Page 9 of 15
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:18 pm
by Prowl33
riggofan wrote:The Hogster wrote:The arbitrator for matters involving the NFL is generally determined by the CBA. I don't know Burbank. But, he's a colleague of Andrew Brandt--who is definitely not an NFL puppet. Roger Kaplan has also been fair, and I'd expect Burbank to be the same.
Is it unusual that we still don't have a date set for arbitration? Seems like this is kind of a time sensitive issue.
I don't think it's time sensitive at all. Why would the Redskins really want the cap space back this year... The biggest part of FA is over. If I were the skins, I would want them to take what we were docked this year, and add it on to next year... plus, they would have to take that extra 1.2 million or whatever that every other team got this year, and take it away from them next year.
Then we could front load some more contracts, and get penalized all over again... lol
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:07 am
by DarthMonk
I think I found out the names of the 8 men that are actually on the NFL Management Council Executive Committee which punished us and the Cowboys.
1 John Mara, Giants (Chairman)
2 Mike Brown, Bengals
3 Clark Hunt, Chiefs
4 Jerry Jones, Cowboys
LINK
5 Robert Kraft, Patriots
6 Mark Murphy, Packers (former player union rep?)
7 Art Rooney, Steelers
8 Dean Spanos, Chargers
Note that the oldest male money in the league (Good Old Boys) is, Brown, Hunt, Mara, and Rooney money. All 4 are on this committee. That's half of 'em. Kraft is also old money. Jones (and Snyder) are punks. Murphy represents but does not own. Spanos had an original stake in the Chargers ... I think.
DarthMonk
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:29 am
by Deadskins
DarthMonk wrote:I think I found out the names of the 8 men that are actually on the NFL Management Council Executive Committee which punished us and the Cowboys.
1 John Mara, Giants (Chairman)
2 Mike Brown, Bengals
3 Clark Hunt, Chiefs
4 Jerry Jones, Cowboys
LINK5 Robert Kraft, Patriots
6 Mark Murphy, Packers (former player union rep?)
7 Art Rooney, Steelers
8 Dean Spanos, Chargers
Note that the oldest male money in the league (Good Old Boys) is, Brown, Hunt, Mara, and Rooney money. All 4 are on this committee. That's half of 'em. Kraft is also old money. Jones (and Snyder) are punks. Murphy represents but does not own. Spanos had an original stake in the Chargers ... I think.
DarthMonk
Yeah, Jones is on the council, which is what makes the deal all that much more shady. This was some backroom dealing by Mara when Jerrah wasn't around.
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:58 am
by Countertrey
Mark Murphy is a treasonous scumbag? Say it ain't so!
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:51 am
by SkinsJock
Deadskins wrote:I think agreeing to settle this before the arbitrator means there is no taking it to court.
Not sure that this isn't still going to arbitration - that's happening IMHO
the NFLPA has basically taken the collusion issue out of the concern here
that was what I was looking for clarification on
I also think that the pukes and the Redskins are kind of tied to what the arbitrator decides and I doubt this goes any further after his decision
no matter which side likes the decision or not
there seems to be some sentiment (outside of our obviously biased feelings) that the Redskins and pukes were more severely punished than was needed
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:56 am
by Deadskins
SkinsJock wrote:Deadskins wrote:I think agreeing to settle this before the arbitrator means there is no taking it to court.
Not sure that this isn't still going to arbitration - that's happening IMHO
Of course it's happening. May 10th. Who said any different?
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:21 am
by 1niksder
Deadskins wrote:SkinsJock wrote:Deadskins wrote:I think agreeing to settle this before the arbitrator means there is no taking it to court.
Not sure that this isn't still going to arbitration - that's happening IMHO
Of course it's happening. May 10th. Who said any different?
If the Skins aren't happy with the arbitration outcome, they may not go to court with it but you can bet they'll threaten to take it to the courts as it will be a option.
