Good/Bad News for a Change - 2013 18MM cap penalty probably (not) going away

FRPLG

Well a lot. Our only options are

a) eat it
b) argue and convince the owners to relent
c) sue

A is most likely to end up happening. B is probably what they're trying but almost assuredly won't work. C is the nuclear option that might work but has a ton of downside

HailGreen28

I'm guessing they could keep us from signing anybody, drafted or FA.

We need the FO's approval (and player's union approval?) to sign contracts. I don't think any player's going to sign with us on otherwise uncertain terms. And risk their own status in the organization when they could sign safe deals with other teams.

Lotus

Yep.

Option C bites the hand that feeds and thus is almost unthinkable, as just as it might be.

__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.

T.O.Killa

I still don't the title of this thread. It should be more like a discussion on the cap penalty. Anyway, when I look at the cap numbers I don't see it hurting us like the experts say. It seems to me, that if there is a guy we want, we just use the subsequent years to charge the signing bonus. I think we have plenty of room to maneuver. We can save 8 Million cutting Hall, 4 Million cutting Moss, 4 million Cutting Wilson, 1 million cutting Jammal brown, and there are others that could be cut. There are a few that could be restructured. Like Trent Williams. Say we want a guy that will cost 10 million a year for five years, the way I understand it, we could give him a nine million dollars roster bonus and charge it to the next four years. Making him count ford 12.2 million the next four years. It seems to me that we have a fairly cheap roster now, and can afford to make the next year a little heavy. Especially, since the cap number should begin to skyrocket in the next two years. I would like to here if I am correct from some of our cap guru's.

CRedskinsRule

It hurts us, in the sense that we can't go splurge in FA and get unlimited players that way, but as you showed, there are definitely ways to manage the cap wisely. As long as we don't push a lot into future years, then we still ought to be able to sign a couple of solid FA's + keep the guys we want. Without know how, I would imagine (or hope) BA is looking at the numbers along this line: 9mill this year (again keep in mind had we "played by the rules" we would have had some cap impact from Haynesworth so this should just be looked at like dead cap in my mind), and 4.5mill "dead cap/penalty" for the next two years. We might not get every player, but as long as the NFL/NFLPA don't pull anymore last minute hijinx then I expect MS/BA will be more than able to put a comprehensive approach to the draft/FA period of the off-season.

Firstdown, the league sets the cap, and will not let us go over it. Therefore if we ignored the penalty, the league would not approve any new contracts, and if we were over the calculated cap, then they would impose a cash fine against the team every day it is over. I am pretty sure Dan Snyder is not going to pay a daily fine in lieu of restructuring a few contracts and managing the cap appropriately.

SBXVII

The NFLPA is Appealing Doty's ruling. From the article... don't expect a different answer cause apparently the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is Union friendly and they figure the court will rule for the NFL and not change the penalties.

NFLPA appeals Judge Doty ruling on collusion claim | ProFootballTalk

Gmanc711

I still don't see how its legal that we lost the cap space, and how people are ruling against us.... but whatever.

__________________
#21

SBXVII

Totally agree with you.

Rules were in place
Rules expired
Two teams took advantage of what all the teams could have done
New rules agreed to and signed
Addendum to the rules agreed to and signed
Punishment/Fines handed out

Crazy. Usually in most cases when a contract expires then there is nothing to hold anyone accountable to in that expired contract. How are you going to make an Addendum, make it retroactive, then punish two teams for violating something that was not in place at the time of said violation?

CRedskinsRule

Basically, all 32 owners give some power to the league "for the greater good", and if the executive body decrees something everyone has to deal with it. For the Skins to get the "proper" decision they would have to go to court against 30 other owners, and have the judge find them guilty of collusion. In a vacuum, maybe you do that, but in reality, that would be like giving the NFLPA a blank check in the next round of CBA talks, and no owner is going to risk the golden goose, especially not for a 1 year(at this point) cap hit of 18million dollars.

When you think in pure percentages, would you risk your multi billion dollar enterprise for about a relatively easily mitigated/accepted penalty of about 10% of your cap space.

BigHairedAristocrat

The thing is, all 32 teams were told NOT to use the uncapped year to dump bad contracts and were warned (in writing) that there would be penalties for teams that did. 28 teams followed that direction and 4 teams were penalized for not colluding. The skins and cowboys did this to an extreme degree, so they were penalized most.

It sucks, and its not "right" but it is what it is. If there's any consolation, its the fact that the skins would be carrng more than 18MM in dead cap in 2012 and 2013 seasons if they hadnt broken the rule. Ultimately, the penalties suck, but we're better off than we would have been if there had been a salary cap.

__________________
Dolphins get good press for saving drowning humans.But we only hear about the swimmers theyve pushed ashore.You know who we havent heard from: all the people theyve pushed out to sea.Dolphins dont know what theyre doing-they just like pushing things.

JoeRedskin

The Doty decision ruled against the NFLPA - not the Redskins. The cap penalty against the Skins could have been evidence in their case of collusion against the NFL if they had (as part of the new agreement) waived their rights to sue over past acts of collusion - even if unknown.

As CREd said, the Skins could sue on the other owners on their own behalf. They won't.

__________________
My Little Pony: Friendship is magic? or ... a repressive matriarchal society where individuals' roles are defined by their immutable physical characteristics and governance is reserved for those who demonstrate the genetic purity of the pony master race?

Evilgrin

Didn't the league risk it in the first place, by penalizing us. Snyder isn't gonna do anything, they know he won't go nuclear.

__________________
Mike Shanahan visited Madame Tussauds yesterday, he tried to recruit a couple wax figures for the skins? They seemed fine to him, just quiet.

NC_Skins

Are we still talking about this? The cap money is good as gone. It's not coming back. Not now, not later, but never. It would take Danny and Jerry killing their cash cow (we call it the NFL) in order to get any sort of justice out of this. The bottom line is, Danny and Jerry (or any other owner) care more about making money, than they do about principles or winning.

__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty