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

Homer: Why Daniel Snyder should sue the hell out of Roger Goodell and the NFL

themurf

By themurf
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

33

33

Posted
Posted
I agree and think this is why the Redskins and the Cowboys must bring a suit forth. If for nothing more than to make a point that the NFL is not a dynasty that can act without regard of the laws of the United States governing Labor.

You think that's a point that Snyder/Jones want to make?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Godfather151981

Godfather151981

Posted
Posted
Glad you agree. Why don't you ask Donald Trump and the USFL about how successful they where when they sued the NFL. The outcome in this case would be worse for any team that tries to sue the league since this is not an anti trust suit, but a claim by one party that the other party is not playing by the rules, rules that the other party makes up. The case holds no water, the league will show that it has ultimate authority in making it's own rules, rules the skins have played by for 75+ years, but the team then decides to sue when it doesn't like one of the rules won't fly in a courtroom.

The OP even put a quote in his post that should tip people off to what will most likely happen " But this is the NFL, which does what it wants and makes up the rules as it goes along."

Basically, the team is screwed and the only course of action is to either take all of the cap hit this year or split it up somehow over 2. Deal with it. I first thought this was tragic, maybe not having enough cash to sign RG3, but this could be a blessing in disguise by not allowing the skins to overpay for FA, like the Vjax rumour going around. I would much rather see some other teams make the mistake of overpaying for a FA in the first 24 hrs, and then leave us with the rest of the FA pool to pick and choose who would work best for the Skins. Big name FA signing rarely work out, especially in Washington, so I think it is much better to do some good scouting and try to find the best FA that suits the system as oppose to the superstar who thinks we will change our system to fit him.

This does put a damper on a quick rebuild, which is why I would focus on getting RG3 his starting Center from Baylor in order to keep RG3 happy. Mocks have him as a late second round pick and moving up quickly, and I would be willing to trade the 3rd round pick this year, and a 3rd next year to move up to get him in the second.

That would hold water if there were rules in place at the time, which there were not. Informally asking teams not to do this is hardly a rule. With that said I'm not sure I'd want to trade any more picks to move up into the second round, but I do like the idea of drafting Baylor's center for RGIII.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SWFLSkins

SWFLSkins

Posted
Posted
You think that's a point that Snyder/Jones want to make?

Redskins/Cowboys strange bed fellows are perennial losers of late, where is the damage done? The Giants won the SB. So Yeah, make the point. Goddell is too high and mighty, at this point he has taken over the game. Worst commish yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
33

33

Posted
Posted
Redskins/Cowboys strange bed fellows are perennial losers of late, where is the damage done? The Giants won the SB. So Yeah, make the point. Goddell is too high and mighty, at this point he has taken over the game. Worst commish yet.

You are overlooking that each owner has 1/32 ownership of the NFL. They may take the league to court, but not to do anything that would devalue the league or their franchises. Also, they each voted Goodell in, and this wasn't his initiative. This was set forth by 28 partners of Snyder/Jones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SWFLSkins

SWFLSkins

Posted
Posted
You are overlooking that each owner has 1/32 ownership of the NFL. They may take the league to court, but not to do anything that would devalue the league or their franchises. Also, they each voted Goodell in, and this wasn't his initiative. This was set forth by 28 partners of Snyder/Jones.

He allowed the lynch mob to carry out back door politics and that is where he should have quashed the antics, this smells bad on the NFL as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Poman

Poman

Posted
Posted
Redskins/Cowboys strange bed fellows are perennial losers of late, where is the damage done? The Giants won the SB. So Yeah, make the point. Goddell is too high and mighty, at this point he has taken over the game. Worst commish yet.

Perhaps we need a **** Goodell thread stickied somewhere a la the **** the Cowboys thread.... **** Goodell. Hail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted

I hope Dan Snyder realizes what an opportunity he has he to completely capture the hearts of Skins fans who still might otherwise hate him.

He has a chance to stand up for us.

I'd rather see the season cancelled because an everlasting stream of lawsuits than have to pay this penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DjTj

DjTj

Posted
Posted
And if we lose...then what?
We can still get compensation somewhere down the line' date=' and if we act like we expect to get the injunction and then lose it, we will lay a better factual basis to calculate damages [i']e.g.[/i] if we actually negotiate a contract with Vincent Jackson but it is denied by the league, he signs somewhere else, and they win the Super Bowl two years later when the case finally goes to trial. Maybe the jury can award us one half of a Lombardi Trophy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
December90

December90

Posted
Posted
Perhaps we need a **** Goodell thread stickied somewhere a la the **** the Cowboys thread.... **** Goodell. Hail.