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:03 pm
by 1niksder
League requests dismissal of Cowboys, Redskins grievance
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the NFL has tried to block the hearing by submitting a request to dismiss the grievance.
The NFL contends that, because the NFL Players Association consented to the imposition of cap penalties, the Cowboys and Redskins have no grounds to attack the agreement under the Collective Bargaining Agreement, which governs the relationship between the league and the players.
Of course, if that argument prevails, the Cowboys and Redskins could be forced to pursue other avenues of relief. Ultimately, the Cowboys and Redskins could choose to claim that the sanctions against them arise from an effort by the NFL to engage in collusion during the uncapped year.
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:54 pm
by SkinsJock
1niksder wrote:Deadskins wrote:SkinsJock wrote:Deadskins wrote:I think agreeing to settle this before the arbitrator means there is no taking it to court.
Not sure that this isn't still going to arbitration - that's happening IMHO
Of course it's happening. May 10th. Who said any different?
If the Skins aren't happy with the arbitration outcome, they may not go to court with it but you can bet they'll threaten to take it to the courts as it will be a option.
sorry mate - you said - "there is no taking it to court"
I think that might happen if ...
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:12 am
by 1niksder
SkinsJock wrote:1niksder wrote:Deadskins wrote:SkinsJock wrote:Deadskins wrote:I think agreeing to settle this before the arbitrator means there is no taking it to court.
Not sure that this isn't still going to arbitration - that's happening IMHO
Of course it's happening. May 10th. Who said any different?
If the Skins aren't happy with the arbitration outcome, they may not go to court with it but you can bet they'll threaten to take it to the courts as it will be a option.
sorry mate - you said - "there is no taking it to court"
I think that might happen if ...
You quoted me and highlighted what DS wrote
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:38 am
by Deadskins
SkinsJock wrote:Deadskins wrote:SkinsJock wrote:Deadskins wrote:I think agreeing to settle this before the arbitrator means there is no taking it to court.
Not sure that this isn't still going to arbitration - that's happening IMHO
Of course it's happening. May 10th. Who said any different?
sorry mate - you said - "there is no taking it to court"
I think that might happen if ...
I said,
by taking it to arbitration there is no taking it to court, and you responded with, "Not sure that this isn't still going to arbitration - that's happening"
Time to get your prescription checked, gramps.
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:32 am
by SkinsJock
that's semantics
let me help you ... if that's even possible
this BS is going to be looked at & adjudicated by an arbitrator
that is just another type of 'court' ...
an arbitrator is just another judge - he typically operates in an abitration court
have a great day
you might even add an asterisk to this effort to derail this - Im done
BOT - hopefully we get some satisfaction here sooner than later
and
that idiot Mara gets a little put down by this as well
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:01 pm
by Deadskins
SkinsJock wrote:that is just another type of 'court'
Uh huh, sure SJ.
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:18 pm
by The Hogster
SkinsJock wrote:that's semantics
let me help you ... if that's even possible
this BS is going to be looked at & adjudicated by an arbitrator
that is just another type of 'court' ...
an arbitrator is just another judge - he typically operates in an abitration court
have a great day
you might even add an asterisk to this effort to derail this - Im done
BOT - hopefully we get some satisfaction here sooner than later
and
that idiot Mara gets a little put down by this as well
Arbitration is not court. If it were, it would be court. The arbitrator in this case is a law professor.--not a judge.
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 8:14 am
by rick301
How's this for settlement compensation?
1. Restore the CAP space. Its a little late for that to really help us fully this year but unused CAP rolls over into the next year.
2. Replace Mara with Snyder as Chair of the NFL Management Council Executive Committee. That will really get the attention of the other council members that were in collusion with Mara.
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 8:30 am
by Deadskins
Nah, The Danny would probably abuse the power even worse. I say just neuter Mara, and give the Skins the G-strings' draft picks next year.
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:40 am
by skinsfan#33
Deadskins wrote:Nah, The Danny would probably abuse the power even worse. I say just neuter Mara, and give the Skins the G-strings' draft picks next year.
