Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

NFL Refuse Redskins' Cap Relief
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Gmen


Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 15737
Location: Myyyyy precioussss
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

People continue confusing what is legal and what is right. You are acting as though CBA law is some sort of moral code. Who cares that the owners colluded? They did it for fairness and in the best interest of the league. Two owners tried to take advantage of it, and got busted. It's as simple as that.
_________________


"Has courage and poise. In my opinion, most of all, he has that quality you can't define. Call it magic."

- Ernie Accorsi scouting report of Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Runaway Jim


Joined: 13 Mar 2009
Posts: 4876
Location: By This River
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
People continue confusing what is legal and what is right. You are acting as though CBA law is some sort of moral code. Who cares that the owners colluded? They did it for fairness and in the best interest of the league. Two owners tried to take advantage of it, and got busted. It's as simple as that.


They did it for the best interest of their own pocketbooks and screwed lots of players out of a lot of money in the process.
_________________

The_Slamman wrote:
RJ is officially the Champion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gmen


Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 15737
Location: Myyyyy precioussss
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Runaway Jim wrote:
Gmen wrote:
People continue confusing what is legal and what is right. You are acting as though CBA law is some sort of moral code. Who cares that the owners colluded? They did it for fairness and in the best interest of the league. Two owners tried to take advantage of it, and got busted. It's as simple as that.


They did it for the best interest of their own pocketbooks and screwed lots of players out of a lot of money in the process.

Yeah, and the Mr. Jones and Snider where just trying to be so generous. One dumping a player because he screwed up his contract a few years prior. Another front loading a contract in an attempt to save cap space down the road. Such angels those two are. I guess no good deed goes unpunished.

Now, if Jones and Snider used this opportunity to give every one of their players a 15% raise for that year, then I'd have some sympathy. But they didn't, did they? They tried to use the opportunity to save cap room down the road.
_________________


"Has courage and poise. In my opinion, most of all, he has that quality you can't define. Call it magic."

- Ernie Accorsi scouting report of Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Runaway Jim


Joined: 13 Mar 2009
Posts: 4876
Location: By This River
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


_________________

The_Slamman wrote:
RJ is officially the Champion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sp6488


Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 9120
Location: MD
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Runaway Jim wrote:
It was agreed in the previous CBA that 2010 was going to be an uncapped year. This was a major point of leverage for the players. The owners were wrong to set and enforce a salary cap outside that CBA. Just because they got away with it doesn't make it right. I don't think the Cowboys or Redskins did anything wrong.

I've long since given up hope that the cap space would be returned, though.


The key issue wasn't spending on players, though. You could spend as much on players as you wanted as a team. Teams were simply told to not structure those deals in such a way as to game the salary cap that would inevitably be in place following the 2010 season. This wasn't some monopolistic suppression of player wages (outside of the normal cap). A team could pay a player infinitybijinity dollars if they wanted to, it would just have to be prepared to live with the cap consequences in following years and not structure the deal to allocate a disproportionate amount of the cap hit to 2010.

I think re: the collusion argument, some people are confusing real $ with cap $. This issue has always been about cap $, not real $ that players can take home.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
sp6488


Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 9120
Location: MD
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheVillain112 wrote:
Senor Mortgage wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
The CBA doesn't mean the actions the NFL takes aren't collusive; it means that the collusion isn't objectionable. After all, the actions taken by the NFLPA (which are equally collusive) outside of the existence of a CBA are also, technically, illegal.


This. One of the key aspects of sports' legal monopoly status is that labor is allow to unionize and agree to a CBA, which, in theory, give labor fair market value and limits the negative aspects of monopoly status. Things like the draft are allowed because the union agrees to in the CBA. Teams agreeing to suppress free agent spending in 2010 with no cap in place was not agreed to by the players/CBA, making it technically illegal collusion at that point.

Honestly this Redskins issue wouldn't have happened under someone like Tags because the NFL should be bringing as little attention as it can to the sketchier part of its monopoly status.


idk. The Broncos got penalized after they tried some salary cap shenanigans while Tags was the commish: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28969-2004Sep17.html


What does this have to do with tags? Most of these owners who voted on this were owners when tags was the commissioner. Furthermore, they're really HIS bosses, not the other way around.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
J Pep 4 Step


Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 30059
Location: Greenvillain, NC
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SeanTayorsaPIMP wrote:
J Pep 4 Step wrote:
SeanTayorsaPIMP wrote:
J Pep 4 Step wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
RuskieTitan wrote:
Justice has been upheld. Hopefully this deters teams in the future from trying to pull the same trick.


Collusion isn't justice.


They didn't punish them with collusion. They punished them with a fine. And a fine is, without a doubt, a type of justice.

Glad it happened. I like the NFL how it is. I don't like the NFL with one team able to scoop up all the a FAs because they bit the hand that feeds them and went against the league to get ahead.


Gg
The thing that bothers me the most about this is that the Redskins had no warning of this and were told about the fine 24 hours before Free Agency...can someone give me a good reason on why the NFL waited until then to tell them. Obviously the trade with Rams had to of had something to do with it...


I don't have an issue with it. Its a punishment. And its supposed to hurt.

And please stop with the Mara conspiracy. This was a league majority decision. Nobody strong armed this through. Nobody forced the issue. Snyder and a handful of teams decided to one degree or another, bite the hand that feeds them in the hopes of gaining a competitive advantage. The rest of the teams bit back and bit back hard.


http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-cole_redskins_cowboys_salary_cap_john_mara_owners_032512

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-cole_nfl_collusion_union_redskins_cowboys_032212

I can't quote these articles since I'm on my phone, but it seems to me that there is plenty of evidence the NFLPA being strong armed into agreeing to the penalties. Now all these terms and legal issues are wayyy over my head for I am just a simple bartender. But it seems to me that everyone who is not involve and looking at this case with an unbiased view sees that Redskins did nothing wrong. It is the NFL that was doing the borderline illegal moves. But again, I'm more upset about the timing of the penalty than anything else.


