The NFL Sends Confusing Messages in Salary Cap Penalties

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:17 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby TXSkinsFan » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:34 pm

Can we structure any free agent contracts to be back loaded so they kick in higher guarantees after the penalties?

Canes Skin
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby CanesSkins26 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:34 pm

SprintRightOption wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:
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.


You have no idea what you're talking about.


Yes I do, It seems you are the one with legally challenged ideas.


You do realize that the NFL has an anti-trust exemption, right?
Suck and Luck

Canes Skin
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby CanesSkins26 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:36 pm

Smithian wrote:My guess is this was announced so close to the start of FA so that the Redskin and Cowboys would have limited time to respond legally.

I hope the Redskins and Cowboys legal departments have shared phone calls today. There has to be some way for these penalties to at least be reduced.


It was announced now because the NFLPA and NFL just reached an agreement on this. The penalty issue was part of the discussions on the 2012 salary cap.
Suck and Luck

|||
Posts: 4306
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:34 am
Location: SANTA ANA,CA

Postby HEROHAMO » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:39 pm

CanesSkins26 wrote:
Smithian wrote:My guess is this was announced so close to the start of FA so that the Redskin and Cowboys would have limited time to respond legally.

I hope the Redskins and Cowboys legal departments have shared phone calls today. There has to be some way for these penalties to at least be reduced.


It was announced now because the NFLPA and NFL just reached an agreement on this. The penalty issue was part of the discussions on the 2012 salary cap.


So is this going to affect the trade?
Sean Taylor starting free safety Heavens team!

21 Forever

"The show must go on."

Hog
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:54 pm

Postby SprintRightOption » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:40 pm

CanesSkins26 wrote:
SprintRightOption wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:
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.


You have no idea what you're talking about.


Yes I do, It seems you are the one with legally challenged ideas.


You do realize that the NFL has an anti-trust exemption, right?


And federal racketeering charges are brought all the time.

Canes Skin
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby CanesSkins26 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:44 pm

SprintRightOption wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:
SprintRightOption wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:
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.


You have no idea what you're talking about.


Yes I do, It seems you are the one with legally challenged ideas.


You do realize that the NFL has an anti-trust exemption, right?


And federal racketeering charges are brought all the time.


You think that the Justice Department is going to bring racketeering charges against the NFL? Take off your tinfoil hat and get out of your parents' basement.
Suck and Luck

Canes Skin
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby CanesSkins26 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:48 pm

HEROHAMO wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:
Smithian wrote:My guess is this was announced so close to the start of FA so that the Redskin and Cowboys would have limited time to respond legally.

I hope the Redskins and Cowboys legal departments have shared phone calls today. There has to be some way for these penalties to at least be reduced.


It was announced now because the NFLPA and NFL just reached an agreement on this. The penalty issue was part of the discussions on the 2012 salary cap.


So is this going to affect the trade?


The latest from the Washington Times ncluded this:

It also was unclear how Saturday’s agreement between the league and the union would impact the trade Washington and St. Louis settled upon Friday.


Not all that helpful unfortunately.
Suck and Luck

|||
Posts: 4306
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:34 am
Location: SANTA ANA,CA

Postby HEROHAMO » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:49 pm

Just so long as the trade is not affected we will be OK. Brace yourselves for the punishment of Greg Williams as well. Hopefully we dont get punished for it too.

From what I am seeing the 36 million in cap space is plenty punishment for one team. Its not a slap on the wrist rather a few cane stick whacks to the bum. Hopefully that is punishment enough. The league will also come to a decision on the punishment regarding the pay for play or pay to "injure" fiasco at the end of this week.
Sean Taylor starting free safety Heavens team!

21 Forever

"The show must go on."

|||
Posts: 4306
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:34 am
Location: SANTA ANA,CA

Postby HEROHAMO » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:55 pm

OK I think we should all hope for the best until this punishment is final. I dont see how they could do that to us but man oh man that would be the absolute worst. OK I cant bear the thought anymore. Gonna go on shutdown mode until there is some finality to the punishment. I dont think the NFL would do that to us. (I hope) [-o<
Sean Taylor starting free safety Heavens team!

21 Forever

"The show must go on."

