The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

rskin72 · Post by **rskin72** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:23 pm

I went this whole weekend with a huge grin on my face thinking of a new, and hopefully, good QB the trade would provide us. And, with the cap space we had, we could afford to be heavy shoppers in the free agent market.

My happiness died around 1630 when I first heard of this....and after reading several articles about how we violated some back room gentlemens agreement between teams in a un-capped season, I am still more confused. We seemed to have violated no written guidance, but rather circumvented the back room gentlemens agreement that the NFL dictated to try and regulate an uncapped year (another question is who on this team knew what about the NFL warning).....and now get "punishment" dictated by the league and supported by NFLPA one day prior to free agency???? Did the league provide us any prior notice that we were potentially facing penalities for violating an unwritten rule???

I have never been a fan of salary caps in any sport, and this just goes to reinforce my beliefs. Regardless of how much your owner wants to spend on a team, unless they spend correctly, and have appropriate front office and scout personnel on the payroll, the team will not flourish.

I am pretty depressed....and po'd at both the NFL (who tries to level the playing ground between owners who want to spend on their teams like Skins and Cowboys, and those that merely talk a good game) and my team who should have realized the consequences of something that it appears they were warned about....

Goodbye Free Agency, a run at Jackson would take most of our cap space up.......

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:35 pm

After a beer or two I'm cool again.. f it guys we still get rgiii and will be busy tomorrow inspite of this. The other owners cried and we pay. I don't blame our fo or anyone other then the officials that approved the deals we made. It's not the end of the world and unlike the pukes we still got money to blow. Head up Redskins Nation! At least Chomo isn't under center and Garrett our HC lmfao could be worse

mdk98w · Post by **mdk98w** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:43 pm

How does taking $36 mil away from a 5-11 team trying to get better, keep it "competitive".
All their doing is kicking someone who has already been beaten.

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:57 pm

Because we won rgiii without tanking the season like the Colts who get the top qb after only.one year of poor qb play vs our twenty.plus years of crappy to ok qb play. Makes perfect sense

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:59 pm

Your right bro. I am back already from shut down mode. Here is a good article about the whole thing. http://nfl.si.com/2012/03/12/nfl-hits-c ... cap-space/

The thing we have to remember that really helps us in this crappy situation is that we did have plenty of cap space to begin with. Also remember that the penalty can be split over two years. The penalty split over two years does not have to be 50/50 either. So our FO does have flexibility on how to take on this penalty. I think a 50/50 split would be the best way. But our FO has the choice of how the penalty will be split 25/75, 50/50, 75/25 whatever..

One more point. I think our FO knew this was coming. I think they knew a punishment was coming just not how severe it would be. They prepared for it the best they could by increasing the cap number as much as it could have.

So believe it or not. If my "calculations" are correct. Right now we stand at about. 50 million minus 18 million equals 32 million under the cap. We got about 4million more after releasing Atogwe and Sellers. We should be right around 32 million under the cap if we decide to do a fifty/fifty hit on the penalty. 1Niksider would love your input on this. I think I am mostly right though.

Shaner021 · Post by **Shaner021** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:18 pm

Per Adam Schefter a statement from the Redskins:

Redskins: "Every contract entered into by the club during the applicable periods (was) approved by the NFL commissioner’s office."

https://twitter.com/#!/AdamSchefter/sta ... 2981159937

Translation: Suck it, NFL.

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:32 pm

#f the NFL bodies responsible. Thanks for.affirming my belief that the fo wasn't the ones "responsible"

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:44 pm

Just another bump this team hits ridding itself of the bums that took up locker room and cap space. Ah well at least we still have options

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:49 pm

From Bruce Allen

“The Washington Redskins have received no written documentation from the NFL concerning adjustments to the team salary cap in 2012 as reported in various media outlets. Every contract entered into by the club during the applicable periods complied with the 2010 and 2011 collective bargaining agreements and, in fact, were approved by the NFL commissioner’s office. We look forward to free agency, the draft and the coming football season.”

Looks like they want the Skins to give up $36M in cap space over the next two years. It can be split up anyway the team wants to, that team in Texas has to give up $10M over two years.

Allen's statement sounds like he wants to give up $0M this yer and $0M next year.

