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

Collusion Missile Crisis: Redskins Wage War on NFL « CBS DC (http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/02/27/collusion-missile-crisis-redskins-wage-war-on-nfl/)

In this article Florio points out that the Redskins arleady filed a suit for collusion and lost. (that suit was basically saying hey they should not punish us, it was not over collusion).

Then he states it opened the door for the NFLPA to file a suit for collusion. (which it did, and he's right that the judge ruled against them because the suit should have been brought before the new CBA was signed).

Then he states the Skins are possibly filing suit for collusion.... no Florio the suit would be in regards to the punishment should have come before the new CBA was signed not after basically being the same as the NFLPA not being able to sue for collusion.

but besides that THE NFL SIGNED OFF ON THOSE CONTRACTS WHEN THEY COULD HAVE DENIED THEM, BUT THEY DIDN'T.... THEY APPROVED THEM. So no punishement should have been given.

That guy is a woman

I believe, in my non-professional opinion, that it was an attempt at satyr. But I digress...

Typed up this to a Steeler friend. A summary of some of the stuff here.


Goodell Talking Redskins Fine - YouTube (Huly and Pez's vid) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5um6HM89AlY&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Goodell tells fans that the NFL owners and players union agreed in advance to collusion on salaries in 2010.

“When we went into the uncapped year we told everybody including the union that we were going to make sure that competitive issues were going to be considered when we came out of it. That if people got competitive advantage in some fashion, by doing certain things in an uncapped year, that would be considered with the labor agreement. That's exactly what we did."

"Teams took advantage and dumped contracts into an uncapped year, and got an advantage going forward. That was a competitive advantage. Those are the kinds of things that need to be balanced in and the players association and us agreed to that. That’s what we agreed to and every club was told that in advance and the players association was told that that would be an issue when we negotiated.”

NFLPA: We did not agree to 'collusion' in advance | CSN Washington (http://www.csnwashington.com/football-washington-redskins/talk/nflpa-we-did-not-agree-collusion-advance)

When asked for a response, NFLPA Assistant Executive Director of External Affairs George Atallah said in an email that he thought that Goodell must have gotten his words mixed up because the union was not told about possible penalties for spending prior to the 2010 uncapped year.

"I'm sure Roger didn't mean to say that we agreed to collusion, because we didn't,” Atallah said via email. “I'm also sure he didn't mean to say that we agreed to penalize teams for their failure to participate in collusion in advance of the uncapped year, because we didn't.”

Redskins still upset about cap penalties, but what can they do? | ProFootballTalk (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/13/redskins-still-upset-about-cap-penalties-but-what-can-they-do/)

"As one league source explained it, the Redskins remain extremely upset about the situation, strongly believing they did nothing wrong. In our view, they’re right. Each and every player contract that supposedly violated the “spirit of the salary cap” was approved by the league in 2010 and complied with the rules that were on the books.

Of course, the contracts were approved because failure to do so would have flagged for the NFLPA the fact that collusion was occurring.

That continues to be the bottom line. The teams were colluding in the uncapped year, and the Cowboys and Redskins were punished for refusing to go along with the plan. The league wisely kept the situation under wraps until the ink was dry on the new labor deal, which prevented the players from suing for collusion."

Redskins put contract talks on hold as they work to recoup salary cap space (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/02/25/redskins-put-contract-talks-on-hold-as-they-work-to-recoup-salary-cap-space/)

The league ruled that the Redskins and Cowboys sought to gain an improper competitive advantage by loading extra salary into the uncapped year. The teams denied wrongdoing. Arbitrator Stephen Burbank ruled last year that the teams could not bring a case because the league and union agreed to the cap reductions, which amounted to a rightful amendment of the CBA. U.S. District Court Judge David Doty has ruled twice that the union waived its right to bring a collusion complaint against the league and teams.

But......

Mixed views on strength of Redskins’ legal position in salary cap case (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/02/26/mixed-views-on-strength-of-redskins-legal-position-in-salary-cap-case/)

The person with knowledge of the salary cap case said the Redskins could argue that if the union had waived its right to bring a complaint based on conduct that occurred before pro football’s 2011 labor agreement, the league and union also should be prohibited from taking action against a team for conduct prior to the labor deal.

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17gb6h4c1kqc6png/original.png

Other teams "took advantage" of the uncapped year. What's the difference? Mainly dollar amounts. In an uncapped year where dollar amounts don't apply.

Good job Hail.

I like how it is addressing all the issues. I still think the team should file and should wait until FA eve to screw over the other owners like they did the Skins last year. I think they have a good arguement. But I would throw in that teams just can't make their own contracts, all contracts are either approved or denied by the NFL who is responsible for looking the contracts over and making sure they fall with in rules and regulations. In this case the NFL did look over the contracts and approved them when they had an opportunity to deny them. On top of that any punishment should have come prior to the new CBA since the contracts were made and approved during the old CBA. The contracts were not constructed and turned in under the new CBA.

Bruce Allen just finishing putting the nail on the coffin to the cap situation in the presser today. He basically said "we got screwed and so we're not able to do sh!t in free agency" so we should not expect any top or 2nd tier players.

I wonder how many more guys will restructure to help create more cap space? Is this cap penalty the kind of thing that could give the Skins a chip on their shoulder for their Super Bowl run next year? Will it bring the team closer together or will the Skins lose some key pieces?

Hopefully, we have another strong draft. Maybe, trade down to load up on more picks. At least the Cowboys are in a worse situation than us and draft poorly.

Bruce Allen just finishing putting the nail on the coffin to the cap situation in the presser today. He basically said "we got screwed and so we're not able to do sh!t in free agency" so we should not expect any top or 2nd tier players.

Well now pump the brakes on that because Chris Russell is saying we have $110 million to spend, making it $13 million we are being penalized, and $5 million we got back (this wasn't including the adjustment to Carrikers contract and Hall being cut).

Well now pump the brakes on that because Chris Russell is saying we have $110 million to spend, making it $13 million we are being penalized, and $5 million we got back (this wasn't including the adjustment to Carrikers contract and Hall being cut).

Are we sure that isn't just roll over unspent 2012 money?

Are we sure that isn't just roll over unspent 2012 money?

It might be

Are we sure that isn't just roll over unspent 2012 money?

It might be

It is.