Contract talks on hold - working to recoup cap space

SKINS#1 · Post by **SKINS#1** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:05 pm

The following article in the Washington Post indicates there may some hope for the Redskins to recoup some cap space.

"The Redskins have put contract negotiations with some of their players on hold, telling agents and players they remain hopeful they can recoup some of the salary cap space that was cut by the NFL last year, according to several people familiar with the situation.
Redskins officials have told those agents and players that they cannot negotiate in earnest until the salary cap matter is resolved. The players include some eligible for free agency in March and others who face the possibility of release unless their contracts are reworked, those people said. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because the team does not want such issues discussed publicly.
The team has told parties involved that it hopes to reach a resolution by late this week."

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:29 pm

Is there a link?

SKINS#1 · Post by **SKINS#1** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:04 pm

Try this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/foo ... cap-space/

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:09 pm

Just saw on twitter that there is a rumor out there that the Redskins are looking into suing the NFL to hold up free agency until this matter is resolved.

I'm not sure if it'll work but what I think it could do is suspend free agency which would tick off all the other owners and hopefully they'll just settle on a number with the Redskins so they can get something back, if not all.

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:10 pm

SKINS#1 wrote:Try this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/foo ... cap-space/

with this update:

Update: 3:37: Redskins officials have told people in the league that they are considering going to court to seek an injunction that would hold up the start of free agency or threatening that move in a bid to bolster their negotiating leverage with the league. Those conversations were confirmed by two people with knowledge of them.

Both said that the Redskins have compelling arguments they could make in an attempt to convince a judge that they would suffer irreparable harm if they are not granted an injunction. But others familiar with the case have said they don’t believe the Redskins have legal arguments that weren’t already considered, and rejected, by an arbitrator.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:29 pm

DarthMonk wrote:... others familiar with the case have said they don’t believe the Redskins have legal arguments that weren’t already considered, and rejected, by an arbitrator.

sorry - when did this happen?

Kilmer72 · Post by **Kilmer72** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:36 pm

frankcal20 wrote:Just saw on twitter that there is a rumor out there that the Redskins are looking into suing the NFL to hold up free agency until this matter is resolved.

I'm not sure if it'll work but what I think it could do is suspend free agency which would tick off all the other owners and hopefully they'll just settle on a number with the Redskins so they can get something back, if not all.

Or a bluff. If they do this I wonder if the Cowboys will jump on board?

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:49 pm

Kilmer72 wrote:
frankcal20 wrote:Just saw on twitter that there is a rumor out there that the Redskins are looking into suing the NFL to hold up free agency until this matter is resolved.

I'm not sure if it'll work but what I think it could do is suspend free agency which would tick off all the other owners and hopefully they'll just settle on a number with the Redskins so they can get something back, if not all.

Or a bluff. If they do this I wonder if the Cowboys will jump on board?

I would imagine it would be a collaborative effort being that both teams benefit if the ruling goes through.

Kilmer72 · Post by **Kilmer72** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:58 pm

I really like the timing of this. This doesn't give the NFL much time to think about how to resolve this. Just like they did to us, we are not giving them time to think.

fetus · Post by **fetus** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:09 pm

hell yeah

suck it mara
and eat me goodell

I am loving this, give me back my money!

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:10 pm

For the record I think the Redskins in hope of something working but realistically we won't get any of the money back?

SouthLondonRedskin · Post by **SouthLondonRedskin** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:06 pm

I'm not sure I like this...

Whilst I don't advocate laying down and taking crap usually, I get the feeling too much is stacked against us in this. Even if we win this battle we'll lose the war, they'll do us over in a different way.

Goodell will have our card marked for sure...

:-&

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:41 pm

SkinsJock wrote:
DarthMonk wrote:... others familiar with the case have said they don’t believe the Redskins have legal arguments that weren’t already considered, and rejected, by an arbitrator.

sorry - when did this happen?

Posted at 12:05 PM ET, 05/22/2012
Arbitrator dismisses Redskins’, Cowboys’ salary cap appeal
By Mark Maske

An arbitrator Tuesday dismissed the challenge by the Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys to salary cap cuts imposed by the league in March.

Arbitrator Stephen Burbank ruled that the NFL and its players union had properly amended their collective bargaining agreement and the two teams could not challenge the decision.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/foo ... _blog.html

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:22 pm

DarthMonk wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:
DarthMonk wrote:... others familiar with the case have said they don’t believe the Redskins have legal arguments that weren’t already considered, and rejected, by an arbitrator.

sorry - when did this happen?

Posted at 12:05 PM ET, 05/22/2012
Arbitrator dismisses Redskins’, Cowboys’ salary cap appeal
By Mark Maske

An arbitrator Tuesday dismissed the challenge by the Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys to salary cap cuts imposed by the league in March.

Arbitrator Stephen Burbank ruled that the NFL and its players union had properly amended their collective bargaining agreement and the two teams could not challenge the decision.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/foo ... _blog.html

Nope, the arbitrator did not reject any legal arguments. He just said the skins had to sue in court to use them.

burgngold4life · Post by **burgngold4life** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:21 am

Don't know if getting on Goodell's bad side is such a good idea.

There will be yellow all over the ground all season long for starters. lol

GFlanagan3 · Post by **GFlanagan3** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:35 am

burgngold4life wrote:Don't know if getting on Goodell's bad side is such a good idea.

There will be yellow all over the ground all season long for starters. lol

like THAT is new???

fetus · Post by **fetus** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:43 am

burgngold4life wrote:Don't know if getting on Goodell's bad side is such a good idea.

