Zazzaro703 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Legally, Smith knowing about it and hiding it from the players and then saying, hey sign this so we can get the CBA without explaining it (if that's what happened) is a big, BIG deal. This, the redskins never had their hopes on the NFLPA lawsuit. They just had to stand out of the way while it played out. I suspect we will make whatever move we have planning for the last year sometime shortly after the superbowl. I thought i remember one of our Redskin insiders saying this back in August. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warpath11 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Legally, Smith knowing about it and hiding it from the players and then saying, hey sign this so we can get the CBA without explaining it (if that's what happened) is a big, BIG deal. Again I do not see what anyone can do since the players signed off on the CBA which included the penalties to our cap so that the league cap would stay at the level it was at. We brought this before the CBA judge at UPenn and he threw it out. Like I said legally I dont see what can be done to overrule the penalties. I hope Im wrong I just dont see much here to help us out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Well this comment was AWESOME:“De controlled both the NFLPA and the NFL Coaches Association from 2009 to 2012. During this period, De threw 3 generations of NFL players under the bus in exchange for a photo op with Roger Goodell and Robert Kraft; threw the Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys under the bus to conceal from NFL players the truth about the declining salary cap; and, De threw NFL coaches under the bus when he: (1) sat silently as NFL teams unilaterally changed coaches’ retirement benefits; (2) filed an unauthorized legal brief under the NFLCA’s name during the NFL lockout; (3) kicked the NFLCA out of the NFLPA’s offices for challenging the filing of the brief, and he rolled the bus over NFL coaches when he snatched $308,000 in coaches’ dues money and sued the NFLCA because NFL coaches understandably want competent representation. “I intend to address all of the issues that confront all NFL coaches and clean up the mess that De left behind. While I do, perhaps De will answer these questions: When you controlled the NFLCA, did you fight for uniform retirement and health benefits that will follow NFL coaches from team-to-team? Why does the salary cap continue to decline while League revenues and team values continue to increase? If you stand by the CBA that you negotiated, why do you shift money from other player benefits to the salary cap to create the illusion that the salary cap is flat or slightly rising?” http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/21/cornwell-comes-out-swinging-against-de-smith/ De Smith has never had the interest of the players as his prime motivation. Is is, and has always been, getting his name out there and making headlines for himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 We brought this before the CBA judge at UPenn and he threw it out. It was actually an arbitor designated by the league. The merits of the case were never heard as he ruled it was not under his scope to review. As I've said before IF we ever find a venue to hear the merits of the case I think the NFL is in for a boat load of problems. The question is will the Skins have the cajones to take it to that venue or decide the blowback might sweep them into the path of penalties too and decline to go there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins0721 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Again I do not see what anyone can do since the players signed off on the CBA which included the penalties to our cap so that the league cap would stay at the level it was at. We brought this before the CBA judge at UPenn and he threw it out. Like I said legally I dont see what can be done to overrule the penalties. I hope Im wrong I just dont see much here to help us out. I'm certainly not a legal expert. But this thing just reeks of corruption from the inner workings of the NFL, NFLPA, & some owners. Gawd, I wish there was something we fans could do to fight this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick7423 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 DeMaurice Smith, the Vinny Cerrato of the NFLPA. Nuff said HAIL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 So I know this would never go anywhere, but it would be a headline. File a class action suit against Mara on behalf of the Redskins ticket holders for a refund of their ticket price. Base it off the penalties levied on the Redskins as a result of legal contracts during an uncapped year hindering the Redskins ability to compete on an equal playing field. Again, I know this would never really fly, but it would make a fun headline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfriedenthal Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 So I know this would never go anywhere, but it would be a headline.File a class action suit against Mara on behalf of the Redskins ticket holders for a refund of their ticket price. Base it off the penalties levied on the Redskins as a result of legal contracts during an uncapped year hindering the Redskins ability to compete on an equal playing field. Say it threw off the "Competitive balance of the league". The same line he used against us. ---------- Post added January-21st-2013 at 04:10 PM ---------- Well