This is basically for front loading so many deals, the Saints and Raiders did the same thing but aren't being punished in the same way as the Skins... they won't lose any money but won't get any of the money the Redskins and ttiT have to give up.

That's all I got right now.... when I know more I let everyone know. This morning I had the Skins with $25,810,437 to spend, taking into account the $3.46M they will need for performance based pay and the $7MI excluded for incoming rookies.

If the give back half what the NFL and NFLPA agreed that the need to that would drop the spending amount to $11M with the release of Sellers and OJ.

I'll be Back

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:58 pm

Am I the only person that breathed a sigh of relief after seeing Redskin1 posting? LOL

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:01 pm

The Cowboys released a simliar statement.

It is time for an unholy alliance.

PickSixerTWSS · Post by **PickSixerTWSS** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:05 pm

Shaner021 wrote: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

Dude......wtf, right under your thread there is a thread about the EXACT same topic. ](*,)

Shaner021 · Post by **Shaner021** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:09 pm

PickSixerTWSS wrote:Dude......wtf, right under your thread there is a thread about the EXACT same topic.

Sorry!

chiefhog44 · Post by **chiefhog44** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:17 pm

HEROHAMO wrote:Your right bro. I am back already from shut down mode. Here is a good article about the whole thing. http://nfl.si.com/2012/03/12/nfl-hits-c ... cap-space/

The thing we have to remember that really helps us in this crappy situation is that we did have plenty of cap space to begin with. Also remember that the penalty can be split over two years. The penalty split over two years does not have to be 50/50 either. So our FO does have flexibility on how to take on this penalty. I think a 50/50 split would be the best way. But our FO has the choice of how the penalty will be split 25/75, 50/50, 75/25 whatever..

One more point. I think our FO knew this was coming. I think they knew a punishment was coming just not how severe it would be. They prepared for it the best they could by increasing the cap number as much as it could have.

So believe it or not. If my "calculations" are correct. Right now we stand at about. 50 million minus 18 million equals 32 million under the cap. We got about 4million more after releasing Atogwe and Sellers. We should be right around 32 million under the cap if we decide to do a fifty/fifty hit on the penalty. 1Niksider would love your input on this. I think I am mostly right though.

And next years cap number goes up tremendously so we will have a bit of a cusion there as well

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:19 pm

This seems to sum it up....

Before the uncapped year of 2010, the NFL told the teams “at least six times” not to dump salaries into the uncapped year. But any agreement among the teams aimed at limiting spending in the uncapped year constitutes clear and obvious collusion.

The league approved the contracts when submitted because the union would have cried foul if the NFL had tried to apply limits to the uncapped year that didn’t exist in the CBA. All along, the league planned to serve up a cold plate of salary-cap revenge against the Cowboys and Redskins at a later date, at a time when the union would be inclined to agree to an after-the-fact effort to punish anyone who opted not to limit the players’ supply of cash in the months before the lockout.

In hindsight, the league’s effort to penalize the Redskins and Cowboys (and to a lesser extent the Raiders and Saints) proves that the NFL indeed had a plan in place to keep spending low, by not signing restricted free agents to offer sheets and/or by hiding behind internal budgets to justify a failure to aggressively spend in unrestricted free agency.

Or, as in the case of the Cowboys and Redskins, discouraging teams from taking advantage of the rules that applied at the time.

The union has opted not to pick at old scars, in large part because the league’s willingness to bump up the 2012 salary cap from $116 million to $120.6 million likely averted a mutiny against NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith, whose contract expires this month.

The the procedure for challenging the action isn’t clear, but the Cowboys and Redskins should fight. Though the NFL deftly persuaded the players to agree with the plan, the Cowboys and Redskins are being penalized for one simple reality.

They refused to engage in collusion.

Link

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:19 pm

cowboykillerzRED wrote:According to the carry over thread we might be around 45 million in cap space

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37552

What about this thread redskins1?? Shouldn't we be closer to 45 before said bonuses and rookie contracts?

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:34 pm

This is atrocious. I don't care if the League warned everyone 100 times; using nonspecific language that can be interpreted any number of ways was totally irresponsible. And on top of that, the NFL explicitly approved everything that we did at the time. There is no way to justify this bull crap ex post evaluation.

I'm stunned.

Either make a rule or don't. Don't hand wave in a direction and say "don't go too far over there!" and then expect to be able to dish out punishment two years later for any offenses you "discover."

Especially if, when people at the time kept asking "have I gone too far?" you tell them "Nope, you're fine!"

:explode:

Man, I hate Goodell. I guess it could be worse, but he is one dud of a commissioner. If this ends up costing us a legit franchise quarterback, I don't think I'll ever forgive the NFL for this. This is a massive screw up on their part.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:43 pm

But Bruce said that the NFL hasn't even contacted them and that they're proceeding along normally... Who are we to believe?

Jeremy81 · Post by **Jeremy81** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:57 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:This is atrocious. I don't care if the League warned everyone 100 times; using nonspecific language that can be interpreted any number of ways was totally irresponsible. And on top of that, the NFL explicitly approved everything that we did at the time. There is no way to justify this bull crap ex post evaluation.

I'm stunned.

Either make a rule or don't. Don't hand wave in a direction and say "don't go too far over there!" and then expect to be able to dish out punishment two years later for any offenses you "discover."

Especially if, when people at the time kept asking "have I gone too far?" you tell them "Nope, you're fine!"

Man, I hate Goodell. I guess it could be worse, but he is one dud of a commissioner. If this ends up costing us a legit franchise quarterback, I don't think I'll ever forgive the NFL for this. This is a massive screw up on their part.

+1...i agree completely

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:07 pm

This is from a Football Outsiders article in 2010, written by J I Halsel, who is a salary cap expert and spent time working for the Management Council and the Redskins...

As I’ve previously written, given the uncertainty of what 2011 holds, clubs who take advantage of the uncapped year by incurring high team salaries in 2010 run the risk of possibly being penalized in 2011 as part of a new salary cap and CBA. Clearly, this is a risk the Redskins are willing to take -- or perhaps they know something the rest of us don’t.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/under-cap/2010/under-cap-redskins-utilizing-uncapped-year

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:08 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:But Bruce said that the NFL hasn't even contacted them and that they're proceeding along normally... Who are we to believe?

The NFL put out a statement confirming it.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:12 pm

cowboykillerzRED wrote:
cowboykillerzRED wrote:According to the carry over thread we might be around 45 million in cap space

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37552

What about this thread redskins1?? Shouldn't we be closer to 45 before said bonuses and rookie contracts?

Since then they've re-signed Montgomery and Scott, tagged Davis and tendered Gano and Kory L.

Back to this possibly mess, this is from the League office

"The Management Council Executive Committee determined that the contract practices of a small number of clubs during the 2010 league year created an unacceptable risk to future competitive balance, particularly in light of the relatively modest salary cap growth projected for the new agreement's early years," the NFL said in a statement.

"To remedy these effects and preserve competitive balance throughout the league, the parties to the CBA agreed to adjustments to team salary for the 2012 and 2013 seasons. These agreed-upon adjustments were structured in a manner that will not affect the salary cap or player spending on a league-wide basis."

Again every contract was approved by that office... Are they saying these teams are being punished for contracts they approved? So why were they approved in the first place?

The answer is the same for both questions, disapproving those contracts would have proven the teams were keeping contracts low and had a set way of doing business in place or in other words COLLUSION. The NFLPA would have been all over the NFL.

Why did the NFLPA agree to this?

The NFLPA doesn't care, because the NFL is taking the money and spreading it among the rest of the teams in the cap pool. The players lose nothing.

There's a fight coming and the NFL is taking on the wrong two owners on this one

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:22 pm

CanesSkins26 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:But Bruce said that the NFL hasn't even contacted them and that they're proceeding along normally... Who are we to believe?

The NFL put out a statement confirming it.

That's not the same as informing the team, now, is it?

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:23 pm

Yeah, basically there's 30 owners who colluded against the NFLPA by refusing to re-work deals and pay players in 2011 to save future cap room. The Redskins and Cowboys refused.

The Redskins should fight tooth and nail against this. They would most likely settle, out of court, for a LOT less than a $36 million cap penalty.

rskin72 · Post by **rskin72** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:27 pm

Well, I don't know that I would confuse Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones with Al Davis' penchant for tweaking the nose of the NFL when he could......but certainly I hope our owners do not roll over and play dead for this...if we have all the facts.

Anyone have Lowell "The Hammer" Stanley's number handy?

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

The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

Buzz Kill

Re: The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

Re: The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

Al Davis