Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Redskins and Cowboys cap room evaporates
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
TGryn
Until today, the Redskins were $31 million under the cap and the Cowboys were $4.5 million under. If I'm understanding this right, the operative word is "were":
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/...s-in-cap-space/
QUOTE
there has been talk of the NFL taking action against teams that deliberately dumped salaries into the uncapped year of 2010. The two primary violators were the Cowboys and Redskins, according to Adam Schefter of ESPN. Per Schefter, the league will punish the teams by removing millions in cap dollars. How many millions? Schefter reports that the Cowboys will lose more than $10 million and that the Redskins will lose $36 million.

...because they deliberately ignored directives from the commissioner:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/...-uncapped-year/

QUOTE
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the teams were told "at least six times" during ownership-level meetings that there would be "serious consequences" for any team that used the uncapped year as an occasion to dump salaries. The Cowboys and Redskins engaged in "systematic dumping" of salaries into the uncapped year, despite the warnings.


Every team will get an additional $1.6 million in cap space from the reallocation.

EDIT: OK, the report states they get to spread out the hit over 2 years, so they can take the hit in stages. Not quite as painful.
Flying Dutchman
QUOTE (TGryn @ Mar 12 2012, 06:19 PM) *
Until today, the Redskins were $31 million under the cap and the Cowboys were $4.5 million under. If I'm understanding this right, the operative word is "were":
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/...s-in-cap-space/

...because they deliberately ignored directives from the commissioner:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/...-uncapped-year/



Every team will get an additional $1.6 million in cap space from the reallocation.

EDIT: OK, the report states they get to spread out the hit over 2 years, so they can take the hit in stages. Not quite as painful.

Supposedly, they were warned as were all the owners at least 6 times that if they tried to front load contracts into the no-cap year there would be severe punishments for their actions. They both ended way above all other teams in their total cap, way...way above.
BirdsWinBaby
according to adam schefter this announcement by the NFL is just the beginning. both teams will appeal/fight this ruling which will lead to what adam calls a "long process"

he said he couldnt give many details until the teams offcially respond. not sure how this plays out but when the lawyers get involved it might be years before they actually get punished. and the number will almost certainly change
TGryn
After reading what I can about this, AFAIK the league office had to approve those contracts when they were sent in, so it looks to me like they're retroactively punishing teams for contracts that they said were OK at the time. Not cool. I don't know if there's any appeals process set up in the CBA if the commissioner and the union are in agreement, though, aside from going to the courts.

I also have to wonder, if the league is punishing the Redskins and Cowboys for basically taking advantage of the uncapped year, shouldn't teams like the Eagles also have to face sanctions for using LTBE clauses in contracts to move cap space from year to year? Technically what they did was fine, but it wasn't exactly in the "spirit" of the salary cap, either.
D Rock
QUOTE (TGryn @ Mar 13 2012, 02:10 PM) *
After reading what I can about this, AFAIK the league office had to approve those contracts when they were sent in, so it looks to me like they're retroactively punishing teams for contracts that they said were OK at the time. Not cool.

The league looks at those contracts as individual deals not with regards to where they fit in the cap structure equation for a particular year as a whole. Likewise the union.
Dreagon
QUOTE (BirdsWinBaby @ Mar 13 2012, 07:50 AM) *
he said he couldnt give many details until the teams offcially respond. not sure how this plays out but when the lawyers get involved it might be years before they actually get punished. and the number will almost certainly change


I think there is a good chance that Jerry won't even fight this. We're talking about five million a year in cap space (for 2 years), not actual real money, and filing a large lawsuit would probably cost just as much or more before it would be over. I doubt he's happy about it, but I'm betting he'll decide to be philosophical about this one and take a "you gotta pick your battles" attitude towards it.

At the same time, as lousy of a gm as he is, I get the feeling he is a mean sob who doesn't forget this type of stuff.
nephillymike
I'll play lawyer for a minute.

The uncapped year was"punishment" for both sides for not reaching a deal. It was the unknown.

For the players it was the scare of no minimum spending levels and longer free agency waiting period which could cause salaries to decrease significantly.

For the owners, it was the scare of no mximum spending levels and the fear that they couldn't protect each other from their owner brethren.

The fact that they were "warned" (six times at that) about dumping salary in the uncapped year and potential ramifications is an interesting comment in a non collusive uncapped year. Sounds to me like they were warned in an uncapped year not to spend too much. I wonder how many warnings were given to the teams that spent at levels which were deemed to be "too low", I;m sure there were some right? Maybe even six warnings to those teams I suppose?

Hmmmmm. Sounds like a connect the dots collusion case to me with probably plenty of paperwork supporitng the warnings to Was and Dal and very little warning paperwork for the other low spending teams. What do you need? They have the paperwork trail and the new announcement. Check. Then you need those that were harmed. How about those on those two teams who were or will be cut b/c of the lower cap after the punishment, or all those free agents this year who would have gotten a much bigger offer from the free spending boys and Skins? Then you need someone pissed enough to sue? I think Snyder and Jones just might be to go Al Davis on their brethren. If not them, does the union want to expose the sham of the collusive uncapped year? Depends I guess.

Should be interesting.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.