Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:55 pm
It is UK. That is what gets me to. The league hates us and if we deserve it why didn't someone say anything at the time or between now and then?
Washington football community discussions spanning the Redskins to Commanders era. 20+ years of game analysis, player discussions, and fan perspectives.
https://the-hogs.net/messageboard/
It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.
But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.
Kilmer72 wrote:Hogster you are a Lawyer. What can we do?
Chris Luva Luva wrote:I read that the other owners wanted Dan and Jerry to be disciplined for breaking that informal agreement.
Chris Luva Luva wrote:It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.
But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.
From a guy I'm discussing this with...
SprintRightOption wrote:Chris Luva Luva wrote:It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.
But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.
From a guy I'm discussing this with...
Assuming the new CBA included a provision against and anti-trust lawsuit, that provision is unlawful. You cannot include in a contract a provision that violates the public policy of the United States. If it were not so then slavery would be legal by contract.
Chris Luva Luva wrote:It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.
But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.
From a guy I'm discussing this with...
HEROHAMO wrote:I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do.
HEROHAMO wrote:Chris Luva Luva wrote:It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.
But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.
From a guy I'm discussing this with...
I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do. Isn't that what matters most? From what I see our team can still do plenty in free agency. It just means we have to not miss on our draft and free agent pick ups. Our pick ups and draftees must be good.
The reality is the Skins were 47 million under the cap. That far outweighs what any other team had under the cap. Now the league says the penalty is 36 million which could be split over 2012 and 2013. 47 million minus 36 million split which is 47 minus 18 still gives us 29 million under the cap. That is still plenty to work with. Less flexibility but I think we will be alright.
I am not the resident Cap expert 1niksider is but I think I am correct.
Bottom line is this. We are going to get our franchise QB. We have 20 plus million under the cap. We can still fill talent around RG3/Luck.
Chris Luva Luva wrote:HEROHAMO wrote:I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do.
I understand but that's for those of us who'd truly like to understand or try to understand the situation in it's entirety.
CanesSkins26 wrote:HEROHAMO wrote:Chris Luva Luva wrote:It's actually insane. The league was instructing teams not to spend above normal in the uncapped year. That's wildly illegal. It's a restraint of trade and they could have been sued into oblivion had any of that come out.
But the most recent CBA absolved the owners of any antitrust litigation, so now the league is punishing the Skins and Cowboys for not colluding with everyone else in previous CBA. The NFLPA signed off on this, unbelievably, by having that salary allocated to other teams. The thing is, this punishment just strengthens any future collusion. The NFLPA should be furious.
From a guy I'm discussing this with...
I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do. Isn't that what matters most? From what I see our team can still do plenty in free agency. It just means we have to not miss on our draft and free agent pick ups. Our pick ups and draftees must be good.
The reality is the Skins were 47 million under the cap. That far outweighs what any other team had under the cap. Now the league says the penalty is 36 million which could be split over 2012 and 2013. 47 million minus 36 million split which is 47 minus 18 still gives us 29 million under the cap. That is still plenty to work with. Less flexibility but I think we will be alright.
I am not the resident Cap expert 1niksider is but I think I am correct.
Bottom line is this. We are going to get our franchise QB. We have 20 plus million under the cap. We can still fill talent around RG3/Luck.
A couple of Skins beat reporters tweeted that they are trying to get confirmation on if this penalty affects the trade. It hasn't officially been submitted to the NFL yet I don't think.
HEROHAMO wrote:Chris Luva Luva wrote:HEROHAMO wrote:I am not really concerned about the legalities that went into this. All I care about is what the Skins can do and cant do.
I understand but that's for those of us who'd truly like to understand or try to understand the situation in it's entirety.
Thats cool bro. I just dont want this to bring down the moral. Most are thinking this will handicap what the Skins can do. When in actuality it may or may not depending on how our FO handles this.