Countertrey wrote:Ummm... Godell doesn't have the power of veto over the owners... THEY employ HIM
He just screwed two of the people who "employ HIM"
So they took him out of the equation altogether....
The fact that the Redskins included the union in the grievance triggered the procedure that allows the teams to avoid a situation in which Commissioner Goodell resolves the matter. Instead, a true outsider will determine whether the action complied with the terms and/or the spirit of the labor deal.
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-
When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....
Deadskins wrote:There is a third option between the nuclear option and the bend-over-and-take-it option, and that's arbitration.
I actually think this will get resolved at the owners meeting starting today or tomorrow. Dan and JJ will force the owners to take a vote to make this cap hit official. The NFL won't get the required votes and the cap his will quietly go away. This is the best case situation for the NFL. The Skins and Cowgirls have already felt some punishment, by having to alter their FA plans. The NFL got their pound of flesh (vice the the arm and leg) they wanted and the Skins and Cowgirls get their cap back and come out looking like they won.
I think this just goes away.
That's step #1 and it may in there, if not it's on to arbitration (step #2) if neither option gets this resolved step three would be to take the league to court.
The only hold up to the owners resolving by a vote is the $1.6M the owners may have to give back, and what to do about the 2012 cap (considering it would have been around $114M if the room hadn't been taken from the teams.
A source with knowledge of the situation tells PFT that the Cowboys and Redskins have filed a formal grievance against the NFL, the NFL Management Council, and the NFL Players Association challenging the agreement to remove and redistribute cap space allocated to the Cowboys and Redskins in exchange for increasing the total salary cap for 2012 to $120.6 million per team.
Not many details currently are known about the grievance. The other 30 teams will receive a full briefing this week, at the league meetings in Florida.
Deadskins wrote:There is a third option between the nuclear option and the bend-over-and-take-it option, and that's arbitration.
I actually think this will get resolved at the owners meeting starting today or tomorrow. Dan and JJ will force the owners to take a vote to make this cap hit official. The NFL won't get the required votes and the cap his will quietly go away. This is the best case situation for the NFL. The Skins and Cowgirls have already felt some punishment, by having to alter their FA plans. The NFL got their pound of flesh (vice the the arm and leg) they wanted and the Skins and Cowgirls get their cap back and come out looking like they won.
I think this just goes away.
That's step #1 and it may in there, if not it's on to arbitration (step #2) if neither option gets this resolved step three would be to take the league to court.
The only hold up to the owners resolving by a vote is the $1.6M the owners may have to give back, and what to do about the 2012 cap (considering it would have been around $114M if the room hadn't been taken from the teams.
A source with knowledge of the situation tells PFT that the Cowboys and Redskins have filed a formal grievance against the NFL, the NFL Management Council, and the NFL Players Association challenging the agreement to remove and redistribute cap space allocated to the Cowboys and Redskins in exchange for increasing the total salary cap for 2012 to $120.6 million per team.
Not many details currently are known about the grievance. The other 30 teams will receive a full briefing this week, at the league meetings in Florida.
Countertrey wrote:Ummm... Godell doesn't have the power of veto over the owners... THEY employ HIM
He just screwed two of the people who "employ HIM"
This is a silly response, that is, essentially, non-responsive. Goodell, first of all, did not make this call. Mara did.
Second, IF Goodell has the backing of the "majority" of owners, he get's to screw members of the minority. If Goodell does NOT have the backing of the majority of owners, he looks for a new job.
How about returning with a cogent response?
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
For someone like Mara to "make this call" sounds illegal as well. Considering his franchise stands to benefit from it more than anyone else.
Add in the fact that there were other teams, particularly the Bears and Packers who did exactly the same thing and, were untouched.
I think Snyder and Jones need to set their sights directly on Mara, something sounds awefully fishy there.
I mean, if you can give your company an advantage by penalizing your competitors. Especially when you are in a position of power to enforce such a thing
How is that much different than what he's accusing Snyder and Jones of doing?
jmooney wrote:For someone like Mara to "make this call" sounds illegal as well. Considering his franchise stands to benefit from it more than anyone else.
Ya think?
How is that much different than what he's accusing Snyder and Jones of doing?
Ya think?
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
Countertrey wrote:Ummm... Godell doesn't have the power of veto over the owners... THEY employ HIM
He just screwed two of the people who "employ HIM"
This is a silly response, that is, essentially, non-responsive. Goodell, first of all, did not make this call. Mara did.
Second, IF Goodell has the backing of the "majority" of owners, he get's to screw members of the minority. If Goodell does NOT have the backing of the majority of owners, he looks for a new job.
How about returning with a cogent response?
It's completely responsive. He could have told Mara that he needs to take it up with the owners. It's a dispute between owners and even more so it's division rivals. Mara may have been irked, but he's have had to understand that. It wouldn't have had a long term impact. On the other hand he was willing to burn two bridges to stick his nose in a dispute he had an easy out of. If you were the owner of another team in another division, wouldn't it bother you that he could screw you based on an accusation of one of the rivals in your division?
Hail to the Redskins!
