NFL taking away Redskins cap space

[Skinsfanatic]

Originally Posted by Jayroc24

I just check the NFL.com website, if it is official, it should be there right??? Nutin! Not one mention that they are removing our the cap money or re-distributing to others. You would think that there would be some notice to Allen or Snyder. This doesn't smell right......

It's on the front page.


NFL.com news: NFL takes millions in cap space away from Cowboys, 'Skins

[Jayroc24]

Originally Posted by Skinsfanatic

It's on the front page.


NFL.com news: NFL takes millions in cap space away from Cowboys, 'Skins

Well dont know what page I was looking at????? My bad!

[Jayroc24]

Originally Posted by Skinsfanatic

It's on the front page.


NFL.com news: NFL takes millions in cap space away from Cowboys, 'Skins

I guess my next question is how is that Allen nor the Boys's have not received something official yet? It is just media putting this out there? Has to be something from the commish office right?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Jayroc24

I guess my next question is how is that Allen nor the Boys's have not received something official yet? It is just media putting this out there? Has to be something from the commish office right?

yes. they were notified yesterday. youre about 10 pages behind the rest of us

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

yes. they were notified yesterday. youre about 10 pages behind the rest of us

No...as of the statement made last night (around 8PM) by BA the team had not been officially notified.

One would think that ahs changed by now though. Or not I guess.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Jayroc24

I guess my next question is how is that Allen nor the Boys's have not received something official yet? It is just media putting this out there? Has to be something from the commish office right?

They won't send it in writing because it's not legal and it will prove collusion if they do. This is not gonna hold up in court that's why the Redskins need to get an injunction...fighting it after they lose out on the players they want to sign does them no good.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by celts32

They won't send it in writing because it's not legal and it will prove collusion if they do. This is not gonna hold up in court that's why the Redskins need to get an injunction...fighting it after they lose out on the players they want to sign does them no good.

in theory and principle, i wholeheartedly agree with you. however, i am 99% sure that this is not a matter that can be litigated, so court isnt an option. the skins could probably appeal to goodell and he will just say no. its awful, and im sure the skins will try to fight it somehow, but i'm not sure how. in the end, i dont see this being overturned. the league and players both approved it already. the most i can see happening is goodell allowing the skins and cowboys to spread the hit into 2014, when the cap will increase dramatically due to the new tv deals.

[SBXVII]

I think I'm just as confused. The teams were supposedly made aware of the penalty. BA says they were not at around 8pm. Today the NFL takes 18 mill. WTF.

As has been stated why did they wait until 24 hrs prior to FA? They cold have done this back in Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. and they wait till after the Skins announce a trade with the Rams, awaiting approval, and 24 hrs. prior to FA. All to force their hand. BS.

I'll say it again. If there was an agreement by the owners then there was collusion amongst owners during the time of the negotiations and the NFLPA needs to step up and file a grievance. If there was no agreement (which the NFL wanted everyone to believe at the time to get the new CBA signed) then you can't come out now and cry foul over something they approved in order to not get suit and change their tune now.

[12thMan]

I wholly expect the Redskins to file an injunction before 4 PM today.

[Jayroc24]

I did find this from the Washington Post;

The NFL issued a written statement that said: “The Management Council Executive Committee determined that the contract practices of a small number of clubs during the 2010 league year created an unacceptable risk to future competitive balance, particularly in light of the relatively modest salary cap growth projected for the new agreement’s early years. To remedy these effects and preserve competitive balance throughout the league, the parties to the [collective bargaining agreement] agreed to adjustments to team salary for the 2012 and 2013 seasons. These agreed-upon adjustments were structured in a manner that will not affect the salary cap or player spending on a league-wide basis.”


Redskins to lose $36 million in cap space over two years [updated] - The Insider - The Washington Post

[freddyg12]

From what was on the nfc east blog on espn.com it really sounds pretty much like collusion of 30 teams & the nfl. Facing pressure from the 30 teams, the nfl took action & got the nflpa to buy in by spreading the cap wealth.

Maybe there's a paper trail from the nfl to the skins FO warning them about some of their contracts. If there isn't, from my ignorant non-anti trust law informed self, this just seems like collusion , the very thing the cba is designed to prevent.

[Jayroc24]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

From what was on the nfc east blog on espn.com it really sounds pretty much like collusion of 30 teams & the nfl. Facing pressure from the 30 teams, the nfl took action & got the nflpa to buy in by spreading the cap wealth.