There will be yellow all over the ground all season long for starters. lol

is this any different from any other year????[/b]

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:20 pm

Report: TtiT will not join Redskins in fight over cap penalties

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:19 pm

frankcal20 wrote:Just saw on twitter that there is a rumor out there that the Redskins are looking into suing the NFL to hold up free agency until this matter is resolved.

I'm not sure if it'll work but what I think it could do is suspend free agency which would tick off all the other owners and hopefully they'll just settle on a number with the Redskins so they can get something back, if not all.

It's "the Danny" coming out of hiding...

The Skins got hit with the cap penalty right before the start of free agency last off season, now they are attempting to control when free agency will start this off season. :twisted:

The aren't going to court to get the cap space back, they are trying to hold up the start of free agency based on the notion they will take the cap penalty to court. I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on the interweb :wink:

So maybe I can get some help here....

To get the Injunction, don't the Skins have to show that there is a very good chance that they would win they case in order to prove the normal start of free agency would put them at a "competitive" disadvantage :roll:

It's like a cap penalty court case prior to the threatened cap penalty court case. Right :?:

If they get the Injunction, wouldn't it be in the best interest of the Owners to give some of the cap space back, considering the start of such a court battle would open the door back open for the NFLPA :?:

With collusion coming back into play, what will the U.S. Government do considering the NFL has a antitrust exemption :shock:

I'm thinking if they get the Injunction the NFL will cave... in doing so nothing goes public, meaning no Congressional Sub-committees, and the NFLPA will still have no leg to stand on.

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:49 pm

Deadskins wrote:Nope, the arbitrator did not reject any legal arguments. He just said the skins had to sue in court to use them.

Oh, so he accepted a legal argument. Wait, he "dismissed a challenge" that contained no legal argument.

:roll:

<---- eyes of the world :wink:

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:47 pm

DarthMonk wrote:
Deadskins wrote:Nope, the arbitrator did not reject any legal arguments. He just said the skins had to sue in court to use them.

Oh, so he accepted a legal argument. Wait, he "dismissed a challenge" that contained no legal argument.

<---- eyes of the world

He said the Skins had a legal argument, but that he wasn't the right venue to air that argument. all he could rule on was whether or not the league had the ability to impose the sanctions, not the validity of said sanctions under the law. He made a point, at the end of his decision, of saying that the Skins arguments had legal merit, but that the courts were the only place they could argue them. His hands were tied by the league's bylaws.

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 10:18 pm

^ dig it

HTTRRG3ALMO · Post by **HTTRRG3ALMO** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:39 am

Kilmer72 wrote:I really like the timing of this. This doesn't give the NFL much time to think about how to resolve this. Just like they did to us, we are not giving them time to think.

Great comment brother! Agree 100%

About your previous comment, I don't think this is a bluff. I mean even if it is, this could get really ugly really fast; to the point of possibly even causing issues with the upcoming season. Don't think it would go that far, but it seems that the Skins front office is in survival mode...people get crazy in survival mode lol

Hopefully the NFL will give back at least some. If there is delay to the upcoming season (not reason to believe so just yet), that's just more R & R for our dear ol RG3

HTTRRG3ALMO · Post by **HTTRRG3ALMO** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:02 am

1niksder wrote:
frankcal20 wrote:Just saw on twitter that there is a rumor out there that the Redskins are looking into suing the NFL to hold up free agency until this matter is resolved.

I'm not sure if it'll work but what I think it could do is suspend free agency which would tick off all the other owners and hopefully they'll just settle on a number with the Redskins so they can get something back, if not all.

It's "the Danny" coming out of hiding...

The Skins got hit with the cap penalty right before the start of free agency last off season, now they are attempting to control when free agency will start this off season.

The aren't going to court to get the cap space back, they are trying to hold up the start of free agency based on the notion they will take the cap penalty to court. I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on the interweb

So maybe I can get some help here....

To get the Injunction, don't the Skins have to show that there is a very good chance that they would win they case in order to prove the normal start of free agency would put them at a "competitive" disadvantage

It's like a cap penalty court case prior to the threatened cap penalty court case. Right

If they get the Injunction, wouldn't it be in the best interest of the Owners to give some of the cap space back, considering the start of such a court battle would open the door back open for the NFLPA

With collusion coming back into play, what will the U.S. Government do considering the NFL has a antitrust exemption

I'm thinking if they get the Injunction the NFL will cave... in doing so nothing goes public, meaning no Congressional Sub-committees, and the NFLPA will still have no leg to stand on.

I think the most reasonable thing would be to give us partial amount back this year.

We deserve it all IMO but if it were the Cowboys, I'd be all like "they cheated!! Don't give them nothing back!!" Buuuuut its the Redskins so its cool

But seriously, having it all back over a period of two years (sound familiar? :twisted:

) would be ideal, but I'd take partial and out of court settlement any day.

I'd love to play internet lawyer...

We could throw him into a pit with those man eating trolls or something...or of course midgets...very aroused, very angry midgets.

We'll spray paint the Redskins logo in the dirt with some yard markers. You know, the same way we rock Fedex Field.

Only thing I haven't figured out yet, is how we're going to get all those lonely midgets out afterwards

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:23 am

HTTRRG3ALMO wrote:If there is delay to the upcoming season (not reason to believe so just yet), that's just more R & R for our dear ol RG3

No one's talking about delaying the season, just the start of free agency.