Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Per Schefter & PFT: NFL salary cap debacle continues---updates include NFLPA filing collusion lawsuits---links and discussion current--MET

sableholic

By sableholic
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

aspkikn

aspkikn

Posted
Posted
So all Danny has to do is pay $1 this year and the rest next year. This way we can build a team around RG3 this year and would not have give a rat's ass next year. :D

Yea right - and then cut all the free agents to get under the cap next year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rockfan7224

rockfan7224

Posted
Posted

And we ain't "cursed." Unless it's some kind of football god who hates stupidity. Only TWO teams are being punished for this. You think it's an accident? Our front office behaved spectacularly moronically if they thought they could get away with this.

Not the point. NFL approves contracts, why is this a problem now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rufus T Firefly

Rufus T Firefly

Posted
Posted
>recent agreement

>recent agreement

>recent agreement

So you are saying that this is a RETROACTIVE punishment?

People, people, people

This is a purely retroactive punishment.

We are being punished because the NFL decided 2 YEARS AFTER THE FACT that they didn't like the way we restructured our contracts.

That's from the bottom of the ESPN story. Sorry I didn't put the link in:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7677375/sources-dallas-cowboys-washington-redskins-lose-millions-cap-space

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Warpath11

Warpath11

Posted
Posted
I can't wait until an official answer is released for this very question.

It may have something to do with the 30% rule of the uncapped year: According to J.I. Halsell

"Chief among those rules is one that prohibits a salary from increasing or decreasing more than 30% from year to year. This would rule out, for instance, paying a free agent a $25 million salary in 2010 and then paying him the league minimum in future years when, presumably, there will be a cap.

Halsell said that the word around the league is that there should be a deal in 2011 that will avert a work stoppage and bring back a salary cap. That means that teams must be cautious about what contracts look like next season and beyond."

When we re-structured Haynesworth and Hall in early 2010 we may have messed with the 30% rule. Not sure if those restructres add up to 36 million but I do recall big Al was given a roster/option bonus for 21 million and Hall in the area of 15 million (not sure about Hall's numbers). Anyway that made their salaries for 2010 30% more than there were for 2009 and 2011 thus the penalty???

Not sure if that is the reason but it could explain some things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conn

Conn

Posted
Posted
It may have something to do with the 30% rule of the uncapped year: According to J.I. Halsell

"Chief among those rules is one that prohibits a salary from increasing or decreasing more than 30% from year to year. This would rule out, for instance, paying a free agent a $25 million salary in 2010 and then paying him the league minimum in future years when, presumably, there will be a cap.

Halsell said that the word around the league is that there should be a deal in 2011 that will avert a work stoppage and bring back a salary cap. That means that teams must be cautious about what contracts look like next season and beyond."

When we re-structured Haynesworth and Hall in early 2010 we may have messed with the 30% rule. Not sure if those restructres add up to 36 million but I do recall big Al was given a roster/option bonus for 21 million and Hall in the area of 15 million (not sure about Hall's numbers). Anyway that made their salaries for 2010 30% more than there were for 2009 and 2011 thus the penalty???

Not sure if that is the reason but it could explain some things.

If ANY of this was the reason, it would have been caught at the time. Two years ago, the NFL had to approve every single contract they are now complaining about.

That's shady ****ing business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsFTW

SkinsFTW

Posted
Posted
Why is this even a rule??? It was an uncapped year, an owner should be able to do wtf he wants with his money! What am I missing here????

It's uncapped, but you can't actually use that to pay your players. Yeah, sounds like a lawsuit to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skinsforlife101

skinsforlife101

Posted
Posted
Dan and Jerry should take all their money that they bring into the NFL, and tell Goodell and the small market teams to **** OFF!

You can bet on it that Jones and Allen will file an appeal. The NFL Players association is not going to be happy to say the least. I don't foresee this happing this year but we may face some cap penalties next year. I sure both Danny’s and Jerry’s lawyers are in Rogers office now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rdavis2005

rdavis2005

Posted
Posted

Heres some cuts that can be made according to salaries and relase fees on another site:

Hall save 6.2 mil, Cooley save 2.1, Moss .5 , Atogwe 3.6, Gaffney 2.6, Beck 1.3, Sellers(already cut) 1.5, Doughty 1.1, Cook .5....also Trent Williams contract looks like it can easily be restructured this yr or next to save 5-6 mil. Most of the aforementioned were either liabilities to the team(Beck, Doughty,Cook) or made minimal imapact last year(Cooley,Atogwe,Moss). The moves w a restucture of Williams will save 24.5 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsTillIDie

SkinsTillIDie

Posted
Posted
There is so much ridiculous knee-jerk chicken littling in this thread. I still don't get how we all of a sudden can't sign ANY free agents with 30 million in cap space AFTER the fact.

We had ~40 million in cap space, which includes space we need to re-sign multiple players, from vet-min guys to fill roster spots to more important players like London Fletcher. Cap space needed to add draft picks.

Take away a major chunk of that and it's difficult to give a guy like Fletcher $6 or 8 million a year, and impossible to give Vincent Jackson $12 million.

Players will have to be cut, which we've already seen. Atogwe. JSteelz suggested Hall might be on the way out. There could be an enormous backlash from this, and we quite simply won't be as competitive as we could've been before this ridiculous cap charge

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazy Levi

Crazy Levi

Posted
Posted

As jaw-dropping as this is...I can say it was SMART to get this trade done. You have to think they had heard that this was coming.

This trade suddenly becomes MUCH more valuable. We'll be getting a relative bargain in RG3, considering that what *I* wanted - go after Flynn in FA - suddenly would have been crippling for us. It's a huge wow, but we got Rg3, we had a good draft last year. We'll just need to be even smarter in FA, and that means doing it like we did last season - avoid the big names and picking smart.

But goddamn it if the stench of #92 isn't haunting us another 2 years. And Christ Bruce Allen...you REALLY ****ed up. Big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kevinklein

kevinklein

Posted
Posted

To those of you who are thinking this is going to somehow impact the RG3 situations: it's not. These deductions, in fact, aren't even considered a violation.

I don't know what's going on really, but it's equivalent to the Redskins being severely punished, without actually being in trouble...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ixcuincle

ixcuincle

Posted
Posted
THE NFL IS NOT CANCELING OUR TRADE WITH THE RAMS.

Seriously, don't even quote that idiot. We're getting RGIII.

Unless the Colts take him ;)

Just had a moment of thought about this, this hurts the team, but the team can still be active if they go "Moneyball" and draft solid underrated players who are not exactly superstars. If you can spend your money wisely and get a nice supporting cast, while still being able to manage that 18 mil penalty (because I'm assuming you would cut into it half and half over 2 years), you might be able to give Griffin some serviceable options.

This isn't the end of the world, but it impairs the Redskins, no doubt. Now it's time to see what the Redskins do to adjust and adapt to this sudden, unfair, ridiculous change in rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Warpath11

Warpath11

Posted
Posted
If ANY of this was the reason, it would have been caught at the time. Two years ago, the NFL had to approve every single contract they are now complaining about.

That's shady ****ing business.

Perhaps it was but with no cap for 2010 and a new CBA for the 2011 it was "put off" until now when the cap came back and the labor situation settled down?? again no idea just throwing out ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...