Canes Skin
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby CanesSkins26 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:59 pm

HEROHAMO wrote:OK I think we should all hope for the best until this punishment is final. I dont see how they could do that to us but man oh man that would be the absolute worst. OK I cant bear the thought anymore. Gonna go on shutdown mode until there is some finality to the punishment. I dont think the NFL would do that to us. (I hope) [-o<


It wouldn't be in the NFL. The issue was the Redskins agreeing to trade so many picks thinking they had all of their salary cap space to work with.
Suck and Luck

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:56 pm

Buzz Kill

Postby rskin72 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:23 pm

I went this whole weekend with a huge grin on my face thinking of a new, and hopefully, good QB the trade would provide us. And, with the cap space we had, we could afford to be heavy shoppers in the free agent market.

My happiness died around 1630 when I first heard of this....and after reading several articles about how we violated some back room gentlemens agreement between teams in a un-capped season, I am still more confused. We seemed to have violated no written guidance, but rather circumvented the back room gentlemens agreement that the NFL dictated to try and regulate an uncapped year (another question is who on this team knew what about the NFL warning).....and now get "punishment" dictated by the league and supported by NFLPA one day prior to free agency???? Did the league provide us any prior notice that we were potentially facing penalities for violating an unwritten rule???

I have never been a fan of salary caps in any sport, and this just goes to reinforce my beliefs. Regardless of how much your owner wants to spend on a team, unless they spend correctly, and have appropriate front office and scout personnel on the payroll, the team will not flourish.

I am pretty depressed....and po'd at both the NFL (who tries to level the playing ground between owners who want to spend on their teams like Skins and Cowboys, and those that merely talk a good game) and my team who should have realized the consequences of something that it appears they were warned about....

Goodbye Free Agency, a run at Jackson would take most of our cap space up.......

CKRGiii
Online
Posts: 4199
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:56 pm
Location: 505 New Mexico repn

Postby cowboykillerzRGiii » Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:35 pm

After a beer or two I'm cool again.. f it guys we still get rgiii and will be busy tomorrow inspite of this. The other owners cried and we pay. I don't blame our fo or anyone other then the officials that approved the deals we made. It's not the end of the world and unlike the pukes we still got money to blow. Head up Redskins Nation! At least Chomo isn't under center and Garrett our HC lmfao could be worse
Last edited by cowboykillerzRGiii on Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#21 forever in our hearts
...and yet ANOTHER record setting performance by "RG3 the third"!!!!
“I wanted to just… put his lights out ….because, you know, …Dallas sucks…” - Dexter Manley

newbie
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:27 pm

Postby mdk98w » Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:43 pm

How does taking $36 mil away from a 5-11 team trying to get better, keep it "competitive".
All their doing is kicking someone who has already been beaten.

CKRGiii
Online
Posts: 4199
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:56 pm
Location: 505 New Mexico repn

Postby cowboykillerzRGiii » Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:57 pm

Because we won rgiii without tanking the season like the Colts who get the top qb after only.one year of poor qb play vs our twenty.plus years of crappy to ok qb play. Makes perfect sense
#21 forever in our hearts
...and yet ANOTHER record setting performance by "RG3 the third"!!!!
“I wanted to just… put his lights out ….because, you know, …Dallas sucks…” - Dexter Manley

|||
Posts: 4306
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:34 am
Location: SANTA ANA,CA

Postby HEROHAMO » Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:59 pm

Your right bro. I am back already from shut down mode. Here is a good article about the whole thing. http://nfl.si.com/2012/03/12/nfl-hits-c ... cap-space/

The thing we have to remember that really helps us in this crappy situation is that we did have plenty of cap space to begin with. Also remember that the penalty can be split over two years. The penalty split over two years does not have to be 50/50 either. So our FO does have flexibility on how to take on this penalty. I think a 50/50 split would be the best way. But our FO has the choice of how the penalty will be split 25/75, 50/50, 75/25 whatever..

One more point. I think our FO knew this was coming. I think they knew a punishment was coming just not how severe it would be. They prepared for it the best they could by increasing the cap number as much as it could have.

So believe it or not. If my "calculations" are correct. Right now we stand at about. 50 million minus 18 million equals 32 million under the cap. We got about 4million more after releasing Atogwe and Sellers. We should be right around 32 million under the cap if we decide to do a fifty/fifty hit on the penalty. 1Niksider would love your input on this. I think I am mostly right though.
Sean Taylor starting free safety Heavens team!

21 Forever

"The show must go on."

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football