| Author |
Message |
HTTRRG3ALMO
Hog
Joined: 01 Jan 2013
Posts: 494
Location: Washington, DC
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:11 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| SkinsJock wrote: |  whatever - this is going nowhere and is not worth wasting space on ..
the Redskins are trying to recoup cap space - this question/issue will be 'resolved' one way or the other in short order - a few weeks MAX
I'm cautiously optimistic |
Agreed. Hard not to get excited about the possibility. Depending on who we're talking about (and if we were to get just $18 back)...that could be 3-4 new starters...possibly more  |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11512
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
as I understand this ...
there is a VERY SMALL possibility that the Redskins might get some of the $18M cap hit for this coming F/A period - hence the timing ...
there is ZERO chance that the Redskins will get ANY of the $18M from last year ... NADA, ZILCH - DONE DEAL ....
and
there is a very good chance that we'll get nothing ... but ... you have to give it a shot or it'll be 'gone' like the hit from last year
that's how I see it  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14702
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | | there is ZERO chance that the Redskins will get ANY of the $18M from last year ... NADA, ZILCH - DONE DEAL .... |
That may wind up being the reality, but it's not like there's no chance. It really depends on how far the Skins are willing to push it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11512
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | SkinsJock wrote: | | there is ZERO chance that the Redskins will get ANY of the $18M from last year ... NADA, ZILCH - DONE DEAL .... |
That may wind up being the reality, but it's not like there's no chance. It really depends on how far the Skins are willing to push it. |
I think you can count on the Redskins REALLY pushing this ... no doubt, in my opinion
however
the chance of getting anything back financially from last season's cap hit is really zilch - that is past
there may be a 'feeling' that the whole $36M 'hit' was too much but ... nothing is coming back from last season - bank on it
I'm hoping that we get the 2013 'hit' removed but even half of that, would really piss off that NY a...ole, Mara  |
|
| Back to top |
|
VRIEL1
Hog
Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Its my understanding from the WAPO article that the Skins arguement is based off of judge Dotties decision regarding the NFLPA's collusion case. He stated that the NFLPA should have filed their case prior to the new CBA being signed.
The Redskins are trying the approach that the NFL should have punished them prior to the new CBA being signed. The thought is the Skins might have a good chance of winning that. I agree with that.
But, I feel another, and possibly better arguement is that the contracts the Redskins reworked were filed to the NFL, as with all contracts, and the NFL had a duty to preread the contracts to make sure all the propper information and contract legalities were in the contracts. As the NFL always does. In this case the Redskins did not do something behind their back which the other owners did not know about until after the new CBA was signed, no, it was done with their knowledge and the NFL approved those contracts when they should have and did have a duty to deny them and request the Redskins to fix the contracts per their aggreement. And because of this NONE of the punishment should be upheld because it all took place under the previous CBA.
That would be my arguement and its not an arguement the Redskins have tried yet. They appealed the punishment and it was denied. The NFLPA filed collusion and Dotty ruled against because of timing of the filing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
 |
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11512
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
^^ - the NFL does 'approve' all contracts ... and they did, during that time ...
however
Mara decided that what the Redskins did (with the NFL's approval) was 'not fair' to all the other teams and he basically told Godahell to take away our first draft pick in the 2012 draft ..
I think we might get the 'fine' reduced ... I just really do not see them (Mara) wanting to give the Redskins any of last years cap back |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14702
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | | Deadskins wrote: | | SkinsJock wrote: | | there is ZERO chance that the Redskins will get ANY of the $18M from last year ... NADA, ZILCH - DONE DEAL .... |
That may wind up being the reality, but it's not like there's no chance. It really depends on how far the Skins are willing to push it. |
I think you can count on the Redskins REALLY pushing this ... no doubt, in my opinion
however
the chance of getting anything back financially from last season's cap hit is really zilch - that is past
there may be a 'feeling' that the whole $36M 'hit' was too much but ... nothing is coming back from last season - bank on it
I'm hoping that we get the 2013 'hit' removed but even half of that, would really piss off that NY a...ole, Mara |
You can't make that statement. If the Skins take the nuclear option and go to court, then there is a very real chance of them recovering some or all of last year's cap hit. I am doubtful that they would push it that far, or that the NFL wouldn't settle before it got that far, though, so in reality, I agree that there is little chance of recouping that money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11512
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK JSPB - help me out here ...
You feel there is a chance, the Redskins could take the NFL to court and put the anti trust stuff, front and center
I feel that most feel there is NO CHANCE that the Redskins will put the NFL and themselves in that position - why do you keep harping on this? 
I do agree that there is a chance the Redskins will get the NFL to reduce the Redskins cap hit this year, DESPITE Mara's hatred for the Redskins 
I just do not see there being any way the NFL and Mara will acquiesce to anything more than that - IF that |
|
| Back to top |
|
VRIEL1
Hog
Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is what supposedly the Skins are thinking:
If the NFLPA could not sue the owners for collusion because it happened during the old CBA and not the current one then:
The Skins are thinking the same way that the NFL should not be able to punish them cause the contracts occurred during the old CBA not the new one. This is a good arguement especially since it was used on the NFLPA by the NFL.