Yeah we should get their fsecond this year and their first next year. The cowgirls can have the Gints 4th this year and 3rd next year.
Make Mara pay for using his possition of power gain an unfair advantage over two division rivals!
By the way, when did Mara get so much pull within the NFL? This offseason he seams to be at the center of a lot of NFL decission. Who died and made him boss?
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:08 pm
by Deadskins
skinsfan#33 wrote:Who died and made him boss?
His dad.
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:41 pm
by skinsfan#33
Deadskins wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:Who died and made him boss?
His dad.
LMAO!
I meant the NFL, not the Gints.
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:00 pm
by DarthMonk
skinsfan#33 wrote:Deadskins wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:Who died and made him boss?
His dad.
LMAO!
I meant the NFL, not the Gints.
Deadman is still right!
Halas didn't leave his daughter in charge.
DarthMonk
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:50 pm
by 1niksder
The Hogster wrote:SkinsJock wrote:that's semantics
let me help you ... if that's even possible
this BS is going to be looked at & adjudicated by an arbitrator
that is just another type of 'court' ...
an arbitrator is just another judge - he typically operates in an abitration court
have a great day
you might even add an asterisk to this effort to derail this - Im done
BOT - hopefully we get some satisfaction here sooner than later
and
that idiot Mara gets a little put down by this as well
Arbitration is not court. If it were, it would be court. The arbitrator in this case is a law professor.--not a judge.
Might get settled before next weeks hearing... the Grapevine say the Redskins are expecting to get back between $5M-$8M in cap space this season and the full $18M next season with the deal being discussed. No word on draft picks as compensation
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:56 pm
by Deadskins
1niksder wrote:The Hogster wrote:SkinsJock wrote:that's semantics
let me help you ... if that's even possible
this BS is going to be looked at & adjudicated by an arbitrator
that is just another type of 'court' ...
an arbitrator is just another judge - he typically operates in an abitration court
have a great day
you might even add an asterisk to this effort to derail this - Im done
BOT - hopefully we get some satisfaction here sooner than later
and
that idiot Mara gets a little put down by this as well
Arbitration is not court. If it were, it would be court. The arbitrator in this case is a law professor.--not a judge.
Might get settled before next weeks hearing... the Grapevine say the Redskins are expecting to get back between $5M-$8M in cap space this season and the full $18M next season with the deal being discussed. No word on draft picks as compensation
What happens to the $1.6 million allocated to the other teams? And I still don't like losing $10-$13 million this year, or the timing of it. We need some compensation!
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:00 pm
by 1niksder
Deadskins wrote:1niksder wrote:The Hogster wrote:SkinsJock wrote:that's semantics
let me help you ... if that's even possible
this BS is going to be looked at & adjudicated by an arbitrator
that is just another type of 'court' ...
an arbitrator is just another judge - he typically operates in an abitration court
have a great day
you might even add an asterisk to this effort to derail this - Im done
BOT - hopefully we get some satisfaction here sooner than later
and
that idiot Mara gets a little put down by this as well
Arbitration is not court. If it were, it would be court. The arbitrator in this case is a law professor.--not a judge.
Might get settled before next weeks hearing... the Grapevine say the Redskins are expecting to get back between $5M-$8M in cap space this season and the full $18M next season with the deal being discussed. No word on draft picks as compensation
What happens to the $1.6 million allocated to the other teams? And I still don't like losing $10-$13 million this year, or the timing of it. We need some compensation!
Still looking for details
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:00 pm
by andyjens89
Maybe they will give us the Saints 2nd rounder for next year that they lost. Then they won't have to make up any phantom picks
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:14 pm
by Countertrey
If the league is discussing a settlement of that size, that is an acknowledgement that they know they are on the wrong end. Snyder should push hard for compensation... hopefully something that takes a chunk out of that vindictive little girl, Mara...