 }})
I was asked to peruse forums and see what was being said about the current Redskins/Cowboys cap space removal threat from the NFL. I decided to do something a bit different and post most of an entire thread.
From a Giants fan forum no less.
BTW, the poster Ntegrase96, is a Cowboys fan.
Ntegrase96's reply to gmen;
From a Giants fan forum no less.
BTW, the poster Ntegrase96, is a Cowboys fan.
Ntegrase96
But the fact is, there's nothing different in what the Cowboys and Redskins did to restructure contracts in an uncapped year than what several other teams did to save money in the same year. If not, the NFL wouldn't have allowed the Cowboys to restructure Miles Austin's contract like they did (they have to approve before the contract takes effect).
The uncapped part of the paragraph above implies that ALL teams were allowed to do what we and our NFCE counterparts did. They just didn't, most likely because they couldn't. And now they're crying foul because they felt that the Cowboys and Redskins gained an unfair advantage. An advantage they gained, but how unfair it was shouldn't be a topic of debate. Both the Redskins and Cowboys played by the rules that year.
Drez
This wasn't cheating. It was a backroom agreement/missive that actually amounts to collusion. However, it doesn't change the fact that they should have known better, but it didn't violate any law, rule, or regulation on the books.
ronmexico
As much as I like to see Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder punished as much as possible, this whole thing just seems unfair to the Cowboys and Redskins.
Goodell is just making up rules as he goes along to make the other owners happy. The rest of the league is just upset that they didn't think to do this.
The fact of the matter is that these contracts and extensions were approved by the league at the time and should remain approved under the new rules. They should be "Grandfathered" in.
Drez
All there was was a backroom agreement among the owners to not do what the Cowboys and Redskins did. Essentially, it was collusion among the owners to keep salaries down during the uncapped year. Reportedly, the NFL FO sent memo's informing clubs to not structure contracts that way, but there is no real basis in any actual rule or law of the NFL for them to make that issuance. Still, as I previously stated, they still should have known better.
Ntgrase96
Agreed. Dumb move by Jerry and Danny boy... sort of. They were warned that this could happen, but I'm not exactly sure what kind of grounds the NFL has to impose these docks on our salary caps.
There weren't any rules to break, so how can you break any rules? Retroactively punishing an organization because the NFL didn't have the power to enforce the rules they wanted in 2010 doesn't make sense. Still I believe you're right. The boys and skins front offices should have known better.
gmen46
So you're saying the NFL has just arbitrarily fined Cowboys and Redskins tens of millions of dollars for no real reason at all. For no rules violation. And if, as you claim, the other 30 owners essentially committed collusion by not doing what Dallas and Washington did that year, they are all now being rewarded by the NFL for committing collusion, with the equably distributed money taken from Dallas and Washington.
And you actually believe this? Wow.
Ntegrase96's reply to gmen;
Ntegrase96
That's exactly what has happened. Just nobody cares because it affects 28 teams positively and is now being covered up by FA frenzy.
I posted this in another thread here, but I'll copy and paste again. This is what has happened:
1. The league approved the contract of Miles Austin in 2010 (with the 17 million front loaded) because they couldn't say no to it without being sued by the NFLPA. But still they wanted to punish the Cowboys for taking advantage of a year with no cap-- for some reason, I'm still not exactly sure since everything done was well within the rules of that season.
2. In order to punish the Cowboys, the NFL would have to have the NFLPA's approval. In order to do that, they waited until they had leverage on the NFLPA to get them to agree to carry out sanctions on teams that "abused" the cap in an uncapped year.
3. That leverage came in the form of an election year for the NFLPA's Executive Director, DeMaurice Smith. The unadjusted cap for 2012 would have dropped for the first time ever without the reduction of the Cowboys and Redskins caps, which would shine a poor light on DeMaurice Smith. Thus, the NFL, in a way,
strong armed the NFLPA to cooperate.
It was a legal move by the NFL to dock both caps. To me, the legality of the move, doesn't justify the punishment. In an uncapped year, there are no rules to be broken. The Cowboys and Redskins did absolutely nothing wrong.
Basically, the Cowboys and Redskins are being punished for not colluding with other teams to the back room 'gentleman's agreement' and denying requests from the NFL to not spend a lot in an uncapped year-- which the NFL had absolutely positively no grounds to do so. In fact, instructing the Cowboys and Redskins to not overspend was illegal on their part since the year was uncapped.
Drez
Why is it so hard to believe. There was NO cap or floor in '10. Sure, the NFL said don't front load contracts to get the meat of it out of the way in the uncapped year, but they had no legal basis for doing so. Even the reasoning they've given is suspect... "detrimental to future competitive balance" or some such nonsense.
It's collusion. And the Cowboys and Redskins decided not to play along and now the other owners want to punish them. None of this seems very far fetched to me. Also, let me make it clear that I don't have a problem with that.
It seems stranger that in an uncapped year that there'd be provisions, that the NFLPA would have had to sign off on, that would limit how teams could spend money.
gmen46
Why is it so hard (for me) to believe this?