I still say for me the arguement is the NFL had a duty and obligation to deny the contracts if the Skins were going against an agreement. If the Skins tried to pass off one of those contracts tomorrow with Hall the NFL would deny them and tell the Skins to rework the contract. They would not approve it then. Year later complain that the Skins violated the CBA.
If they could not punish during a non CBA year then they should not have allowed contracts to be signed either. We all know why the contracts were approved and why the punishment, the NFL didn't want to get caught breaking the law (collusion) and had to get the NFLPA to sign off their rights.
I would agree with the punishment if the Skins did something without the rest of the owners knowing or approval and got caught, but that's not what happened here. The NFL received the contracts, looked them over, chose not to deny them so as not to get caught breaking the law, and later after getting the NFLPA to sign off their rights decided to punish the Skins.
In reality nothing was done without the owners knowledge, the NFL could have and should have denied the contracts as they would if the contracts went against the CBA or in this situation their "agreement". Because the league approved the contracts there should be no punishment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14702
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| VRIEL1 wrote: | | If the NFLPA could not sue the owners for collusion because it happened during the old CBA and not the current one |
No, they couldn't sue, because they signed a deal saying they couldn't sue for any previous transgression, known or unknown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14702
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | OK JSPB - help me out here ...
You feel there is a chance, the Redskins could take the NFL to court and put the anti trust stuff, front and center
I feel that most feel there is NO CHANCE that the Redskins will put the NFL and themselves in that position - why do you keep harping on this? |
No, you are misstating my position, and have changed your own. This is the first time you have put your position that way. Previously you were saying there is no way they could recoup any of last year's cap hit. Now you are saying they wouldn't take it that far, which is exactly what I have been saying all along.
It's really a high-stakes game of chicken. I think the NFL would blink first, but I doubt Snyder really wants to piss off the rest of the owners that much, which is why he going about it in this candy-assed way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11512
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^^ typical
still not sure about what exactly your position is - it seems we both are 'interpreting' each other's position differently - whatever
I have not changed my feeling that: ....
the Redskins are hoping that they can get the 2013 cap hit, reduced or eliminated
AND that nothing they are doing affects the $18M hit from last season
ALSO that the Redskins are posturing aggressively but nobody expects the Redskins (or the NFL & Mara) to allow this to get into a courtroom |
|
| Back to top |
|
VRIEL1
Hog
Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | VRIEL1 wrote: | | If the NFLPA could not sue the owners for collusion because it happened during the old CBA and not the current one |
No, they couldn't sue, because they signed a deal saying they couldn't sue for any previous transgression, known or unknown. |
Yes you are right but the judge also made the point to say the NFLPA should have filed prior to the new CBA. The NFLPA didn't sign their rights away until the eve of FA which was like 6 months later.
I've heard the Skins are thinking along the same lines with the punishment , that the NFL should have punished prior to the new CBA while they were still under the so called "agreement." |
|
| Back to top |
|
VRIEL1
Hog
Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | SkinsJock wrote: | OK JSPB - help me out here ...
You feel there is a chance, the Redskins could take the NFL to court and put the anti trust stuff, front and center
I feel that most feel there is NO CHANCE that the Redskins will put the NFL and themselves in that position - why do you keep harping on this? |
No, you are misstating my position, and have changed your own. This is the first time you have put your position that way. Previously you were saying there is no way they could recoup any of last year's cap hit. Now you are saying they wouldn't take it that far, which is exactly what I have been saying all along.
It's really a high-stakes game of chicken. I think the NFL would blink first, but I doubt Snyder really wants to piss off the rest of the owners that much, which is why he going about it in this candy-assed way. |
I too am antsy but for this threat to work DS probably is thinking he will need to file the eve of FA similarly to how the punishment was doled out last minute so the Skins didn't have time to challenge it. DS waits until the eve of FA and the NFL can't call an emergency hearing to lift the injunction prior to march 12th.
I too doubts he does it but will wait until March 12th before calling him a wuss. |
|
| Back to top |
|
VRIEL1
Hog
Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | ^^ typical
still not sure about what exactly your position is - it seems we both are 'interpreting' each other's position differently - whatever
I have not changed my feeling that: ....
the Redskins are hoping that they can get the 2013 cap hit, reduced or eliminated
AND that nothing they are doing affects the $18M hit from last season
ALSO that the Redskins are posturing aggressively but nobody expects the Redskins (or the NFL & Mara) to allow this to get into a courtroom |
I agree wih you. I'll say this "IF" DS does find the balls to go ahead and file the suit I think the Skins could win all 36 mill back, but right now we are in bluff stage with the hopes the NFL lets us keep some or all of this years penalty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
|
| Page 3 of 4 | All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
