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

According to this article LINK (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/23/collusion-suit-directly-resulted-from-redskins-cowboys-cap-penalties/), we spent over $225 Million. ($123+$102) The salary cap for 2009 was $128 mil. So yeah, the $36 mil penalty isn't as much as we "overspent" in the uncapped year.

Still, springing the penalty on the literal eve of free agency was a dick move by Goodell/Mara that cost us beyond dollars.

I think we still came out ahead, but we shouldn't have been penalized in the first place. In a just world, the penalty doesn't stick, and Danny and Jerrah get to sit back and laugh as owners that depend on revenue sharing try to figure out how to stay afloat while the NFL loses billions in a collusion lawsuit to the NFLPA. And all the fingers point at Mara for causing this disaster.


Agree, and thanks for the numbers...

Not gonna happen

Do the Redskins have any $hot? (http://redskins.espn980.com/bloggers/chris-russell/item/822-do-the-redskins-have-any-$hot?)

He says the only thing the Redskins can really do, is file a lawsuit against the National Football League, a strategy the person said was highly unlikely, “I can’t imagine they would do that.”

The way the Redskins and possibly the Cowboys would go about that, is to file a lawsuit in state or federal court, because the arbitration angle is dead.

The problems associated with a lawsuit of that magnitude is that according to the league’s constitution, the loser of the battle would pay all fees and could be counter-sued for “conduct detrimental to the league.”

The source described a decision to do this as a “thermo-nuclear” choice and strongly suggested that the Redskins avoid that route.

The same person also said that the only way he could think of to make this reversal take place, short of filing a lawsuit – would be to get an amendment to the league’s collective bargaining agreement. How likely is that and getting such a move past key executives like John Mara of the New York Giants? Extremely unlikely in another ESPN 980 sources thought process.

The main source did allow something that I thought was particularly interesting, by saying the NFL “amended the CBA to (bleep) these teams" before, which is why the league’s management committee was able to negotiate a cut throat deal with the NFLPA, in the person’s eyes.


Part of me thinks we should sue the NFL and NFLPA. Not that it would help us, but just to make a point.

What I never understood was if the Redskins restructured contracts in an uncapped year to gain some sort of advantage over other teams, how much of an advantage would we have? Uncapped year or not, a team should be able to restructure contracts if it wants.....

What I never understood was if the Redskins restructured contracts in an uncapped year to gain some sort of advantage over other teams, how much of an advantage would we have? Uncapped year or not, a team should be able to restructure contracts if it wants.....

They were looking out for the cheap owners that wanted to save money and instead of dropping loads like Danny and Jerry did. I am of mind that I believe most owners would rather profit than win.

I have been thinking this same thing ever since the Giants were watching the Redskins and Cowboys battle for the NFC EAST crown. Mara forced the Redskins to be fiscally conservative and utilize more young, hungry players along with re-signing key team members from the year before.

Kind of ironic huh?

I think that was part of the plan 3 yrs back when Shanahan and company took over the team. The 18 mil hit hurt sign better quality younger players if anything.

They were looking out for the cheap owners that wanted to save money and instead of dropping loads like Danny and Jerry did. I am of mind that I believe most owners would rather profit than win.

I don't really think thats the case. There are alot of ways for people who are already fithly stinking richt to make even more money. But these guys chose to own an NFL team. They know theyre going to make money, but they want to do it in a manner that allows them to win something. So i think all NFL owners are driven to have a successful team that wins.

I do think that alot of owners, due to a number of factors (market size, their own limitations in coming up with ways to generate revenue, etc.) have a more limited budget to work with. They simply can't afford to spend as much money and make an acceptable profit margin. I mean, if mike brown (cinci) or shahid khan (jags) spent money like Daniel Snyder and Jerry Jones, the franchises would go bankrupt.... come to think of it, that might not be a bad thing.

This is fantastic news.. especially because with the holes we need filled( Safety,Cornerback,WR,RT ) there are some very good free agents available.

This is fantastic news.. especially because with the holes we need filled( Safety,Cornerback,WR,RT ) there are some very good free agents available.

Don't get too excited, we're probably not getting money back.

It sounds to me like we will get most or all of it back. We should! an uncapped year means you should be able to do what you want as far as spending , thjere was no guidelines to suggest different. It's totally unfair

John Clayton:

Venkat in Baltimore noted how much the Dallas Cowboys are over the cap and wonders if the team can appeal to Judge David Doty to get their $5 million of lost cap room back. The case is closed, and the Cowboys can't appeal to Doty because the NFL Players Association signed off on the penalty. The Cowboys lost $10 million of cap room over a two-year period. The Redskins lost $36 million. Even though both teams raised complaints, they have no chance of overturning the decision.

NFL mailbag -- Running QBs have leg up, for now - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2012/story/_/id/8843814/nfl-mailbag-running-qbs-leg-now)