Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
so contracts between two non federal entities aren't binding? if the CBA says the year is uncapped, then guess what? you can't punish people for treating that year as uncapped unless you had documentation proven that it really wasn't... which, by the way, would incriminate the league for collusion.
there's a difference between criminal, civil, and law and contract law, and agreements are binding regardless of state involvement. obviously not a lawyer, but I don't think it'd be dubious at all.
|
The multiple defenses the Redskins can use aside here, 30 owners acting as the NFL can in-fact decide to impose penalties on unwritten rules. That's what the NBA did essentially when they rejected the Chris Paul-Lakers trade (although in that case, the league actually owned one of the teams).
It will be interesting to see if the Redskins can successfully defend themselves. If they're going to defend themselves by litigation, I have no idea how they plan to do that.
If they plan to just reject the penalty on the grounds that the league approved all their moves when made according to the old CBA, I do think the league will have a difficult time forcing this penalty on them. I question whether the league is powerful enough to make the Redskins and Cowboys comply.