Fall NFL Thread

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

It was a harsh punishment, but I think it's deserved. There's absolutely no rhyme or reason for putting bounties on players heads, and this has much to do with circumventing the salary cap as it is about trying to injure players.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

So the Redskin's and Cowboys are now fighting the salary cap penalties.(as I think they should)

I guess the situation is that though the NFL is accusing the teams of giving themselves a competitive advantage with the contract restructures, the NFL in fact signed off on all of these moves. So these punishments are basically coming down on moves the NFL let go through. So now they are giving the Redskin's and Cowboy's drastic competitive disadvantages based on those teams not doing what they were told, even though when the moves were happening it was fully within the NFL's power to stop them. Which makes punishing these teams after the fact iffy at best.

It seems like the NFL overreached here and though it won't help either team much next season I think they stand a very good chance of overturning this.

Also considering the damage is already done, since it effected free agent negotiations for both teams, it might open up the NFL to a considerable lawsuit for upsetting competitive balance unjustly.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

How was it in the NFL's power to stop them during the uncapped year when there was no running CBA; it had expired. If the NFL tried to stop the two teams from doing what they want, they would be complaining about that instead. Much akin to what David Stern did with the Chris Paul trade in the NBA. It would be lose-lose for the league office.

Didn't seem to effect the Redskins, they signed (and overpayed) several players. They loaded up on short-term contracts to take advantage of the uncapped year, so I don't understand why anyone should feel sorry for either franchise.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

How was it in the NFL's power to stop them during the uncapped year when there was no running CBA; it had expired. If the NFL tried to stop the two teams from doing what they want, they would be complaining about that instead. Much akin to what David Stern did with the Chris Paul trade in the NBA. It would be lose-lose for the league office.

Didn't seem to effect the Redskins, they signed (and overpayed) several players. They loaded up on short-term contracts to take advantage of the uncapped year, so I don't understand why anyone should feel sorry for either franchise.

Because, my understanding is, in the NFL all contract changes go through the NFL front office. No exceptions. It's not an official contract without that. Meaning that when the deals went down the NFL ok'd it. Then later turned around and and fined them for it.

And the reason it was most likely ok'd it was that their was no rules against anything that was done.

There were verbal warnings but a verbal warning is not a rule. So if the teams appeal it they well most likely win because there was technically no rule violation. If the NFL felt so strongly about this they should have made a written rule, but they did not. Punishing teams for not following an unwritten rule, by itself is pretty shifty. But when violating that rule required the NFL's approval things start to look pretty bad for the league management.

Because basically even you decide that what the Skin's and Cowboy's did was "harming the competitive balance of the league" the NFL itself is guilty of collusion in the matter.

---------------------------------------

I don't think it's a matter of feeling sorry. It's a matter of whether the punishment is fair and equivalent to the offense. In this case I think it's semantics in terms of competitive balance, neither the skin's nor the cowboys made the playoffs; and the fact remains that they broke no rules, and that the NFL league office was complicit in the actions for which these teams are being punished.

They probably could have gotten away with subtracting the exact amounts from the salary caps that these teams got out from under during the uncapped year, restoring the competitive balance, but that isn't what the NFL decided to do. They decided to be punitive and hit them for substantially more than that, thereby shifting the competitive balance against them.

To do that, when neither team actually broke a rule and the NFL permitted it at the time, is something I would have to think any legal arbitrator would consider profoundly unfair on the NFL's part.

This isn't a matter of feeling bad or whatever, in the NFL the leagues authority is not absolute. The NFL has to follow guidelines which the teams agree to. I cannot violate or go outside those guidelines. In other words it can't just punish teams for whatever it feels like.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

I think when the Owners decided that they would opt-out of the previous CBA they all agreed to the terms in which an uncapped year would operate. That's my point, all the owners and GMs knew there would be penalties for overspending and some didn't care.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

I think when the Owners decided that they would opt-out of the previous CBA they all agreed to the terms in which an uncapped year would operate. That's my point, all the owners and GMs knew there would be penalties for overspending and some didn't care.