Maybe there's a paper trail from the nfl to the skins FO warning them about some of their contracts. If there isn't, from my ignorant non-anti trust law informed self, this just seems like collusion , the very thing the cba is designed to prevent.

Agreed, just seems odd that the NFL has not come out and issued a statement outright & that you have both teams (Skins and Boys) denying notification.......

[Drewsky27]

We are still in top half of league with our cap reduced. I can see why some see this as better.. It means more underrated free agent signings like last year that were good pickups... Nobiggy

[BigHairedAristocrat]

check out this from a poster on the PFT article:

http://http://profootballtalk.nbcspo...tions-in-2012/

gurnblanstonreturns says:
Mar 13, 2012 11:22 AM
Whoa, Nellie! Nothing like a good, old-fashioned anti-trust fight to upset Goodell’s hard won decade of labor peace.

As a Redskins fan, my bias in favor of the Redskins is obvious, but does not change the situation. Realitypolice has set forth the facts very clearly. Anyone in need of a refresher course in antitrust issues as they pertain to matters between the owners (as opposed to matters between owners and labor) need only review the Ninth Circuit’s decision upholding the Raiders judgment against the league regarding franchise movement from the early ’80s.

This overreach by Goodell, clearly backed by small-market franchises, including the sacrosanct families such as the Rooneys and Maras, is designed to offset the consequences of the owners’ actions in the labor negotiations of the current CBA. (It surely can be no coincidence that a Mara chairs the relevant committee addressing this issue.) The owners decided to force an early termination of the CBA with the resultant “uncapped” year in their determination to obtain better terms from the players in the next CBA. This tactic proved a smashing success.

Unfortunately for the small-market franchises, an “uncapped” year presented an opportunity to franchises such as the Redskins and Cowboys to address untenable and damaging cap positions. In an effort to subvert the labor negotiations and tilt the process further in their advantage, many owners apparently devised a system of collusion that could be denied publicly and leave no papertrail. By giving multiple “warnings” to some owners that the illegal, unofficial policy of collusion would be enforced after the players had been pressured into accepting the owners’ demands, the owners acted in the classic fashion of a cartel as understood under antitrust law.

The small market franchises have benefitted for years under the socialist tenets of the league’s structure to ensure their ability to compete against wealthier franchises. In fact, these franchises have been so successful in using superior football-related organizations that they have enjoyed tremendous on-field success while the Redskins and Cowboys have endured many years of failure.

Owners such as Snyder and Jones have cooperated with this regime, while chafing at some of its revenue-sharing aspects, in the apparent belief that the NFL’s ultimate success depends upon this unique, socialist structure to avoid the fate of MLB. By poking this hornet’s nest, the owners and Goodell risk this arrangement.

If the league insists upon this punitive enforcement of an illegal collusion to dampen player salaries in the uncapped year, then Snyder and Jones should follow Al Davis’ example and bring an anti-trust suit against the league.

With the facts in their favor, they could very easily force the league’s capitulation in the face of the destruction of the “house of cards” which is the NFL under anti-trust law.

Snyder and Jones should make clear that their forebearance in underwriting the success of the Maras, Rooneys and “stockholders” of Green Bay (and the Super Bowl championships those teams have enjoyed since the mid-90s) is at an end.

If the benefactors of the socialist structure want to assert that they have the right to enforce collusion in the uncapped year, they should be put on notice that Snyder and Jones are willing, and perhaps even anxious, to reverse years of futility by two of the league’s proudest franchises by ushering in a new era of professional football – an era characterized by the survival of the fittest as the Redskins and Cowboys become the NFL’s Red Sox and Yankees. Many Redskins and Cowboys fans could comfort themselves about the dissolution of the “old” NFL by warming themselves in the glow of Red Sox- and Yankee-like rings and trophies.

Hopefully, those who have benefitted so greatly by the socialist structure of the NFL and its one great foray into capitalist hardball (forcing the uncapped year and early termination of the CBA) will recognize the fool-hardiness of seeking to further their advantage by punishing their benefactors for exercising their rights in the uncapped year. Hail!

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

check out this from a poster on the PFT article:

http://http://profootballtalk.nbcspo...tions-in-2012/

that's awesome! Pretty much articulates what I see this as - collusion between 30 owners & the nfl.