For Midget Fans: Why John Mara cheated

[tshile]

Head. Wall. Bang.

Failing to accept that a team that legally did no wrong, isn't, ya' know, IN the wrong; isn't only being obtuse; it's being as arrogantly ignorant as you possibly can be.

Hail.

legally did no wrong...

it's like you're almost coming around to understanding what it is we're actually saying, but you're not quite there.

---------- Post added October-17th-2012 at 04:30 PM ----------

None of the above is what SS has repeatedly asked you for tshile.

Your just repeatedly offering an opinion and using that as fact in some deluded idea that your view of 'context' justifies the Redskins and Cowboys being in the wrong, regardless of the punishment you acknowledge is unfair.

Hail.

He's asking me about the rule...

My opinion is that we didn't break any written rules.

What more is there to want? I've said this multiple times. I've never said we broke any written rules...

"Please tell me the specific post number so I can see where you reference the broken rule." I answered the question.. even though I shouldn't have...

---------- Post added October-17th-2012 at 04:32 PM ----------

I'm done dude. You win.

Arguing with a wall is rough

It was a noble effort, though I could have told you what the outcome would be before you started

[tshile]

We did no wrong PERIOD! Legally, morally, whatever way you want to cut it.

Until you grasp that, this conversation is just going to go around and around in circles.

Hail.

Hey! You're finally catching on...

At least you've dropped the 'let me ask you the same question over and over, ignoring your answers to them' shtick.

edit: i have no idea how this post ended up above yours... i've seen this a few times now. no idea wtf is going on with it.. oh well.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

We did no wrong PERIOD! Legally, morally, whatever way you want to cut it.

Until you grasp that, this conversation is just going to go around and around in circles.

Hail.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Your being totally facetious to what SS asked tshile.

You've repeatedly said the Redskins were in the wrong. He's asked you to reference what rule they broke. You refuse to answer that, and throw up that you've said no rules were broken.

It's one of a heck of a tactic for not answering a question. Answer with a point that agrees to the overall question literally; even though I know that's not what I'm being asked as what I'm being asked I have no answer to back up my claim outside of my own personal opinion.

That is tantamount to trolling IMHO. But then that's not for me to judge on.

Hail.

[tshile]

Your being totally facetious to what SS asked tshile.

You've repeatedly said the Redskins were in the wrong. He's asked you to reference what rule they broke. You refuse to answer that, and throw up that you've said no rules were broken.

It's one of a heck of a tactic for not answering a question. Answer with a point that agrees to the overall question literally; even though I know that's not what I'm being asked as what I'm being asked I have no answer to back up my claim outside of my own personal opinion.

That is tantamount to trolling IMHO. But then that's not for me to judge on.

Hail.

I was asked what rule they broke - by your own admission.

My answer, as it has been SINCE PAGE FOUR, is that no rule was broken.

Your OWN response to me, ON PAGE FOUR, was that I said NO RULES WERE BROKEN

How is it a naive position to take tshile when you acknowledge no rules were broken and the league approved what we did?

You can't then say it was underhand because it doesn't sit well with other teams that didn't take the opportunity before the new CBA was agreed.

Hail.

Yet I'm trolling? You've really devolved into attacking the poster when you can come up with nothing else. This is absolutely pathetic. You need to re-read the thread, you can't even remember your own opinions much less mine.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Again, totally ignoring what was said to you.

Brilliant. Continue on at your leisure.

Hail.

[PCS]

Time out.

That's known as an attention getter.

Relax wud yas guys? Yeeeesh.

NFL Competition committee,(Mara sits on that one too),sends out a warning to all NFL Teams not to take advantage of the uncapped season in the way the Skins,Cowboys,Bucs,Raiders,and 19 other teams ended up doing. This warning is rumored to have been issued a total of 6 times during or including ownership meetings. Redskins,Cowboys,and 21 other teams,(to various degrees),say whatever and do so anyway. Fast forward to what I posted earlier. Basically,the Skins and Cowboys are guilty of not following an unwritten rule that should never have been issued in the first place. Mara was and is an opportunistic prick who took advantage of the circumstances and his position. IMHO of course.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I just don't get how you think it's in anyway logical to defend punishing someone when no rules were broken.

[tshile]

I just don't get how you think it's in anyway logical to defend punishing someone when no rules were broken.

I'm not defending the punishment, but...

Because I don't think the redskins broke any rules.

But I do think they disrupted the competitive balance, because they were playing by a set of rules other teams weren't (those 'other teams' were playing by some 'unwritten' rule, and yes it was collusion).

If you want to say the other teams are at fault for that and could have followed in the redskins footsteps but chose not to, that's absolutely fine; I (unlike others) aren't going to ridicule you for not agreeing with me. And I do, in some ways, certainly agree that those other teams have fault in the matter as well; after all, at a minimum they were colluding.