It's not that simple though.

From a legal standpoint, the NFL had no right to even tell teams how much they could spend because, without a salary cap, the NFL had no authority on the matter. Plus, the exact figure they couldn't go over had to be pretty arbitrary. I mean, if they knew the number they couldn't go over then it wouldn't even be called an uncapped year at all. And since nothing was in writing the restrictions it poses are limited to what teams claim to remember about the agreement.

If either team had used uncapped money to pick up free agents or make new contracts then, I'm sure that would have violated several other rules . But that's not what happened. They exploited what they thought was a loophole to get rid of some excess salary baggage.

The reality of the situation is the NFL gave a verbal warning to teams and the Cowboy's and Skin's thought they had enough wiggle room in the NFL's position and took advantage now the NFL want's to punish them extremely harshly. So the NFL, realizing the teams were correct and that they broke no rules, decided to use the vaguely written "upsetting competitive balance" rule as an excuse. Which is problematic because, my understanding is, that rule is for punishing actual instances of cheating; like spygate. The problem is the NFL actually signed off on these moves, so calling them cheating after the fact is going to be really hard for the NFL to prove. And if the NFL can't prove it then they are in the wrong.

Normally something this flimsy would never make it past the NFLPA but they allegedly agreed to let this slide as a condition of the new CBA.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

It was an uncapped year because there was no salary ceiling for teams payroll in regards to players, but there was a salary floor that certain stingy owners weren't allowed to go below, much like some MLB owners do (*cough*Peter Angelos*cough*). Meaning a particular player's salary cap hit for that year wouldn't matter, which is why those teams have also purged as much as they 've signed in this NFL offseason.

There is some legal ambiguity though, why else would they even bother trying to fight it? Both the Cowboys and Redskins are incredibly profitable organizations. If it was only verbal than they have legal standing, but also spending more than the rest of the teams in the uncapped year upset competitive balance, but because the owners as a single entity opted out of the old CBA, there was nothing to prevent it from happening.

I'm not sure I can see them getting out of it, nor do I think they should personally. They took a risk in an uncap year that other teams didn't, so they reap the consequences/benefits as well. It's the NFL bylaws, if they want to fight it in court, they could end up damaging the league as whole, and I'm not sure if Snyder or Jones think that's worth it.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

It was an uncapped year because there was no salary ceiling for teams payroll in regards to players, but there was a salary floor that certain stingy owners weren't allowed to go below, much like some MLB owners do (*cough*Peter Angelos*cough*). Meaning a particular player's salary cap hit for that year wouldn't matter, which is why those teams have also purged as much as they 've signed in this NFL offseason.

There is some legal ambiguity though, why else would they even bother trying to fight it? Both the Cowboys and Redskins are incredibly profitable organizations. If it was only verbal than they have legal standing, but also spending more than the rest of the teams in the uncapped year upset competitive balance, but because the owners as a single entity opted out of the old CBA, there was nothing to prevent it from happening.

I'm not sure I can see them getting out of it, nor do I think they should personally. They took a risk in an uncap year that other teams didn't, so they reap the consequences/benefits as well. It's the NFL bylaws, if they want to fight it in court, they could end up damaging the league as whole, and I'm not sure if Snyder or Jones think that's worth it.

But again the NFL has to PROVE that competitive balance was upset by what the Redskins did.

I think the NFL caused this problem. First by being lazy and not putting written rules out there, which would have avoided this. And, secondly by overreaching on the penalties. They should have given them a cap hit of exactly the expenses the teams were trying to dodge and maybe dock them a mid-to-late round draft pick down the road, it would have been fair and would have left both teams little incentive to try and fight it.

The salary cap in the NFL per team is about 120 mil. The NFL is levying a salary cap penalty of 36 mil over 2 years on the Redskin's(18mil per year). Essentially reducing cap space to 102 million for the next 2 years. Meaning they lose almost about 1/6th of the teams yearly cap space. Dan Snyder has no choice but to fight that, there's too much at stake, and if he's going to then Jerry Jones isn't going to back down either.

