Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Redskins Locker Room


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack (1) Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2012, 04:02 PM   #91
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 51
Posts: 8,743
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hog1 View Post
I've been hoping we were using the Saber rattling as a bargaining chip to get our stuff (or at least some) back.
The Dan and JJ have the two most valuable franchises in the NFL. They are....shrewd self made Billionaire guys. Very accustomed to difficult problems and negotiations. I do not see them letting this slide........
Each side has some strong negotiating chips.

- The DS & JJ's position is, essentially, we did nothing wrong and your punishment violates the rules of our business agreeement. Ultimately, in any legal battle we will win and we have the money and the will to take you to the mat.

- The other 30 owner's & the NFL's position: Maybe so, but until a court tells us to do otherwise, we are disapproving any contracts over the penalized amount. Further, we will take away draft choices, look for other infractions, etc. By the way, we have 400 lawyers who can make sure this doesn't see the inside of a court room for several years ... and then let's talk us some appellate review.

Ultimately, arbitration is the best course. I am pretty sure we will end up with a "time served" sanction (i.e. - acceptance of what's been done with a removal of the rest. Possibly a small credit to allow us to go forward w/out needing to push this years money into future caps). I can't see an arbitrated settlement that nets us draft picks. It would be nice, but I wouldn't bank on it. Even if it does, I doubt it would be anything more than a 6th or 7th round pick, maybe two (pure speculation on my part).
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  

Advertisements
Old 03-19-2012, 04:24 PM   #92
Pro Bowl
 
Giantone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,168
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBXVII View Post
Just to clarify...

32 teams agreed to break the LAW (Collusion against the players).
2 or 4 teams changed their minds and decided not to break the LAW.
and now only 2 teams are getting punished for not doing something wrong, immoral, and illegal?

^that is the message your trying to get across right?

There was no "collusion" against the players,no player was denied the right to make money(see A.Haynsworth) the NFL players Association agrees to this ,what was agreed to by 32 owners was not dumping the saleries during the uncapped year,something all but 4 did,why not all 32 just do it and it would benift eveyone?
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread.
Giantone is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 04:27 PM   #93
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 29
Posts: 14,711
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Galvanize aka "My finger is on the button." *push the button*
__________________
"It's nice to be important, but its more important to be nice."
- Scooter

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 04:28 PM   #94
Pro Bowl
 
Giantone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,168
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by tryfuhl View Post
Probably just as much as you "know" that all teams "agreed"
,,,,just going by what has been reported.
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread.
Giantone is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 04:30 PM   #95
Special Teams
 
BuckSkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Eastern Ohio
Age: 45
Posts: 232
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
There was no "collusion" against the players,no player was denied the right to make money(see A.Haynsworth) the NFL players Association agrees to this ,what was agreed to by 32 owners was not dumping the saleries during the uncapped year,something all but 4 did,why not all 32 just do it and it would benift eveyone?
And can you prove that it was agreed to by all?
__________________
"Any Nation willing to give up a little freedom, to gain a little security, will deserve neither, and lose both."
-Benjamin Franklin
BuckSkin is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 04:33 PM   #96
Pro Bowl
 
Giantone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,168
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckSkin View Post
And can you prove that it was agreed to by all?

see post #94
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread.
Giantone is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 04:38 PM   #97
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 29
Posts: 14,711
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckSkin View Post
And can you prove that it was agreed to by all?
The NFL hasn't even been willing to go on record as saying the names of the 4 teams that were fined. All we have is people speaking off the record to insiders and beat reporters.

It's not like the NFL has been hesitant to release information about fines and suspensions in the past. Why the vague official statements citing "a small number of teams"?

Maybe I'm wrong but I've yet to see one report where an actual NFL rep came out and named the Redskins and Cowboys specifically in this scandal. In every official press release the most specific mention I've seen is "a small number of teams."
__________________
"It's nice to be important, but its more important to be nice."
- Scooter

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 04:41 PM   #98
Franchise Player
 
ArtMonkDrillz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Age: 31
Posts: 7,997
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
There was no "collusion" against the players,no player was denied the right to make money(see A.Haynsworth) the NFL players Association agrees to this ,what was agreed to by 32 owners was not dumping the saleries during the uncapped year,something all but 4 did,why not all 32 just do it and it would benift eveyone?
Haynesworth was signed in 2009, but yes, he did restructure in 2010.

Clearly more than 4 teams pull this kind of thing. Others have pointed out Chicago's deal with Peppers. I'm sure the giants were completely above the board with everything they did that year.
__________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." The Dude

Last edited by ArtMonkDrillz; 03-19-2012 at 04:46 PM. Reason: clarity
ArtMonkDrillz is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 04:55 PM   #99
Franchise Player
 
FRPLG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 9,961
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
There was no "collusion" against the players,no player was denied the right to make money(see A.Haynsworth) the NFL players Association agrees to this ,what was agreed to by 32 owners was not dumping the saleries during the uncapped year,something all but 4 did,why not all 32 just do it and it would benift eveyone?
You are wrong. They engaged in textbook collusion. By "agreeing" to not dump monies into the uncapped year they did several things:

First they denied players guaranteed monies that would have come from non-guaranteed future monies. in the form of modifying salaries into bonuses.

Second, by "agreeing" to not clear future cap space into the uncapped year they denied players that future cap space. If teams had engaged in clearing say 500 mil of cap space into the uncapped year then that is 500 mil of future cap space that the players should have the economical advantage of having. But they don't. It is a clear and easy case to make for collusion.
FRPLG is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 05:04 PM   #100
Pro Bowl
 
Giantone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,168
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by FRPLG View Post
You are wrong. They engaged in textbook collusion. By "agreeing" to not dump monies into the uncapped year they did several things:

First they denied players guaranteed monies that would have come from non-guaranteed future monies. in the form of modifying salaries into bonuses.