I've never said the punishment was fair. There are a handful of people in this thread that want to paint me as defending the NFL for whatever reason - I'm not. I just simply see the league's stance on the position of competitive balance and how the redskins and cowboys messed it up (or, conversely, how the 'other' teams messed it up)

Finally, if the punishment the Redskins and Cowboys received was just then it should have been applied equally to all the other offenders. Including those who took the uncapped year as a chance to go below the floor and save some money (yet still collect their equal share on revenue sharing.)

This issue is far more complex than a few have led onto in this thread. If you want to bury your head in the sand and scream "NO RULES THERE WERE NO RULES" and end any discussion there then that's fine; but there is more to the story if you're willing to try and see it. Note: that doesn't mean you have to agree with it.

[SnyderShrugged]

Post 56 is one of them. I suggest you revisit your reading lessons. In post 50 GHH clearly understands my position, as I had said it before then in post 46.

As I've said, multiple times, all the answers, support, links, etc you guys are asking for have already been posted. You're just refuse to agree with it or acknowledge it; that doesn't make it not exist.

edit: i'm sure there are more. feel free to look for them yourself if you need to.

No, nothing there that says what rule was broken at all. Nice try though.

Out of respect for PCs, i'm out, of this one. Enjoy

[SkinsHokieFan]

This issue is far more complex than a few have led onto in this thread. If you want to bury your head in the sand and scream "NO RULES THERE WERE NO RULES" and end any discussion there then that's fine; but there is more to the story if you're willing to try and see it. Note: that doesn't mean you have to agree with it.

TShile

Had you given the response here, that you did in the JKC thread on BGO, I think you would have gained much more traction, in particular when talking about the lack of allies Snyder has amongst NFL owners, and going into specific things you had heard (noatably the 2000 Superbowl)

That could at least provide a way of "thinking" of why the owners would do something that objectively is so dumb.

In fact, I implore you to help save the thread by adding those nuggets here

[tshile]

No, nothing there that says what rule was broken at all. Nice try though.

Out of respect for PCs, i'm out, of this one. Enjoy

There is a source of confusion here, and it very well be on my end... I'm going to try to clear it up just for the sake of easing minds. I think you don't understand my position on the topic...

I don't think the redskins broke any rules. So asking me to point you to a post where I said which rule was broken is not possible. What I thought you were asking was where did I discuss rules being broken - so I pointed you towards posts where I said I didn't think any written rules were broken...

[BKSkinsFan]

It sucks, I was and still am angry about it, but here is the thing.. It seems as though we did it KNOWING there would be consequences. I can only get so angry when they obviously were warned, did it anyway, then act like they did nothing wrong when they get punished.

Say what you want, no broken rules, etc.. We were WARNED and did it anyway. Enough crying and wishing people dead on here, it's really going over the top in here lately.

[G1]

I didn't ask what the rule said, I ask what you would think if you were a fan of another team.

I'm just not trying to view it as shortsighted as most here. I'm trying to view it from all of the other teams perspective. You are entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine.

If I were a fan of another team I'd be dissapointed that my team

1. Acted illegally in a collusion that may damage the current CBA. I don't want another lockout.

2. Didn't act as professionally as the Skins and Cowboys (and others not in Mara's division) by engaging properly in the contractually agreed CBA

[rick7423]

I'm not defending the punishment, but...

Because I don't think the redskins broke any rules.

But I do think they disrupted the competitive balance, because they were playing by a set of rules other teams weren't (those 'other teams' were playing by some 'unwritten' rule, and yes it was collusion).

If you want to say the other teams are at fault for that and could have followed in the redskins footsteps but chose not to, that's absolutely fine; I (unlike others) aren't going to ridicule you for not agreeing with me. And I do, in some ways, certainly agree that those other teams have fault in the matter as well; after all, at a minimum they were colluding.

I've never said the punishment was fair. There are a handful of people in this thread that want to paint me as defending the NFL for whatever reason - I'm not. I just simply see the league's stance on the position of competitive balance and how the redskins and cowboys messed it up (or, conversely, how the 'other' teams messed it up)

Finally, if the punishment the Redskins and Cowboys received was just then it should have been applied equally to all the other offenders. Including those who took the uncapped year as a chance to go below the floor and save some money (yet still collect their equal share on revenue sharing.)

This issue is far more complex than a few have led onto in this thread. If you want to bury your head in the sand and scream "NO RULES THERE WERE NO RULES" and end any discussion there then that's fine; but there is more to the story if you're willing to try and see it. Note: that doesn't mean you have to agree with it.

I totally get what you have written, but i think you are mistaken in that the Boys and Skins disrupted the competitive balance in 2010. Wat the league and Mara's are really pissed about is that the Boys and Skins are financially successful and more than willing to spend whatever is necessary to get a player, and by doing so bloat the minimum salary of a player especially ones who are tagged the franchise player.

Most teams cannot match the sheer dollars that the Boys and Skins can dish out. This is the real competitive balance Mara is eluding to, but this capgate is all he could convince the other teams to get us on to keep them in check.

Now as for why the arbitrator did not even hear the case was because of our dear friend DeMaurice (?) Smith. in order to save his job with the NFLPA and also get the salary cap up from $116M to $121M, he agreed to allow the NFL pursue the charges against the Skins and Boys. By doing so, he effectively gave full NFLPA sanction on the fines, therefore no arbitration.

We were screwed by very powerfull and corrupt individuals and Mr Mara is square in the middle of the corruption. Did the Boys and Skins do anything to deserve it? maybe by over paying for crappy players and therefore inflating value. I kind of get that, but the manner in which they went about the punishment was low and dirty. So much so that Roger Goodell needs to be removed from office, and soon.

IMHO only

hail

[Big Blue Joe]

I still don't get why Skins fans single out John Mara. He's not the sole member of the management council. And every owner, except for Tampa's, voted in favor of the penalties.

[FanboyOf91]

I still don't get why Skins fans single out John Mara. He's not the sole member of the management council. And every owner, except for Tampa's, voted in favor of the penalties.

Dude, you could've at least read the first post in the thread before asking such a question.

[Big Blue Joe]

Dude, you could've at least read the first post in the thread before asking such a question.

I did. I still don't get it. The rest of the owners agreed with Mara. And voted with him both in the management council and then again as a whole. It seems like your problem should be with the entire league. Why single out John Mara? If, for example, the Krafts and the Rooneys thought the Skins and Cowboys did nothing wrong, do you think the penalties would have still been imposed?

[FanboyOf91]

I did. I still don't get it. The rest of the owners agreed with Mara. And voted with him both in the management council and then again as a whole. It seems like your problem should be with the entire league. Why single out John Mara? If, for example, the Krafts and the Rooneys thought the Skins and Cowboys did nothing wrong, do you think the penalties would have still been imposed?

You're either being very dense or trolling. Who sets the agenda of the management council?

[HOF44]

I did. I still don't get it. The rest of the owners agreed with Mara. And voted with him both in the management council and then again as a whole. It seems like your problem should be with the entire league. Why single out John Mara? If, for example, the Krafts and the Rooneys thought the Skins and Cowboys did nothing wrong, do you think the penalties would have still been imposed?

He was the driving force behind the penalties, and he wanted us to lose draft picks also but was overruled. May the NFLPA get a monster settlement on the collusion he exposed to the press.

[Big Blue Joe]

You're either being very dense or trolling. Who sets the agenda of the management council?

Does it matter? Can John Mara force the other owners to approve his agenda if they don't agree with it?

[rick7423]

I did. I still don't get it. The rest of the owners agreed with Mara. And voted with him both in the management council and then again as a whole. It seems like your problem should be with the entire league. Why single out John Mara? If, for example, the Krafts and the Rooneys thought the Skins and Cowboys did nothing wrong, do you think the penalties would have still been imposed?

NO, and that is the point. The other owners have been strong armed in agreement because they understand what collusion means. If they did not agree, then they would be next on the hit list.

---------- Post added October-17th-2012 at 08:28 PM ----------

Does it matter? Can John Mara force the other owners to approve his agenda if they don't agree with it?

again, yes.

[grego]

I did. I still don't get it.

google 'john mara'. the third article about him is a yahoo piece that talks about him being chairman of the nfl management committee, etc.

[RandyHolt]

Dallas has been working the system for decades. We got on board when Dan took over. and think we were the straw that broke the camels back.

Before these penalties, I think its safe to say the NFL's salary cap was an utter joke.

NHL fans are often well aware of their teams cap, and sites like capgeek detail every single dollar of cap room year round. I doubt such a site even exists still, for the NFL. I am an avid fan of 40 years and have no idea what our cap hit is. You hear we are cap strapped but then sign some ridiculous over priced free agent. Year after year.

I believe NFL owners or powers that be have unwritten rules that we broke. Or is an unwritten rule, not a rule?

The problems that pissed off Mara started long before the uncapped year.

[grego]

heres the best article i've actually ever read on the issue.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/37421/im-not-sure-john-mara-should-be-talking

Mara is wrong because he's the chairman of the NFL Management Council, which is the group that imposed these penalties, and he's the owner of a team that plays the Cowboys and Redskins twice each year and competes with them for the same division title. That's not to say Mara did this on purpose to get one over on two division rivals. But one of the first things we're taught in any journalism class is to avoid even the appearance of impropriety -- to steer clear of any activity that could ever allow anyone to accuse us of engaging in a conflict of interest. That is clearly not a concern Mara has in this case, but he should. There's a chance he should have recused himself from this whole thing, and even if he hadn't, he's not doing himself or his excellent reputation any favors by being the aggressive face of the penalties.