The NFL should have realized from the start they were in a weak legal position here and punished the teams lightly but instead they tried to go heavy and I honestly think the likely net result of that is going to be that the NFL is going to lose and both teams will get off the hook.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

They only have to prove that if litigation occurs. The Cowboys and Redskins are under the NFL umbrella, if either owner levies suits against the NFL it will be incredibly damaging.

I would think it much more likely for the NFL to change the penalty to something more palatable to all parties involved than to allow either owner to sue them, that would be insane for either side to go through with.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

They only have to prove that if litigation occurs. The Cowboys and Redskins are under the NFL umbrella, if either owner levies suits against the NFL it will be incredibly damaging.

I would think it much more likely for the NFL to change the penalty to something more palatable to all parties involved than to allow either owner to sue them, that would be insane for either side to go through with.

Normally, I would say dialed back penalties would be the way things would go but he problem is free agency has already started so the NFL's salary cap punishment has already had an impact and no matter how this turns it, it will put the teams at a competitive disadvantage. So the damage is already starting to be done. So unless the NFL backs down big time in the next couple of weeks it's in the teams best interests to take this all the way; it will hurt the NFL but it's in the best interest of the teams in question. They can squeeze the NFL for a lot here.

And really the NFL front office deserves to look bad. They screwed up in not putting things in writing. They screwed up in trying to make an example of teams without being sure they could make it stick.

Pretty much any way this shakes out it's going to turn into an embarrassment for Roger Goodell.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

The Redskins haven't shied away from signing Free Agents though, even with the cap penalty. The GMs and Team Presidents knew this was happening, just like they knew how the structure would be for opting out of the CBA and having an uncapped year.

I don't like Roger Goodell much anyway. His arbitrary fines and suspensions, fining players for not wearing correct shoes, fining players for not wearing microphones...just so stupid.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

The Redskins haven't shied away from signing Free Agents though, even with the cap penalty. The GMs and Team Presidents knew this was happening, just like they knew how the structure would be for opting out of the CBA and having an uncapped year.

I don't like Roger Goodell much anyway. His arbitrary fines and suspensions, fining players for not wearing correct shoes, fining players for not wearing microphones...just so stupid.

I don't mean to say that the Skin's and Cowboy's didn't do something wrong. They totally did, and I think the deserve to be punished for it. But the way the NFL issued the punishments in this is going to come back to bit them in the end.

As for Goodell, as a Steeler fan I naturally loath him. For all the same reasons you said and more. I think on a basic think his idea of what Football should be simply doesn't match up with what I think. Rules slanted toward the offensive, passing side, of the game. More football games in a season. More teams. Less physicality. All issues I'm on the other side of.

I don't have any problem with a lot of his player softy policies but I'm no fan of the arbitrary nature of his fines, I wish he set up a system where players knew what they would be fined for and what they fine will be and make it apply to everybody evenly and fairly.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

Now I know why I'm naturally inclined to argue with you, I'm a Ravens fan

James Harrison is a bit of a nutjob and might have some dirty play, but I think he becomes a punching bag because he refuses to change his play after getting fined. Offense brings ratings, but the game always goes through these motions and evolutions and even devolution at times. I don't think they'll ever get more games in a season. It's completely hypocritical to their stance on player safety.

If Goodell was actually serious about changing the way people play he would suspend them for games for "dirty" play.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

Now I know why I'm naturally inclined to argue with you, I'm a Ravens fan

James Harrison is a bit of a nutjob and might have some dirty play, but I think he becomes a punching bag because he refuses to change his play after getting fined. Offense brings ratings, but the game always goes through these motions and evolutions and even devolution at times. I don't think they'll ever get more games in a season. It's completely hypocritical to their stance on player safety.

If Goodell was actually serious about changing the way people play he would suspend them for games for "dirty" play.

Completely agree.

I'm a Steeler fan, so you know I hate the Ravens, but one thing I will say for the Ravens is that they play football they way it's meant to be played. Raven's versus Steelers are the best games of the year to me because they play all 3 phases of the game. Not just offense.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

Completely agree.