1) Because what you describe has not been in any media explanation that I have seen. If you have a direct link or reference, I'd love to read it.
2) Because what you describe means that Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder--two of the LAST NFL owners I believe would just roll over and take it up the *** from the NFL--are, in fact, allowing tens of millions of dollars to be taken from them, for NO REASON at all, according to you and ntegrase.
I invert your question back to you. Why is it NOT hard for you and ntegrase to believe this nonsense?
Ntegrase96
1.
NFLPA Agreed to Cowboys/Redskins salary cap sanctions
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...reed-to-cowboysredskins-salary-cap-sanctions/
Video from PFT: The Cowboys/Redskins salary-cap mess, from square one
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/13/the-cowboysredskins-salary-cap-mess-from-square-one/
In the name of competitive balance, The NFL plays the Tyrant and the Bully
http://deadspin.com/5892791/
and
2.
NFL writers: 'Battle is just beginning between Cowboys and NFL'.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/da...ust-beginning-between-cowboys-and-the-nfl.ece
Cowboys and Redskins statements on cap hit reveal an NFL ambush
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...-51b6d8d64160/comments?count=20&sortBy=latest
Ntegrase96
In all fairness gmen46, you probably haven't been nearly as engrossed in this as I have since it broke yesterday.
No aspect of this makes any sense.
From the retroactive punishment for not breaking any rules, to the fact that the guy who heads the competition committee that held the sanctions is none other than John Mara, a divisional rival of both the Cowboys and Redskins.
gmen46
Thanks for the links. And I defer at this point to your understandable vested interest in this issue, since it effects your team and not mine.
But, you have to admit, it goes against everything that is holy--and unholy--to believe either Jones or Snyder, let alone both, will allow themselves to be "Deliverence-d" into losing tens of millions of dollars if there is in fact no regulatory justification, yeah?
Ntegrase96
It's a very odd situation. I think Snyder will lead the way in any action taken, but right now my guess is they're trying to figure out how to attack the situation.
I've stated before that I personally just want answers. The 10 million for us is really not an enormous deficit. It's mostly the principal of the cap removals.They're completely unjust and based on absolutely nothing that's legally binding.
If the NFL can do this, what else can they do and how long will it be before it affects your team as well?
Redeyejedi
No matter what 30 teams in the NFL decided to follow what the NFL asked and 2 didnt. No one is being punished the teams are just taking the cap hits they rightfully were supposed to take for the contracts they gave out.
I have less of a problem with what the COwboys did.The Redskins were blatantly trying to get out of the bad contracts they gave.
Ntegrase
I can see this argument. But the fact is, the NFL had no right to ask that teams limit spending in an uncapped year. In fact, I'm pretty sure it was illegal to do so.
And I'm not so certain that it was only the Cowboys and Redskins that didn't follow suit with the gentleman's agreement amongst owners, but they were the only ones that were really penalized.
Now don't get too caught up on 'gentleman's agreement' amongst owners as a respectable idea. The one's that filed suit were colluding. So really, the only ones that weren't doing something that could be deemed as illegal were the two organizations that are currently being punished-- Dallas and Washington. Ironic isn't it?
Redeyejedi
Not limit spending they told them not to dump salary because there would be consequences in the new CBA for doing it and there was. They converted salary into bonus's that didnt prorate over the contract length.
Ntegrase96
That does not matter. The NFL didn't have cap rules for that year. I understand the difference between unlimited spending and dumping salaries, but it still does not matter. The NFL didn't have any power what so ever on how teams were allowed to spend their money during that season.
The NFL didn't have the power to punish them then, and certainly doesn't have the power to punish them now. They did, however, strong arm the NFLPA into cooperating in an unjustified sanction against the two teams.
Simply put, the Cowboys and Redskins are being punished for something that happened in 2010 for rules that didn't exist until about half a week ago. Furthermore, they're being retroactively punished for something the NFL approved in the first place.
Tell me how that makes sense...?
Drez
The reason why Jones and Snyder haven't done anything is because about the only recourse they'd have is to start an anti-trust suit. They'd spend way more than they'd ever get in a settlement.
And no money is being taken from them, they're just getting deducted cap space and the total value of that space is distributed to all but 5 or 6 teams.
The owners are just pissy that the Cowboys and Redskins didn't abide by their agreement and are now seeking retribution.
Redeyejedi
Its cap space they would of got charged with anyway. They are trying to act above the rest of the teams in the NFL. Skins and Boys fans dont seem to understand if the teams didnt agree to this there would of been total anarchy. The cap would of been meaningless
Ntegrase96
There wasn't a formal agreement. That's what you don't seem to be understanding. The year was uncapped and teams could choose to do as they pleased.
It was a backhand agreement amongst owners. Granted the Cowboys and Redskins 'acted above the agreement' so to speak, but whoever said they agreed to it in the first place? They weren't legally bound to do so, and their actions suggest they never did anyway.
So tell me, based on the rules of an uncapped year, how were the Cowboys and Redskins out of bounds?
Anarchy eh? It's not like the league has been capped forever. I'm pretty sure it survived before the cap and an uncapped year wouldn't ruin the league or create anarchy.