Second, by "agreeing" to not clear future cap space into the uncapped year they denied players that future cap space. If teams had engaged in clearing say 500 mil of cap space into the uncapped year then that is 500 mil of future cap space that the players should have the economical advantage of having. But they don't. It is a clear and easy case to make for collusion.
Ok lets say you're right why did only 4 out of 32 do it?
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread.
Giantone is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 05:09 PM   #101
Impact Rookie
 
Evilgrin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 684
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Each side has some strong negotiating chips.

- The DS & JJ's position is, essentially, we did nothing wrong and your punishment violates the rules of our business agreeement. Ultimately, in any legal battle we will win and we have the money and the will to take you to the mat.

- The other 30 owner's & the NFL's position: Maybe so, but until a court tells us to do otherwise, we are disapproving any contracts over the penalized amount. Further, we will take away draft choices, look for other infractions, etc. By the way, we have 400 lawyers who can make sure this doesn't see the inside of a court room for several years ... and then let's talk us some appellate review.

Ultimately, arbitration is the best course. I am pretty sure we will end up with a "time served" sanction (i.e. - acceptance of what's been done with a removal of the rest. Possibly a small credit to allow us to go forward w/out needing to push this years money into future caps). I can't see an arbitrated settlement that nets us draft picks. It would be nice, but I wouldn't bank on it. Even if it does, I doubt it would be anything more than a 6th or 7th round pick, maybe two (pure speculation on my part).
If the league sticks to the "because we say so" arguement, arbitration seems a bit silly. And the chance of it being fairly considered? How do they pick the person who hears the case?

I think in addtion to good chances in a legal battle, the skins and cowboys also have the NFL not wanting any of this to take place in public. Trying to talk the crazy guy back off the cliff.
Evilgrin is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 05:23 PM   #102
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 51
Posts: 8,743
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone View Post
There was no "collusion" against the players,no player was denied the right to make money(see A.Haynsworth) the NFL players Association agrees to this ,what was agreed to by 32 owners was not dumping the saleries during the uncapped year,something all but 4 did,why not all 32 just do it and it would benift eveyone?
Wow. Reading is fundamental. Rather than restate my previous posts, and since you have so clearly ignored them, I'll just assume you can't refute logically and specifically any of the points I have previously made. [EDIT: See posts 63, 64,65]

Two very simple points: (1) The league cannot retroactively change its governing rules in order to sanction teams for actions that conformed to the rules at the time they were taken; and (2) the mere fact that the NFLPA subsequently signed off on the penalty does not have any bearing on whether the owners' prior actions were collusive.

Quite frankly, you're just talking out your ass and have no concept of the legal principles on which you are offering opinions.

I think "obtuse" is the word most applicable at this point.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 05:35 PM   #103
The Starter
 
Mechanix544's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fort Bliss, TX
Posts: 2,277
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Wow. Reading is fundamental. Rather than restate my previous posts, and since you have so clearly ignored them, I'll just assume you can't refute logically and specifically any of the points I have previously made. [EDIT: See posts 63, 64,65]

Two very simple points: (1) The league cannot retroactively change its governing rules in order to sanction teams for actions that conformed to the rules at the time they were taken; and (2) the mere fact that the NFLPA subsequently signed off on the penalty does not have any bearing on whether the owners' prior actions were collusive.

Quite frankly, you're just talking out your ass and have no concept of the legal principles on which you are offering opinions.

I think "obtuse" is the word most applicable at this point.
BOOYAH MUTHA SUCKA!!!!!!!!!!!

Go to the corner Giantone, or better yet, to a giants message board.
Mechanix544 is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 05:46 PM   #104
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 51
Posts: 8,743
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilgrin View Post
If the league sticks to the "because we say so" arguement, arbitration seems a bit silly. And the chance of it being fairly considered? How do they pick the person who hears the case?

I think in addtion to good chances in a legal battle, the skins and cowboys also have the NFL not wanting any of this to take place in public. Trying to talk the crazy guy back off the cliff.
In arbitration the league will advance a couple of legal theories as to why the sanction should be upheld:

1. Since we [the owners] believed a new CBA was forthcoming that would reinstate the salary cap, the majority of owners reached an informal agreement not to structure contracts in a manner that would harm the competitive balance going forward. DS and JJ violated this agreement and attempted to gain a competitive advantage contrary to the spirit of the governing CBA which, by its terms, created only one uncapped year [Of course, if no subsequent CBA had been agreed upon, the cap would simply disappear going forward] .

2. As a procedural matter, pursuant to the NFL's charter, the sanction was issued by the competition committee and communicated through the Commissioner's office. Further, and because it affects the salary cap, the sanction has been approved by the NFLPA as required by the current governing CBA.

These are both legally defensible positions that create the appearance of a reasonable dispute (barely so in my humble opinion). For all the reasons I have stated before, I just don't think they stand up under any scrutiny.

The "b/c we say so" argument is the practical and informal reason for their actions rather than the legal basis.

As to who hears the arbitration, from what I understand, that would be governed by the CBA.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 03-19-2012, 05:52 PM   #105
Special Teams
 
BuckSkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Eastern Ohio
Age: 45
Posts: 232
Re: Redskins, Cowboys could go “nuclear” over cap mess

Mark Maske, to whom GiantOne refers, says that individuals familiar to the situation suggest...
"Stephen Burbank, the University of Pennsylvania law professor who was known as the sport’s special master when previous labor agreements were under the jurisdiction of a federal court in Minneapolis."
__________________
"Any Nation willing to give up a little freedom, to gain a little security, will deserve neither, and lose both."
-Benjamin Franklin
BuckSkin is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.53462 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25