Redskins' and Cowboys' Salary Cap Challenge Dismissed

[Evilgrin]

Based on all the reading, I think they pretty much knew this would happen, fair or unfair. It will be interesting to see how they proceed, if they proceed.

[NC_Skins]

You can forget Jones and Snyder taking this to court. It would involved them opening up the NFL to collusion charges, and quite frankly I doubt they risk their cash cow over this.


The good news in all this is after next year, we'll be at least 18 million under the cap left from that void inflicted by the cap punishment the previous year.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Simple - I am betting that Burbank's decision reads like some version of this:

1. Parties to the 2012 CBA = NFL & NFLPA;
2. Players & NFL agreed to the restructured salary cap for 2012, 2013;
3. Individual clubs have no standing to in this forum to challenge the agreement between the NFL & NFLPA.

Just read Hoophead's discussion in the old closed thread. I am betting the arbitrator pretty much followed the same line of reasoning.

Wait.... were still talking about the 2010 uncapped year right? and the year the offense supposedly occurred. and the fact the new CBA was not in place until 2011 a year later.... and the agreement between the NFL and NFLPA on the issue came a whole year after that in 2012.

All we will probably hear from Burbank will be that the NFL made its case and it was clear he had no standing in ruling on the case. Which is why it was dismissed. He did not rule on whether the whole case was right or not just if he could hear it.

So now DS needs to take the case to the proper venue and file it in the court of law. Scare the you know what out of the NFL into giving back the CAP space or atleast a majority of it or face going to court and possibly losing their exempt status. My money is the NFL will cave then.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You can forget Jones and Snyder taking this to court. It would involved them opening up the NFL to collusion charges, and quite frankly I doubt they risk their cash cow over this.


The good news in all this is after next year, we'll be at least 18 million under the cap left from that void inflicted by the cap punishment the previous year.

No they can always file the case, get the NFL to buckle, get back some of their CAP space, and drop the charges before it actually goes to court. and doing this might also put Goodell in check that he is not all powerful like he thinks he should be.

[SBXVII]

On a lighter side I want to blame Hoop for jinxing us and if they NFL already didn't know he gave them the ammo they needed to simply get the case dismissed. lol.

So I lift my glass high and salute you Mr. Hoop and say thank you for the insightful comments and information. Folks the blame has to go someplace. Hoop.... smile and wave.

[firstdown]

Snyder need to drop his beer and food prices for the next year so he can avoid revenue sharing.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

It's clear now that Hoophead is really Burbank.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I imagine Hoophead's arguments won the day. ...

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Simple - I am betting that Burbank's decision reads like some version of this:

1. Parties to the 2012 CBA = NFL & NFLPA;
2. Players & NFL agreed to the restructured salary cap for 2012, 2013;
3. Individual clubs have no standing to in this forum to challenge the agreement between the NFL & NFLPA.

Just read Hoophead's discussion in the old closed thread. I am betting the arbitrator pretty much followed the same line of reasoning.

Like I said before, I give the concise answer. See JR for longer, more cumbersome answers.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Wait.... were still talking about the 2010 uncapped year right? and the year the offense supposedly occurred. and the fact the new CBA was not in place until 2011 a year later.... and the agreement between the NFL and NFLPA on the issue came a whole year after that in 2012.

Not sure if you're being ironic or starting over at square one of the earlier thread. The adjustments to the cap are for the 2012 and 2013 years. Regardless of why the NFL & NFLPA made the adjustment, the adjustment applies to the 2012 and 2013 years and, so, requires an agreement to modify the existing CBA.

Originally Posted by SBXVII

All we will probably hear from Burbank will be that the NFL made its case and it was clear he had no standing in ruling on the case. Which is why it was dismissed. He did not rule on whether the whole case was right or not just if he could hear it.

Sort of - - Burbank will say that the Skins and Cowboys failed to state a prima facie case for going forward. The NFL had nothing to prove - their argument was simply that Washington and Dallas hadn't made their case. Burbank agreed.

Originally Posted by SBXVII

So now DS needs to take the case to the proper venue and file it in the court of law. Scare the you know what out of the NFL into giving back the CAP space or atleast a majority of it or face going to court and possibly losing their exempt status. My money is the NFL will cave then.

They could, but as NC pointed out, they would be opening up the "collusion" bag for the players - a collusion that they did not expose even if they did not fully participate in it. Even without that factor, it would be a tough road to hoe given Goodell's authority under the NFL By-Laws.

Again, I thought they should've gone nuclear to start - I think the adverse ruling from the abritrator weakens their civil case and deprives them of certain arguments they could have made in a circuit court.

At this point, I am with CRed. Bite the bullet and take revenge by winning the SB.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Like I said before, I give the concise answer. See JR for longer, more cumbersome answers.

I understand complete sentences and concepts beyond 1+1=2 are cumbersome to you. Pardon me for addressing those Warpathers slightly higher on the intellectual ladder than you.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I understand complete sentences and concepts beyond 1+1=2 are cumbersome to you. Pardon me for addressing those Warpathers slightly higher on the intellectual ladder than you.

Except we both basically referenced the subject as thoroughly discussed in the old thread. Now if you want to imply other Warpathers are unable to search threads and find the full discussion you certainly can maintain your disdain for them. I will continue to believe all of us are savvy web users.

Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using Tapatalk 2

[NYCskinfan82]

Not surprised. Burbank received the suitcase full of $$$ IMO.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by NYCskinfan82

Not surprised. Burbank received the suitcase full of $$$ IMO.

Right, because everytime a judge rules against someone or something you are rooting for, it means they took a bribe.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by mooby

Right, because everytime a judge rules against someone or something you are rooting for, it means they took a bribe.

Well, it is the only way I ever win a case.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

No they can always file the case, get the NFL to buckle, get back some of their CAP space, and drop the charges before it actually goes to court. and doing this might also put Goodell in check that he is not all powerful like he thinks he should be.

In fairytale land this works. Not in the real world. They aren't going to risk their cash cow over this. Snyder loves the Redskins, but he loves money much much more.



On that note.


John Keim ‏@john_keim

RT @adbrandt Am told by league source that #Cowboys and #Redskins are issuing a joint statement saying they accept the decision. Case closed