NFL taking away Redskins cap space

This is true. Unfortunately, the NFLPA had no choice but to agree to a dirty deal by the NFL. Plain and simple. Still though, I don't see if stopping those teams from suing the NFL.

Again, if I'm London Fletcher, I sue. They took money right out of his pocket.

Again, if I'm London Fletcher, I sue. They took money right out of his pocket.

He probably can't. Not just b/c of the speculative nature of the damages (He would pretty much need a statement from the Skins saying "We would have offered you X, but due to salary cap restrictions resulting solely from the NFL's sanction, we can only offer you Y". Pretty sure that is not forthcoming).

As a member of the NFLPA, the NFLPA's agreement to the salary cap arrangements would, most likely, cut off his legal remedy.

Clearly he, and other potential Redskins are likely harmed, BUT the players organization agree to allow the harm to happen.

I'm pretty much with CRed on this one. After D. Smith's reelection and the owners meeting, the league will rework this and, IMHO, simply say - "Okay, what's done is done this year, but next it will go back to normal and their will be no further penalty."

Good post but I want to clarify one thing. The NFLPA agreed to the punishment of the skins/cowboys now that the deal is done and the effect of the new CBA would have pushed this years cap well below last year's. There is NO WAY the NFLPA accepts this punishment while the CBA was being negotiated.

If the CAP was going to fall below last years it was going to fall whether the NFLPA agreed to it or not. The owners threw out there that they would not allow the CAP to fall below last yrs if they agreed not to file a law suit. It was a cookie to keep them quiet. No way the CAP falls below last yrs just because the Skins reworked 2 contracts and Dallas reworked 1. Besides the revenue sharing is taken from the total amount earned from income not total amount paid out. Those lesser teams still would have gotten their fair share of the skimming from the top of the better managed teams.

As has been said on the radio, there were far more teams that spent below the bottom limit of the CAP also. They too effected the balance across the board... and they don't get punished. Why?

and your right had the league came out and said "we agreed not to do this and tried to punish the two teams.... the new CBA would never have been signed and it would have gone to court with the NFLPA having filed that the owners colluded. The key is the owners broke the law

How about this for a decent result. All the owners punished the Skins and Cowboys for not playing fair. Ok. It's done. Now JJ/DS need to punish the league for their breaking the law to the sum of 46 mill.

He probably can't. Not just b/c of the speculative nature of the damages (He would pretty much need a statement from the Skins saying "We would have offered you X, but due to salary cap restrictions resulting solely from the NFL's sanction, we can only offer you Y". Pretty sure that is not forthcoming).

As a member of the NFLPA, the NFLPA's agreement to the salary cap arrangements would, most likely, cut off his legal remedy.

Clearly he, and other potential Redskins are likely harmed, BUT the players organization agree to allow the harm to happen.

I'm pretty much with CRed on this one. After D. Smith's reelection and the owners meeting, the league will rework this and, IMHO, simply say - "Okay, what's done is done this year, but next it will go back to normal and their will be no further penalty."

I agree that the punishment likely will be reduced but it has to be reduced more than that. Even at "only" $18 mil. for one year, the punishment still does not fit the supposed crime.

So, you and your friends agree to do a job for another group. After the other group leaves, your friends secretly agree to try and cheat on the agreement. Even though you know it's wrong, and may even be illegal, because the "the group reache[d] consensus and you are in the group that's what you have to do"? Sorry, illegal agreements cannot be enforced.

Agreed. Majority does not equal morality.

However, if the Redskins were part of the consensus and gave their word on a shady deal, then I don't really have a problem with them facing the shady consequences of that deal.

He probably can't. Not just b/c of the speculative nature of the damages (He would pretty much need a statement from the Skins saying "We would have offered you X, but due to salary cap restrictions resulting solely from the NFL's sanction, we can only offer you Y". Pretty sure that is not forthcoming).

As a member of the NFLPA, the NFLPA's agreement to the salary cap arrangements would, most likely, cut off his legal remedy.

Clearly he, and other potential Redskins are likely harmed, BUT the players organization agree to allow the harm to happen.



Right--I noted somewhere else that he probably doesn't have standing, given the NFLPA. But I'd damn sure want my dues back if I'm London! Sure, the NFLPA can say that the same amount of cash is out there, so London can go get it. But as someone who's captain of a team's D, he has more value to that team. And we all know that the the skins would spend the money, while it ain't going nowhere in Indy, Jax, etc.

London Fletcher just seems to be one of those good guys who gets ****ed with all the time. But I'm sure he'll be OK--let's pay the man!

Also, for the fans this cap reduction news came out of the blue, but it didnt for the Skins. They were continually warned by the NFL to cool it yet for some reason they ignored the warnings. The sad part is that the Skins could have avoided this mess if they'd have just heeded the warnings and backed off a little. The NFL tried to save the Skins from themselves but the Skins were too arrogant to listen.

Word is that these "warnings" never actually came from the NFL and never in writing and you don't heed warnings when you aren't doing anything wrong...

I'm not at all surprised the NFLPA agreed. While the players may or may not have made less in the uncapped year (I suspect they didnt make less) that was only one year. The NFLPA agreed to the deal so that their players could make more every year after that because part of the deal was keeping the cap from going down. The NFLPA too the long term view of keeping salaries up for their members.

Also, for the fans this cap reduction news came out of the blue, but it didnt for the Skins. They were continually warned by the NFL to cool it yet for some reason they ignored the warnings. The sad part is that the Skins could have avoided this mess if they'd have just heeded the warnings and backed off a little. The NFL tried to save the Skins from themselves but the Skins were too arrogant to listen.

How can the NFL warn the Redskins, approve the contracts the Redskins sent them, and then reprimand them? The NFL league office approved the contracts! How do you back off a little? How is the Redskins organization arrogant?

Pansies!!!

MarkMaske ‏ @MarkMaske
Cowboys are unlikely to challenge their NFL-mandated salary cap reduction, according to a person familiar with case...

Pansies!!!

MarkMaske ‏ @MarkMaske
Cowboys are unlikely to challenge their NFL-mandated salary cap reduction, according to a person familiar with case...



Not sure I quite get that strategy. /shrug