• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

Why wouldn't the Redskins sue the league? And Tandler's thoughts.

McKissic for the win

McD5

The Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
14,954
Reaction score
16
Points
318
Location
Orlando

Florida State


Mods, please merge if you deem it appropriate. It's slow, and I think this is worthy of a new thread.

Rich Tandler, a great Skins writer, mentioned a few risks of suing the league yesterday:

http://www.realredskins.com/rich-ta...02/are-the-redskins-about-to-go-nuclear-.html

There are pitfalls in suing a league of which you are a member. In 1980 Al Davis sued the NFL to move his Raiders from Oakland to Los Angeles. He won the antitrust suit and moved the team to the LA Coliseum in 1982. He spent the rest of his years as an outcast among NFL owners. When he wanted improvements to the LA Coliseum and, after he moved the team back to Oakland in 1995, the Oakland Coliseum, he got precious little support from the league.

The possibility of strained relations with the other owners would be the risk the Redskins would be taking by going to court against the league. Even if they win there could be ramifications that last for decades and end up being more costly than what might be gained by winning the ability to spend an additional $18 million in player salary.


I believe there are many more:

1. Say goodbye to hosting the SB anytime soon, and to all of the money it could bring.

2. Support with the team name? You'd like to have the league supporting that decision, whatever it may be.

3. Bountygate. This was the first thing that came to my mind a year ago. I believe the fear of that investigation spreading to DC made it impossible to even consider suing last season. A year later, that worry is probably much less.

4. Player suspensions. Will the league treat any currently suspended Skins, or future problems kindly?

Can anyone think of any other risks in suing the league for $18 million this season? Dan certainly seems hesitant to do so.
 

Last edited:

Boone

The Commissioner
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
43,003
Reaction score
3,204
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

1. Say goodbye to hosting the SB anytime soon, and to all of the money it could bring.

How likely is a DC SB anyway? Not very. Minimal concern

2. Support with the team name? You'd like to have the league supporting that decision, whatever it may be.

Probably a legitimate concern - but the NFL is more image conscious than any other organization - if the heat on the name grows from a nagging bark to a raging chorus, they won't support us anyway

3. Bountygate. This was the first thing that came to my mind a year ago. I believe the fear of that investigation spreading to DC made it impossible to even consider suing last season. A year later, that worry is probably much less.

I can't imagine Goodell would risk that kind of obvious retaliation. The door has been shut on Bountygate. Opening it now after it's been resolved would be blatant, clear retaliation. Can't see even Goodell risking that. And it would be the basis for more Redskins legal action if he did.

4. Player suspensions. Will the league treat any currently suspended Skins, or future problems kindly?

I'm trying to figure out what breaks we've gotten in the past? I don't see how it could get worse.

Can anyone think of any other risks in suing the league for $18 million this season? Dan certainly seems hesitant to do so.

I think the biggest risk is that Goodell leads by intimidation. It's not him we have to worry about - it's his ability to intimidate other owners into opposing anything we do. Look at the Cowboys - they clearly got screwed - not as badly as the Redskins, but $10,000,000 isn't chump change. Yet they're clearly afraid to cross Goodell.

Now that we've 'floated' the idea of a lawsuit, which btw, was pretty stupid - we either do it, or we look like lame gasbags. I wish Snyder would just embrace his inner evil. It's there just below the surface. I'd like to see it rise again. If you're going to be an epic dick - how about doing it when it really counts for something, not just when you want to send a message to your neighborhood association or your bad defensive coordinator.

Hell - if Snyder informed the league that the Redskins would not take the field in 2013 until re-consideration of the penalties and some reasonable accomodation was made - I'd 100% support that. That would take balls.

Unfortunately, I think this is all bluff and I think Snyder will swallow hard and we'll see no relief of any kind. When push comes to shove, Snyder is a company man. He won't kick the golden goose IMHO. I hope I'm wrong.
 

tshile

Guest
all the 'money' the SB brings does nothing for me, and likely millions of other fans. the cost of building up to host the super bowl vs money that's brought it does little to help small businesses too.
see:
http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/the-economic-mixed-bag-that-is-the-super-bowl

Support in the team's name? The owners already hate Snyder and have shown no support, so what support are we going to lose?

Bountygate? Ship sailed. Unjustified suspensions? Doubt it.

The real problem is with trades and the draft. I don't think people understand how closely the teams work together when it comes to trades and the draft. Do you really think we got the #2 overall pick because we beat Cleveland with a deal on St Louis's arbitrary and fake deadline? No, we got it because Fisher wanted to do Shanahan a solid and that's how they decided to do it.

You lose those kind of relationships when you alienate yourself from the league.

That said - I don't think all of the other 30 owners (cowboys are on our side on this one, so far) are for what happened to us, so I don't think it'll alienate all 30 owners. We'll have to see how it plays out to figure out who it turns off, but Snyder was such a bag of dicks when he first came into the league majority of the owners don't like him anyways. Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan are the only reason anyone in the league has any respect for us or willingness to work with us.

I hope Snyder and Allen have a plan here because they could **** up the next 30 years for us if they don't. And for what? 36 million dollars in cap space over two years we weren't supposed to have anyways?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Lanky Livingston

Guest
Snyder doesn't care about becoming a pariah amongst NFL owners - from what I've heard he isn't very well-liked already.

Breaks from the league? Are you kidding? Like all the suspensions and penalties we got this year and the timing of them weren't designed to give us the most possible trouble. The NFL is already against the Redskins - its about time Snyder and his minions fired back.

I hope he does sue the league, and Goodell is exposed as the fraudulent liar he is.
 

tshile

Guest
Which suspensions/fines weren't within the normal bounds outlined in the fine schedule?

Even trent Williams punching someone at the end of a game was given the bare minimum fine.

I'm not sure if you've ever looked at the fine schedule lanky, but it's pretty cut and dry with very, very little leeway in how much a player is fined/suspended. If our players were receiving unfair treatment we'd know about it...
 

Lanky Livingston

Guest
Which suspensions/fines weren't within the normal bounds outlined in the fine schedule?

Even trent Williams punching someone at the end of a game was given the bare minimum fine.

I'm not sure if you've ever looked at the fine schedule lanky, but it's pretty cut and dry with very, very little leeway in how much a player is fined/suspended. If our players were receiving unfair treatment we'd know about it...

I was referring to the timing of all our suspensions & penalties, not the fines themselves.

$36M cap hit the day before free agency?
Polumbus gets injured, and they suspend Jordan Black in the next day or so?
Tanard Jackson suspended a week before the season, after all the good free agents were gone?
Cedric Griffin suspended after the Redskins started to show signs of life?

Other teams are winning appeals over things like BROKEN CUPS, and our guy with a legit prescription for his medication that he's been taking for 10 years and that the NFL is aware he's been taking for 10 years is suspended. Come on, man!
 

tshile

Guest
I was referring to the timing of all our suspensions & penalties, not the fines themselves.

$36M cap hit the day before free agency?
Polumbus gets injured, and they suspend Jordan Black in the next day or so?
Tanard Jackson suspended a week before the season, after all the good free agents were gone?
Cedric Griffin suspended after the Redskins started to show signs of life?

Other teams are winning appeals over things like BROKEN CUPS, and our guy with a legit prescription for his medication that he's been taking for 10 years and that the NFL is aware he's been taking for 10 years is suspended. Come on, man!
Well yeah the $36 million cap hit was obviously a dick move timing wise, that one I agree with you on.

I think the rest of it is coincidental. Jordan Black's is a little shady because I believe he had approval for it, but admitted it was because of a problem with his paperwork.

Jackson was a repeat offender... you're going to blame that on the league being out to get the redskins? dude is suspended indefinitely because he got caught so many times...

Griffin's timing had nothing to do with how the redskins were doing and had everything to do with him losing his final appeal. He could have taken the suspension earlier, but opted to appeal and drag it out.
 

Lanky Livingston

Guest
I mean, you can look at it however you want...but its obvious to me that the league has it out for the Redskins.
 

tshile

Guest
I mean, you can look at it however you want...but its obvious to me that the league has it out for the Redskins.
See... that's the thing, it's not so obvious to me. I just don't see it. You can cry about the timing of things, but they were all self inflicted... "However I want" is how they went down...

Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crock to me. Guys got caught taking performance enhancing drugs... they got suspended... some appealed and lost... that means the league is out to get us?

how does that compare with the league letting davis and Williams fail a million drug tests before finally suspending them for 4 games? was the league going easy on us because they like us, or were they just following the rules outlined in the contract with the NFLPA on drug testing?
 

Lanky Livingston

Guest
The $36M cap penalty was self-inflicted?

EDIT: And yes, Black's suspension was due to misfiled paperwork or whatever; but don't you think a REASONABLE result would be to have it overturned in appeal? Considering he's been taking it for 10 years, and the league has known about it for 10 years? I mean, that's no less reasonable than a broken piss cup, IMO.
 

tshile

Guest
The $36M cap penalty was self-inflicted?
I said I agree with you on the cap...

and yes, it was... we wouldn't have had to restructure those deals if, as an organization, we didn't make ****ty deal for 10+ years straight. that's what happens when you let clowns run your multi-billion dollar business.
 

Taylor 36

Camp Fodder
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Virginia Beach

VCU

I honestly don't see how it could hurt us anymore than we've already been hurt.

-The league already shot down the SuPer Bowl idea here for DC. Unless we build a dome or have a retractubal roof, it is never going to happen. NY got it ONLY because of the damage from 911. Since the Pentagon wasn't completely destroyed and the deaths in DC didn't reach 4 figures, we're an after thought.

-Most of the owners already hate Snyder, and they have since he bought the team. Old, family rich men are never usually kind to the new, young, self-made billionaire on the block. Plus, Danny screwed them by being willing to pay players and coaches, which drove up the market prices. Sad, but true, I think the best friend that Danny has in the owners meetings is Jerry Jones, and he may be the only one.

-One thing the owners do care about when it comes to DC is the money it brings into the league. They all know the finacial risks and hits that would certainly occur, at least for the first few years, if the Redskin's name was changed. Besides, they really have no control over the name. Daniel Snyder owns all rights to it, not the NFL.
 
Last edited:

Lanky Livingston

Guest
See... that's the thing, it's not so obvious to me. I just don't see it. You can cry about the timing of things, but they were all self inflicted... "However I want" is how they went down...

Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crock to me. Guys got caught taking performance enhancing drugs... they got suspended... some appealed and lost... that means the league is out to get us?

how does that compare with the league letting davis and Williams fail a million drug tests before finally suspending them for 4 games? was the league going easy on us because they like us, or were they just following the rules outlined in the contract with the NFLPA on drug testing?
Again...a difference of opinion. In my opinion, its blatantly obvious.
 

tshile

Guest
So were they being nice on Davis/Williams or were they just following policy?
 

tshile

Guest
I guess part of my problem is i'm not 100% sold that the redskins didn't deserve the cap penalties they got.

I understand it's colluding - if you don't think the NFL has been colluding since the merger to keep the players down as much as possible then I think you're being naïve. That's not to excuse it, I just don't see that as being the show-stopper everyone else seems to.

We had bad contracts that we made because we ran our organization poorly. Other teams watched us do it and laughed at us. So we tried to wipe all that away with a no-salary-cap season, and the league said no - you don't get to be reckless then fix it all in a year while the rest of the teams spend years being responsible.

I completely understand the league's position. I also understand why they don't give two craps about tampa bay, because they hurt the players by going below the floor and the league doesn't care about the players. Doesn't make it right, but I understand why they did it.

All that said I want the redskins to win their injunction on free agency because **** Goodell, I want his head to explode when the redskins ruin his precious schedule of events and the news is how the redskins managed to stop free agency.

I also want them to win the law suit because having the cap space back would be awesome, especially considering we're actually being run like an organization that finally knows what it is doing.

I just don't get outraged about it like majority of the redskins fans seem to, I think we more or less deserve what we got (the timing of it was a dick move, as lanky pointed out) and I hope that we aren't making a stupid 36 million dollar penalty we would have had if we never tried to restructure the deals to begin with worse by going after the league. That's a bigger concern to me than any 'injustice' done by the league.

I recognize those are unpopular opinions among redskins fans... I just don't buy into the 'everyone is out to get us' and 'we did nothing wrong' stuff I constantly see, it strikes me is as homerism.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friend 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you Sandy ❤
    Top