the love scenes in girl with the dragon tattoo over and over for 24 hours straight.