http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/foo ... p-penalty/


Annnnnd....this is if Danny boy wants to join up with them

Maybe because the players union totally screwed us over wen they agreed to the cap hit in the first place? Duh!“The real question is why [the Redskins] didn’t seek to join in some action by the players,” the person said. “After all, the players’ theory is that [the Redskins] didn’t violate the rules and were punished for not agreeing to the conspiracy…. I’m a bit at a loss why they wouldn’t. At the very least, if you were [the Redskins], wouldn’t you cooperate with the players’ case?”
Hog Bowl IV Champion (2012)Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
ANDDeadskins wrote:Maybe because the players union totally screwed us over wen they agreed to the cap hit in the first place? Duh!“The real question is why [the Redskins] didn’t seek to join in some action by the players,” the person said. “After all, the players’ theory is that [the Redskins] didn’t violate the rules and were punished for not agreeing to the conspiracy…. I’m a bit at a loss why they wouldn’t. At the very least, if you were [the Redskins], wouldn’t you cooperate with the players’ case?”
The other person familiar with the situation confirmed that the union would be interested in joint legal action with the team but said the Redskins haven’t given that serious consideration because they “don’t think there was collusion.”
For a moment I figured this wouldn't get any more confusing.1niksder wrote:ANDDeadskins wrote:Maybe because the players union totally screwed us over wen they agreed to the cap hit in the first place? Duh!“The real question is why [the Redskins] didn’t seek to join in some action by the players,” the person said. “After all, the players’ theory is that [the Redskins] didn’t violate the rules and were punished for not agreeing to the conspiracy…. I’m a bit at a loss why they wouldn’t. At the very least, if you were [the Redskins], wouldn’t you cooperate with the players’ case?”
The other person familiar with the situation confirmed that the union would be interested in joint legal action with the team but said the Redskins haven’t given that serious consideration because they “don’t think there was collusion.”
Oh, I'm pretty sure they know there was collusion, but they can't be a party to any lawsuit that says so.HTTRRG3ALMO wrote:For a moment I figured this wouldn't get any more confusing.1niksder wrote:ANDDeadskins wrote: Maybe because the players union totally screwed us over wen they agreed to the cap hit in the first place? Duh!
The other person familiar with the situation confirmed that the union would be interested in joint legal action with the team but said the Redskins haven’t given that serious consideration because they “don’t think there was collusion.”
If the Skins don't think there was a collusion then why have they tried anything (speaking about the past here) at all? I know the latest lawsuit talk are currently "rumor status".
Hog Bowl IV Champion (2012)Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
I posted this one before his thread...I'm quick on the draw todayDeadskins wrote:Oh, I'm pretty sure they know there was collusion, but they can't be a party to any lawsuit that says so.HTTRRG3ALMO wrote:For a moment I figured this wouldn't get any more confusing.1niksder wrote: AND
If the Skins don't think there was a collusion then why have they tried anything (speaking about the past here) at all? I know the latest lawsuit talk are currently "rumor status".
P.S. Hows about breaking this conversation out to the new thread Darth started?
DoneDeadskins wrote: P.S. Hows about breaking this conversation out to the new thread Darth started?
If there was collusion Peppers won't have gotten a front loaded contract that paid him $26M in year one of the deal. Yep, the same contract that dumped $22M+ in cap space from a six year/$90M+ deal into the un-capped year and re-worked after the cap returned.Deadskins wrote: Oh, I'm pretty sure they know there was collusion, but they can't be a party to any lawsuit that says so.
The Skins simple say they did nothing wrong, the contracts they were punished for were approved by the NFL and they still write the same type of contracts. They are saying they don't understand why they were punished... The NFL's stand is they dumped future cap space into a uncapped year... Collusion would have to effect the money spent and player's contracts, this was about moving future pro-rations (old Money) into the current (uncapped) year. The Bears dropped twice as much money into the uncapped year with Pepper's than TtiT did with Austin's deal, but they went with a small signing bonus and a big year one base. The Skins re-worked old deals and added buyout option that pushed all outstanding allocations for bonus money paid into the current (uncapped) year to the deal.HTTRRG3ALMO wrote:For a moment I figured this wouldn't get any more confusing.1niksder wrote:ANDDeadskins wrote: Maybe because the players union totally screwed us over wen they agreed to the cap hit in the first place? Duh!
The other person familiar with the situation confirmed that the union would be interested in joint legal action with the team but said the Redskins haven’t given that serious consideration because they “don’t think there was collusion.”
If the Skins don't think there was a collusion then why have they tried anything (speaking about the past here) at all? I know the latest lawsuit talk are currently "rumor status".
Skinsfan55 wrote:The team is wussing out. In order to join the NFLPA in a suit, they would have to agree that the NFL colluded against the players association. The Redskins are unwilling to do that, even though they would almost certainly recoup some cap space.
They are... But you also gotta think further ahead than the 2013 season. We don't wanna get screwed in 2025 because some people are still bitter about things.Skinsfan55 wrote:The team is wussing out. In order to join the NFLPA in a suit, they would have to agree that the NFL colluded against the players association. The Redskins are unwilling to do that, even though they would almost certainly recoup some cap space.
Yep, we gotta think further than 1 season. We'll be in prime position next year. Hopefully RGIII will enter it completely healthy.brad7686 wrote:I guess on the bright side we'll be 18 mil under the cap next season. I'm not enthralled with this year's FA class anyway.
That's the hardest part for me; waiting another year. Makes me nervous to put RG3 on the field but that's just being extreme w/ worries.Chris Luva Luva wrote:Yep, we gotta think further than 1 season. We'll be in prime position next year. Hopefully RGIII will enter it completely healthy.brad7686 wrote:I guess on the bright side we'll be 18 mil under the cap next season. I'm not enthralled with this year's FA class anyway.
Thanks....I think? Been working some long hours recently so have not had a chance to track on my Redskin forums as I would like. But, this collusion discussion just straight torques me off as I have read a bit about both sides....and I just do not see how you can get around the nugget that it was an uncapped season, and the NFL signed off on our deals. Then add to that the statement by Mara and the NFL that all teams were warned not to exceed an imaginary salary cap number......SkinsJock wrote:... welcome back ......