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him
Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way
KazooSkinsFan wrote:If you were the owner of another team in another division, wouldn't it bother you that he could screw you based on an accusation of one of the rivals in your division?
Countertrey wrote:Ummm... Godell doesn't have the power of veto over the owners... THEY employ HIM
He just screwed two of the people who "employ HIM"
This is a silly response, that is, essentially, non-responsive. Goodell, first of all, did not make this call. Mara did.
Second, IF Goodell has the backing of the "majority" of owners, he get's to screw members of the minority. If Goodell does NOT have the backing of the majority of owners, he looks for a new job.
How about returning with a cogent response?
It's completely responsive. He could have told Mara that he needs to take it up with the owners. It's a dispute between owners and even more so it's division rivals. Mara may have been irked, but he's have had to understand that. It wouldn't have had a long term impact. On the other hand he was willing to burn two bridges to stick his nose in a dispute he had an easy out of. If you were the owner of another team in another division, wouldn't it bother you that he could screw you based on an accusation of one of the rivals in your division?
Problem: The Fat lady has yet to sing. We have no idea what the power structure is among these committees... This one appears to be the most powerful, and politically potent. Mara speaks, Goodell acts.
I suspect that both have severely over-reached. It's possible that the league will find some face saving way to back out of this by the end of the owner's meetings this week.
Wouldn't you just love to be a fly on the wall?
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
Countertrey wrote:I suspect that both have severely over-reached. It's possible that the league will find some face saving way to back out of this by the end of the owner's meetings this week.
Wouldn't you just love to be a fly on the wall?
Heck yeah. I'm curious too where the owners come down on this. Is it all the less profitable teams vs. the richer teams?
Nor would I... and, I wouldn't be surprized to find that Kraft and Rooney are involved as well... also "not less than profitable"...
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
The NFL has no plans to penalize the Washington Redskins over allegations that the team’s defensive players had an improper bounty program when Gregg Williams oversaw the defense between the 2004 and 2007 seasons, according to a person with knowledge of the league’s investigation.
Houston, Detroit and N.Y. Giants are all roughly 700,000 over the NFL's salary cap, according to a league source. Houston can take their cap exception from the Redskins and Cowboys and get under the cap but the Giants and Lions will have to make a move or restructure contracts to get under cap. They have until Wednesday to get under the cap.
I've got the Skins sitting at right over $7M in space... That's more that ten times what the gints have and they used some of Washington's money
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-
When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....
Houston, Detroit and N.Y. Giants are all roughly 700,000 over the NFL's salary cap, according to a league source. Houston can take their cap exception from the Redskins and Cowboys and get under the cap but the Giants and Lions will have to make a move or restructure contracts to get under cap. They have until Wednesday to get under the cap.
I've got the Skins sitting at right over $7M in space... That's more that ten times what the gints have and they used some of Washington's money
what's your count for recent super bowl titles vs last place finishes? right,
We might want to revisit this, in light of the NFL's own filings.
what a mess - I'd agree that the NFLPA is most likely going to lose in Doty's court, but I doubt that anything changes as far as the Skins and pukes are concerned
this is just a HUGE mess
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
We might want to revisit this, in light of the NFL's own filings.
what a mess - I'd agree that the NFLPA is most likely going to lose in Doty's court, but I doubt that anything changes as far as the Skins and pukes are concerned
this is just a HUGE mess
If someone accepts the settlement offer and cashes the check, they can't turn around and sue you anyway. I blasted the players for this exact reason at the time and I got a bunch of flack that the players had "no choice." Well, now the NFL is safe, they can admit to whatever they want. There is no mess at all for them. The NFLPA sold us out, with friends like that....
Hail to the Redskins!
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him
Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way
We might want to revisit this, in light of the NFL's own filings.
what a mess - I'd agree that the NFLPA is most likely going to lose in Doty's court, but I doubt that anything changes as far as the Skins and pukes are concerned
this is just a HUGE mess
If someone accepts the settlement offer and cashes the check, they can't turn around and sue you anyway. I blasted the players for this exact reason at the time and I got a bunch of flack that the players had "no choice." Well, now the NFL is safe, they can admit to whatever they want. There is no mess at all for them. The NFLPA sold us out, with friends like that....
True for the NFLPA, not true for the Skins and Pies.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
kaz wrote:If someone accepts the settlement offer and cashes the check, they can't turn around and sue you anyway. I blasted the players for this exact reason at the time and I got a bunch of flack that the players had "no choice." Well, now the NFL is safe, they can admit to whatever they want. There is no mess at all for them. The NFLPA sold us out, with friends like that....
True for the NFLPA, not true for the Skins and Pies.
Not sure what that means exactly. If you mean it's not "fair" then I agree. If you mean it's not "legal" then you're going to have to be more specific. I doubt Danny and Jerry would have dropped this if they saw a legal remedy.
Hail to the Redskins!
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him
Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way
They can still take the NFL to court. And now they have the NFL's own court filing that they did no wrong to use against them. This is considered the nuclear option, though, because taking the NFL to court exposes the league (and by extension, the Skins and Pies) to antitrust violations. But I bet, if they did file, the NFL would quickly settle before it ever got that far.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