Sounds like a good theme to put on a towel and hand out to each of the 95,000 fans as they enter Fedex field for the season opener.

Goodell needs to be booed off the stage on draft day and he needs to be fired from his commissioner duties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Riggo#44

Riggo#44

Posted
Posted
Sounds like a good theme to put on a towel and hand out to each of the 95,000 fans as they enter Fedex field for the season opener.

Goodell needs to be booed off the stage on draft day and he needs to be fired from his commissioner duties.

When the #2 and the #14 picks come around...how heartily is he going to get booed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
edelbeb

edelbeb

Posted
Posted
Yes. But at what cost?

Goodell and the other owners are playing chicken here' date=' I think. And they made a brilliant move: they did not fine the teams. They took away cap space.

Basically, the Skins and Boys have to sue to prove that losing cap space hurts them in some tangible way. They may be able to prove this, but do they want to prove this? They would also have to stop free agency and - in theory - the season. Do they want to do this? There is a lot at risk here for the Cowboys and Redskins and what they can "win" is really just the ability to spend more money.[/quote']

The NFL's imposition of and explanation for the cap hit constitute an admission of the negative effect of the salary cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taylor4Life

Taylor4Life

Posted
Posted

My immediate thought was that this was a move that didn't pass the smell test... as if the league really has it in for Snyder and Jones. I think that Snyder and Jones have no choice but to legally challenge this. Let's shine a bright light on these ****roaches in a courtroom, I have a hunch that there is much more shadiness involved in this hose job than we can imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Bob

Jim Bob

Posted
Posted
1. The Redskins did NOT violate the cap. All parties agree on that issue.

2. Does the Redskins contract with the NFL permit the NFL to retroactively penalize the Redskins, even if they did not violate the violate league rules, provided the other owners and the NFLPA sign off on the penalty? Absent language to that effect in the Redskins' NFL contract, the union's agreement is of no significance in a lawsuit brought by the Redskins. The union's agreement merely prevents the union from suing the NFL.

I'm guessing there is a clause that says that The Rog can do whatever he wants in there.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sportjunkie07

sportjunkie07

Posted
Posted

this whole thing is such a joke.

on the flipside of the cap ceiling, is the cap floor. several teams spent very little. this amount would be below the normal (but still legal, just like our moves) cap floor. their strategy was to spend as little as possible in 10' to have more money to spend in subsequent years, and thus gain their competitive advantage

why are they not being punished?

and didnt the bears have a massive contract frontloaded for julius peppers? why are they not being punished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimboDaMan

JimboDaMan

Posted
Posted
One thing that's missing from the "but the league approved the contracts" line is that the league approved them individually, not collectively. It isn't that any of them are bad, it's that too much $ total got dumped.
So I can sign all the free agents I want since no individual contract exceeds my total cap? I'm reasonably sure that the league will not take that approach to our FA signings this year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
this whole thing is such a joke.

on the flipside of the cap ceiling, is the cap floor. several teams spent very little. this amount would be below the normal (but still legal, just like our moves) cap floor. their strategy was to spend as little as possible in 10' to have more money to spend in subsequent years, and thus gain their competitive advantage

why are they not being punished?

and didnt the bears have a massive contract frontloaded for julius peppers? why are they not being punished.

Because its all arbitrary bs with no sound footing. This would be a legal nightmare for the NFL and the owners if anyone actually calls them out on this, and forces them to open their books, and then justify the punishments.

Heck, the team that should get looked at the hardest is the Packers. They did this, and guess what? They won the SB in 2010, and were looking dominant in 2011 if not for a fluke loss in the playoffs. If any team threatened competitive balance in the league it was them. They probably are going to be dominant for years because of their cap moves in 2010, and yet no one seems to care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Acre

Dark Acre

Posted
Posted
So I can sign all the free agents I want since no individual contract exceeds my total cap? I'm reasonably sure that the league will not take that approach to our FA signings this year.

No, your cap total is a separate matter. The amount you may spend is a specific ceiling every year. Once you reach it, you're stuck. The dispute here is that its an ad hoc call on how salary $ was dumped in the uncapped year. Unlike a hard ceiling, there was no floor per se so there was no "too much" to hit with a specific contract. My point supports the Skins. This was a last-minute decision to screw 2 teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AvesPKS

AvesPKS

Posted
Posted
One thing that's missing from the "but the league approved the contracts" line is that the league approved them individually, not collectively. It isn't that any of them are bad, it's that too much $ total got dumped.

That's right, because Goodell is Robocop and his ability to reason is constrained by his Prime Directives. It's not his fault somebody decided to add an extra one a few years later.

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...