Cowboys and Redskins losing cap space

[BradyFTW!]

Breer's story:

Fair enough, but unless there was a specific rule in the provisions surrounding the CBA opt-out, then that should be a toothless threat, and one that sounds an awful lot like collusion. It doesn't matter what the competition committee says, it's either against the rules or it isn't.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Fair enough, but unless there was a specific rule in the provisions surrounding the CBA opt-out, then that should be a toothless threat, and one that sounds an awful lot like collusion. It doesn't matter what the competition committee says, it's either against the rules or it isn't.

OTOH, look at it this way:

If most teams abide by the idea that this is not a "get out of jail free" card, but *some* teams decide it is, then parity is threatened.

In any case, if I understand the sanction section correctly, it is well within Goodell's rights to do this, but ONLY, according to the NFL by-laws, if the Executive Committee agrees.

 

[PatsSox363804]

Fair enough, but unless there was a specific rule in the provisions surrounding the CBA opt-out, then that should be a toothless threat, and one that sounds an awful lot like collusion. It doesn't matter what the competition committee says, it's either against the rules or it isn't.

It sounds an awful lot to me like they are using a crap warning 2 years ago to justify giving more teams cap space because they couldnt find a legit way to do so. This is BS, I don't care that we get more cap space.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Why won't the NFL let Jerry Jones and Dan Synder be great?! lol

Cuz there is no cure for ******ed.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Does anyone know exactly what Dallas and Washington did that was against the rules?

They exploited the uncapped year and are not NY teams.

 

[Boomer B]

Per PFT they were told 6 times not to do this, and they did. Screw em, they were told and thought they could get away with it, but now they gotta pay the piper.

"Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the teams were told “at least six times” during ownership-level meetings that there would be “serious consequences” for any team that used the uncapped year as an occasion to dump salaries."

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

But the special get out of dead cap hell free CBA exemption that the Jets were saved by is OK

 

[resdubwhite]

But the special get out of dead cap hell free CBA exemption that the Jets were saved by is OK

Spot on. How much again? 11 million.

 

[Deus Irae]

The 'boys and 'skins should sue the league on this. Of course, if they do sue and win, the NFLPA will be right behind them claiming collusion.

Win/Win

 

[Uncle Rico]

So does this mean the Redskins' two wins vs the Giants last year are tainted?


:rocker:

 

[MP-Logick]

Q: Why isn't the union challenging this?

A: While this behavior seems to fit the very dictionary definition of collusion, as multiple teams were engaged in discussions to limit the earning potential of their employees and prospective employees, do not expect it to be challenged in court. The decision today, in which the Redskins were docked $36 million in cap space and the Cowboys $10 million, is the result of a settlement between the NFL and the NFLPA. One reason the union has no problem with it is that the money lost to the Cowboys and Redskins is not taken out of the overall 2012 spending pool — each of 28 other teams gets $1.6 million extra in cap room, so there's no net loss league-wide. Another reason the union won't push on it is because they agreed, as part of the settlement of last year's Brady vs. NFL federal lawsuit, to drop all pending legal action against the league. That included their claims that the league engaged in collusion in 2010.

From the NFC East blog at ESPN.

 

[BradyBranch39]

I think the Redskins should take like 90-95% of the hit in 2013, given the option.
It buys them time--and they have no 1st round pick to pay in 2013 anyways.

 

[DaBruinz]

I don't care for the Redskins or the Cowboys, but this is BS. Those contracts were approved by the NFL. If they were illegal contracts, they should have been declared null and void at the time. Penalizing them now is BS.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

I'm having a difficult time believe Goodell did this unilaterally. Many owners must be involved in this.

 

[TyronePoole]

If I'm RG3 I'm seriously considering pulling an Eli Manning here and refusing to sign with them. This is a team now that will be among the lightest in the draft and now will have money problems too. How appealing are the Redskins going to be to free agents now even when they get their salary cap money? Chances are high that he'll have a better career almost anywhere else.

 

[Deus Irae]

From the NFC East blog at ESPN.

That's too bad about the NFLPA stuff, because it was a slam dunk win for the union.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I'm having a difficult time believe Goodell did this unilaterally. Many owners must be involved in this.

Confess to ignorance here but could this be a case of settling old scores between owners? Which owners had to sign off on this? All, just the Competition Committee or what? If we had real sports reporters these and other probing questions would be asked and addressed.

 

[TyronePoole]

That's too bad about the NFLPA stuff, because it was a slam dunk win for the union.

seems like a new cause of action to me

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

seems like a new cause of action to me

Don't you have to have suffered damages in a suit? No $ went away from players, instead "the wealth got distributed differently"

 

[TyronePoole]

Don't you have to have suffered damages in a suit? No $ went away from players, instead "the wealth got distributed differently"

well you could argue that it damages the ability of Redskins players currently under contract to negotiate/re-negotiate