Mara made a comment saying he thought the penalty was justified. That doesnt mean he was the puppetmaster pulling the strings.

And the NFLPA wasnt strong armed. It was a negotiation offer. One they were free to take or leave.

Are you suggesting I am somehow biased? What would make you think so?
_________________

CK on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 45100
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
People continue confusing what is legal and what is right. You are acting as though CBA law is some sort of moral code. Who cares that the owners colluded? They did it for fairness and in the best interest of the league. Two owners tried to take advantage of it, and got busted. It's as simple as that.


Actually 5 teams got caught
_________________


Sig courtesy of mack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 45100
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
Runaway Jim wrote:
Gmen wrote:
People continue confusing what is legal and what is right. You are acting as though CBA law is some sort of moral code. Who cares that the owners colluded? They did it for fairness and in the best interest of the league. Two owners tried to take advantage of it, and got busted. It's as simple as that.


They did it for the best interest of their own pocketbooks and screwed lots of players out of a lot of money in the process.

Yeah, and the Mr. Jones and Snider where just trying to be so generous. One dumping a player because he screwed up his contract a few years prior. Another front loading a contract in an attempt to save cap space down the road. Such angels those two are. I guess no good deed goes unpunished.

Now, if Jones and Snider used this opportunity to give every one of their players a 15% raise for that year, then I'd have some sympathy. But they didn't, did they? They tried to use the opportunity to save cap room down the road.


So they could then spend MORE money later which is what the NFLPA wants.
_________________


Sig courtesy of mack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eagles101


Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 9101
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i really hope this comes up every 7 days for the next ten years so we can have this legality discussion in footballs future....its really interesting to see what people learned at there local community college.
_________________
vikingsvikings wrote:

I don't understand most of that, but I can tell it's probably inaccurate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gmen


Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 15737
Location: Myyyyy precioussss
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
Actually 5 teams got caught

So they could then spend MORE money later which is what the NFLPA wants.

And only two got punished. DARN YOU MARAAAA!!!!

The owners had an agreement (collusion, call it whatever you wish) that they would not dump salary or front load contracts for that year. Reports are that the Snider and Jones were warned about, and they still did it. They were trying to gain an unfair salary cap advantage down the road, which is not good for the league. This isn't baseball where the owners willing to spend the most money can buy up the best talent.

It's not surprising that the two more arrogant owners in the league tried to pull this off. What, did they think the other 30 billionaires don't have a backbone and won't do anything about it? The penalty levied against them simply took away the salary cap advantage they tried to gain. Personally, I say consider yourselves lucky they didn't take away draft picks as well.
_________________


"Has courage and poise. In my opinion, most of all, he has that quality you can't define. Call it magic."

- Ernie Accorsi scouting report of Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 47678
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Runaway Jim wrote:
Gmen wrote:
People continue confusing what is legal and what is right. You are acting as though CBA law is some sort of moral code. Who cares that the owners colluded? They did it for fairness and in the best interest of the league. Two owners tried to take advantage of it, and got busted. It's as simple as that.


They did it for the best interest of their own pocketbooks and screwed lots of players out of a lot of money in the process.


The irony of this statement is overwhelming. The Redskins used that year to dump past FA mistakes that were cap liabilities. They were the ones that screwed players out of money.

They cut players that they would not have been able to release if there was a salary cap due to the cap penalties it would have incurred.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harper41


Joined: 29 Aug 2009
Posts: 22266
Location: Roll Tide Country
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Saints and Raiders both lost cap space last year due to this I believe,
I'm not sure why people are saying only two teams were punished,
_________________

RTR
#Keepitonehunna
SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Thought someone broke into my house.
Jumped out of bed (left my brother)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
teamorange


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 13593
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
Brian23 wrote:
Gmen wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
RuskieTitan wrote:
Justice has been upheld. Hopefully this deters teams in the future from trying to pull the same trick.


Collusion isn't justice.

There was a good reason behind the collusion. Was is legal? Probably not.

30 other owners played by the gentlemen rules, but two sneaky owners thought they could pull a fast one. Nope. And in that sense, justice was served.


No, 30 other's didn't. Quite a few others did the same and got no punishment.

Oh, right. So this is just the NFL picking on the Cowboys and Redskins.

Step back for a second and be reasonable about this.


The NFL Management Committee did impose those fines and John Mara is the chairman of that committee. I just find it funny that other teams were equally as fishy but the only teams to get punished are in the NFC East.
_________________
quietjetsket wrote:
skrILL wrote:

Care to offer some sort of insight instead of just being obnoxious? Rolling Eyes
I don't.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sp6488


Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 9120
Location: MD
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

teamorange wrote:
Gmen wrote:
Brian23 wrote:
Gmen wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
RuskieTitan wrote:
Justice has been upheld. Hopefully this deters teams in the future from trying to pull the same trick.


Collusion isn't justice.

There was a good reason behind the collusion. Was is legal? Probably not.

30 other owners played by the gentlemen rules, but two sneaky owners thought they could pull a fast one. Nope. And in that sense, justice was served.


No, 30 other's didn't. Quite a few others did the same and got no punishment.

Oh, right. So this is just the NFL picking on the Cowboys and Redskins.

Step back for a second and be reasonable about this.


The NFL Management Committee did impose those fines and John Mara is the chairman of that committee. I just find it funny that other teams were equally as fishy but the only teams to get punished are in the NFC East.


Maybe the concept is 'equally as fishy' but iirc the magnitude to which dal and wash did this was far greater.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group