this comment was AWESOME:“De controlled both the NFLPA and the NFL Coaches Association from 2009 to 2012. During this period, De threw 3 generations of NFL players under the bus in exchange for a photo op with Roger Goodell and Robert Kraft; threw the Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys under the bus to conceal from NFL players the truth about the declining salary cap; and, De threw NFL coaches under the bus when he: (1) sat silently as NFL teams unilaterally changed coaches’ retirement benefits; (2) filed an unauthorized legal brief under the NFLCA’s name during the NFL lockout; (3) kicked the NFLCA out of the NFLPA’s offices for challenging the filing of the brief, and he rolled the bus over NFL coaches when he snatched $308,000 in coaches’ dues money and sued the NFLCA because NFL coaches understandably want competent representation.... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/21/cornwell-comes-out-swinging-against-de-smith/ Two things of interest to me. This topic is still very top of mind, to not just us, but the outsiders too. They think we got hosed, and it's not just the homers in us getting riled up. Secondly, although the NFLPA "doesn't have anymore recourse" on this, but I wonder if there is any recourse through the NFLCA? I mean, almost as importantly, this affects the coaches, and puts them in a tougher situation. Am I out of line, or is it reasonable to think that there is something in the agreement between the CA and the NFL, that allows for an appeal of these types of issues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins0721 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Say it threw off the "Competitive balance of the league". The same line he used against us. So if we replace "Washington Redskins" with "Green Bay Packers" in this whole sordid affair, would a GBP stockholder(s) be able to file a lawsuit against the NFL on similar grounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfriedenthal Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 So if we replace "Washington Redskins" with "Green Bay Packers" in this whole sordid affair, would a GBP stockholder(s) be able to file a lawsuit against the NFL on similar grounds? No... the "shares of stock" weren't official ownership. It was a marketing ploy to gain funding. See here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/05/green-bay-packers-stock_n_1129801.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2cents Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Again I do not see what anyone can do since the players signed off on the CBA which included the penalties to our cap so that the league cap would stay at the level it was at. We brought this before the CBA judge at UPenn and he threw it out. Like I said legally I dont see what can be done to overrule the penalties. I hope Im wrong I just dont see much here to help us out. The National Labor Relations Board would love to hear about this. In detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABlitz Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 one site I've seen has Williams signed till like 2016 and his cap price actually goes down from this year from 14 mil to 8 to 11 to 14, 250, 000. Frankly with them able to affored 14 million for him this year I hope they might renegotiate, drop him down to 5 or so and bump him up the year after. I'm sure Trent would have a problem with that. He probably has matching earings for his gaudy necklace lined up. Not to mention a lot of munchies for the offseason. ---------- Post added January-22nd-2013 at 01:28 AM ---------- They always have the Al Davis route. They would probably win, but the stakes would be HUGE, could also end up spiraling out of control and have tons of unintended consequences. Which is why I'm all for it. It's a very fine line to having a few team owners and the commish angry with you and having all the other team owners agnry with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I'm sure Trent would have a problem with that. He probably has matching earings for his gaudy necklace lined up. Not to mention a lot of munchies for the offseason. Um, wanna explain why you're being a dick to Trent Williams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warpath11 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 The National Labor Relations Board would love to hear about this. In detail. Now that sounds fancy, what would be the path forward using NLRB? And can the NLRB overrule the agreed upon CBA (and penalties that were a part of said CBA)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 No... the "shares of stock" weren't official ownership. It was a marketing ploy to gain funding.See here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/05/green-bay-packers-stock_n_1129801.html That's only the new stocks they were selling, which didn't include voting rights. The original stock, still held by people, does include voting rights, as my father gets a ballot annually on who he'd like to keep/dump from the board. They don't get to vote on much, because the shareholders basically just approve a board and then they run the team from there. Those shares are passed along and sold to others but you're not allowed to hold more than like 100 shares, so no one person can become the owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Lets close this down until there is actually news to report. In which case, someone can make a new thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.