The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

Kilmer72 · Post by **Kilmer72** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:55 pm

It is UK. That is what gets me to. The league hates us and if we deserve it why didn't someone say anything at the time or between now and then?

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:55 pm

Andrew Brandt reporting that it was the other owners that pushed for the penalties.

Kilmer72 · Post by **Kilmer72** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:59 pm

Redskins and Cowboys make more money for this league and yet we get screwed.

Skeletor · Post by **Skeletor** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:02 pm

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/ ... s-cap-mess

Shaner021 · Post by **Shaner021** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:02 pm

Redskins' fans,

The NFL is sending fans confusing messages by penalizing the Dallas Cowboys and Washington Redskins for "manipulating" the 2010 uncapped year.

http://sports-kings.com/downanddistance ... penalties/

I personally don't get it, but I'm sure the NFL lawyers have already determined the legality of it all.

Shane

SprintRightOption · Post by **SprintRightOption** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:03 pm

I am now glad the Redskins gave up two first round draft choices. They couldn't afford to pay those would be players the money now anyway.

Snyder and the team has to sue each and every other team and the NFL in federal court for Racketeering. If I was Dan Snyder I would cut every player on the team right now and forfeit the season. I wonder how the NFL Owners and Management would like the loss of all the TV contract money?

"A pattern of illegal activity carried out as part of an enterprise that is owned or controlled by those who are engaged in the illegal activity. The latter definition derives from the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations Act (RICO), a set of laws (18 U.S.C.A. § 1961 et seq. [1970]) specifically designed to punish racketeering by business enterprises."

The NFL stole $36 million from the Redskins. The NFL is Guilty.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:06 pm

I read that the other owners wanted Dan and Jerry to be disciplined for breaking that informal agreement.

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:12 pm

Did the Redskins sign up to any agreement, formal or informal?

PAPDOG67 · Post by **PAPDOG67** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:12 pm

Sounds like Ex Post Facto BS if you ask me.

Kilmer72 · Post by **Kilmer72** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:16 pm

Hogster you are a Lawyer. What can we do?

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:21 pm

I think I preferred the lockout.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:21 pm

Dont let this bring us down. In all honesty if our FO chose to be creative and try and dump those salaries this is what we get.
Like I said we can still split the penalty over two years. I was wrong in my calculations we actually had 47 million in cap space before the penalty of 36 million. That 36 million can still be split over 2012 and 2013. It does not have to be a 50/50 split either if I am correct.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:21 pm

It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.

But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.

From a guy I'm discussing this with...

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:23 pm

Kilmer72 wrote:Hogster you are a Lawyer. What can we do?

REALLY

hopefully 1niksder can give us some input - he's a lot more familiar with the salary cap

and has more NFL savvy

ferryrich · Post by **ferryrich** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:26 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I read that the other owners wanted Dan and Jerry to be disciplined for breaking that informal agreement.

Of course they'd want that - they get an extra $1.8m each in cap room, should they need or want it

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:30 pm

It would seem that the Redskins might want to take a bigger hit in 2013 as the Salary Cap next year will be a little higher

it still sucks but this FO will figure out the best way forward

SprintRightOption · Post by **SprintRightOption** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:34 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.

But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.

From a guy I'm discussing this with...

Assuming the new CBA included a provision against an anti-trust lawsuit, that provision is unlawful. You cannot include in a contract a provision that violates the public policy of the United States. If it were not so then slavery would be legal by contract.

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:35 pm

SprintRightOption wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.

But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.

From a guy I'm discussing this with...

Assuming the new CBA included a provision against and anti-trust lawsuit, that provision is unlawful. You cannot include in a contract a provision that violates the public policy of the United States. If it were not so then slavery would be legal by contract.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:36 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.

But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.

From a guy I'm discussing this with...

I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do. Isn't that what matters most? From what I see our team can still do plenty in free agency. It just means we have to not miss on our draft and free agent pick ups. Our pick ups and draftees must be good.

The reality is the Skins were 47 million under the cap. That far outweighs what any other team had under the cap. Now the league says the penalty is 36 million which could be split over 2012 and 2013. 47 million minus 36 million split which is 47 minus 18 still gives us 29 million under the cap. That is still plenty to work with. Less flexibility but I think we will be alright.
I am not the resident Cap expert 1niksider is but I think I am correct.

Bottom line is this. We are going to get our franchise QB. We have 20 plus million under the cap. We can still fill talent around RG3/Luck.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:40 pm

HEROHAMO wrote:I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do.

I understand but that's for those of us who'd truly like to understand or try to understand the situation in it's entirety.

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:42 pm

HEROHAMO wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.

But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.

From a guy I'm discussing this with...

I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do. Isn't that what matters most? From what I see our team can still do plenty in free agency. It just means we have to not miss on our draft and free agent pick ups. Our pick ups and draftees must be good.

The reality is the Skins were 47 million under the cap. That far outweighs what any other team had under the cap. Now the league says the penalty is 36 million which could be split over 2012 and 2013. 47 million minus 36 million split which is 47 minus 18 still gives us 29 million under the cap. That is still plenty to work with. Less flexibility but I think we will be alright.
I am not the resident Cap expert 1niksider is but I think I am correct.

Bottom line is this. We are going to get our franchise QB. We have 20 plus million under the cap. We can still fill talent around RG3/Luck.

A couple of Skins beat reporters tweeted that they are trying to get confirmation on if this penalty affects the trade. It hasn't officially been submitted to the NFL yet I don't think.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:44 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
HEROHAMO wrote:I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do.

I understand but that's for those of us who'd truly like to understand or try to understand the situation in it's entirety.

Thats cool bro. I just dont want this to bring down the moral. Most are thinking this will handicap what the Skins can do. When in actuality it may or may not depending on how our FO handles this.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:47 pm

CanesSkins26 wrote:
HEROHAMO wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.

But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.

From a guy I'm discussing this with...

I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do. Isn't that what matters most? From what I see our team can still do plenty in free agency. It just means we have to not miss on our draft and free agent pick ups. Our pick ups and draftees must be good.

The reality is the Skins were 47 million under the cap. That far outweighs what any other team had under the cap. Now the league says the penalty is 36 million which could be split over 2012 and 2013. 47 million minus 36 million split which is 47 minus 18 still gives us 29 million under the cap. That is still plenty to work with. Less flexibility but I think we will be alright.
I am not the resident Cap expert 1niksider is but I think I am correct.

Bottom line is this. We are going to get our franchise QB. We have 20 plus million under the cap. We can still fill talent around RG3/Luck.

A couple of Skins beat reporters tweeted that they are trying to get confirmation on if this penalty affects the trade. It hasn't officially been submitted to the NFL yet I don't think.

If this affects the trade? THen I surely would be heartbroken and you wouldnt hear from me in a while. Crossing fingers. [-o<

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:47 pm

HEROHAMO wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
HEROHAMO wrote:I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do.

I understand but that's for those of us who'd truly like to understand or try to understand the situation in it's entirety.

Thats cool bro. I just dont want this to bring down the moral. Most are thinking this will handicap what the Skins can do. When in actuality it may or may not depending on how our FO handles this.

Or for those of us who are going into battle at work tomorrow.... I'm dreading it already.

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:48 pm

If its a dispute amoungst ownners let Danny and jerruh fork it out of pocket! I'm dreaming I know but this news jus sucks. Like when ferrot scored a td.... Yay go team... Then he injures himself on the wall... Well at least we got the td

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

Re: The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

Re: The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties