The world is a toll-free toilet
Our mouths neurological ass0s
And psychologically speaking
We're in a state of mental diarrhea
Talking sh*t a mile a minute
Or in a state of constipated notions
Can't think of nothin' but sh*t, and in this world of stinky futures
Sh*tty memories and constipated 19 now-nows
Emerges from the hiney of your head the doo doo chasers
Bringing you music to get your sh*t together by
Legally, you'd never get away with this in the real world and that is the bottom line.
Can we just find one "good" in this steaming pile? At least we came out of this still under the cap. Dallas is now way over. Slight evil laugh....
The union is really the only one who can challenge it as collusion and they've signed off on the punishments. The Redskins and Cowboys can't challenge it as collusion because as part of the league in general they're complicit in it.
Yeah, interestingly Schefter said he thought this would be tougher for Dallas than DC because of where Dallas was, cap-wise.
And why is the Cowboys figure 10 mil? From what I'm hearing is it was because of a 17 mil bonus to Miles Austin. The Redskins figure is perfectly matching the DeAngelo/Haynesworth deals.
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post...skins-cap-messQ: What exactly did they do?
A: During the uncapped 2010 season, teams were repeatedly warned by the league not to structure contracts so that big money was assigned to 2010 in order to attain future-years cap relief. They were told there would be penalties if they did this. The Cowboys and the Redskins, to a greater extent than the league's other 30 teams, ignored these warnings and engaged in such behavior anyway. Miles Austin's contract with the Cowboys, which included a $17 million base salary in 2010, is being brought up as the prime example.
Q: How did they get caught?
A: The complaints against the Cowboys and the Redskins for engaging in perfectly legal behavior that violated no actual rules but only the collusive backroom dictates being issued by the league came not from the league office but from the other 30 teams, who were doing what they were told while the Cowboys and the Redskins were not. The other teams demanded action, since they were the good soldiers, and so the league decided it needed to take some.
Q: Why isn't the union challenging this?
A: While this behavior seems to fit the very dictionary definition of collusion, as multiple teams were engaged in discussions to limit the earning potential of their employees and prospective employees, do not expect it to be challenged in court. The decision today, in which the Redskins were docked $36 million in cap space and the Cowboys $10 million, is the result of a settlement between the NFL and the NFLPA. One reason the union has no problem with it is that the money lost to the Cowboys and Redskins is not taken out of the overall 2012 spending pool — each of 28 other teams gets $1.6 million extra in cap room, so there's no net loss league-wide. Another reason the union won't push on it is because they agreed, as part of the settlement of last year's Brady vs. NFL federal lawsuit, to drop all pending legal action against the league. That included their claims that the league engaged in collusion in 2010.
Q: Why is this happening now, the day before free agency?
A: The answer to that lies in the reason it took so long for the league to establish and announce this year's salary cap. The union must sign off on the cap before it is approved, and it obviously took issue initially with the idea of punishing teams for spending money in an uncapped year. But the league was toying with the idea of lowering this year's salary cap, and used this issue as a bargaining chip with the union. Basically, if the union agreed to the punishment for the Redskins and Cowboys, the cap would be $120.6 million, as it is now. But if they refused, the league was prepared to make the cap lower. I don't know by how much, but say for the sake of argument they wanted to drop it to $116 million per team. That'd have been a total of $128 million when spread across 32 teams — a significant loss to the players if they agreed to it.
The whole thing is BS, its revisionist history at its best, the same could be said of teh Davis & Williams suspensions if they tested positive while the players were on strike.
But as others have said, it's probably a good thing that the skins dont have as much room to blow their brains out. Or as I saw on another board they could take the full $36 hit this yr and have like $50 mil in cap space next yr.
Either way I think our team will be OK.
Agreed. Take as much a possible this year. Bye, Fletcher.
Grant Paulsen @granthpaulsen
With $83 million on books for 2013, #Redskins are $37 MM under next yr's cap (if it stays at $120MM). Should defer most of penalty to '13.
If we were 40M under the cap as of today, we have another 5M with the cuts of Atogwe & Sellers. So that's 45M. If we were to take 15M right now that would still leave us with 30M for this year and leaves us with 17M for next year assuming the cap stays at 120M.
Last edited by Rasta; 03-12-2012 at 11:23 PM.
Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.