I'm a Steeler fan, so you know I hate the Ravens, but one thing I will say for the Ravens is that they play football they way it's meant to be played. Raven's versus Steelers are the best games of the year to me because they play all 3 phases of the game. Not just offense.

Agreed, it's like a prize fight every time we play regardless of the records. But usually both teams are winning, so the stakes are high.

What is your outlook for this year? I know they had cap trouble. Do you think someone will pay the price to sign away Mike Wallace?

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

Agreed, it's like a prize fight every time we play regardless of the records. But usually both teams are winning, so the stakes are high.

What is your outlook for this year? I know they had cap trouble. Do you think someone will pay the price to sign away Mike Wallace?

I think if somebody was going to outbid the Steelers for Wallace it probably would have happened already. Though to be honest I don't think that would be a big deal either way. It would be a loss but we are still pretty deep at wide receiver. Wallace is probably the best we've got but Antonio Brown isn't far behind.

The problem for us is the defense front and naturally O-line. There is going to be a lot of new faces on D next year and that's always worrisome.

And if we don't fix the O-line issues players like Suggs are going to end every play sitting on Roethlisberger's head; which is significantly less funny when you are a Steelers fan.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

I think if somebody was going to outbid the Steelers for Wallace gong to happen it probably would have happened already. Though to be honest I don't think that would be a big deal either way. It would be a loss but we are still pretty deep at wide receiver. Wallace is probably the best we've got but Antonio Brown isn't far behind.

The problem for us is defense and naturally O-line. There is going to be a lot of new faces on D next year and that's always worrisome.

You would think that, but sometimes they wait until Free Agency sort of plays out to see whether a team is willing to give up a first rounder to acquire his rights and whether that 1st-round pick could be used to get a WR in the draft instead...would be cheaper anyways. I'm not sure Wallace is worth a 1st rounder really.

It's always the O-line there. And it seems most of the people they cut bait with were old and couldn't stay healthy. Those are the easiest decisions to free up cap room.

 

[Kaiten]

Re: The NFL Thread

Wallace will not be signed away, not only would he cost a first round pick but the contract would have to be to large for the Steelers to match. If he were unrestricted he would have commanded a contract similar to Colsten, Garcon, and Jackson. No one would want to pay $20 million guaranteed plus a first round draft pick for a wide receiver.

There is no question that the cap penalties was collusion. 2010 was an uncapped year, as per terms of the collective bargaining agreement there was no cap on pay roll. A backroom deal was struck among the owners to freeze pay roll, an agreement not negotiated with players nor part of a legal document. They also agreed to retroactively punish any team that violated this gentleman's agreement. That is a fairly open and shut case of collusion. When this reaches the arbitrator the law favors the Redskins and Cowboys. Even with Anti-trust exemption the NFL has a very flimsy case.

New Mock Draft: http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/user_mock_drafts.cfm?mock_id=11986

Yes I have the Vikings taking Blackmon third. Adam Schefter is predicting they will take him over Matt Kalili and I have learned that his predictions almost always come true. If he is right Cleveland will get a ton of offers for the fourth pick. I doubt they will agree to move down any lower than eight, where they can at least get Melvin Ingrim or Quinton Coples. In my opinion Luck, Griffin, Kalil, Claiborne, and Richardson are the only elite prospects in this draft.

 

[Jammin]

Re: The NFL Thread

Good news for the Steelers fans today. Jericho Cotchery has been resigned on 2 year deal(for a modest $3 million)

I love this move! He is the kind of wide receiver that I think every team could use, and I'm pretty glad no team picked him up. Last year he was a very reliable player for the Steelers who showed that he had great hands and a willingness to accept the more humble aspects of being an NFL wideout(he's not a guy who freaks out when he doesn't get a lot of targets and he's not afraid to block or tackle) but whenever he was needed he ready to go.

He was a good player for us last year and I'm excited to see him don the black and gold again.

 

[xi0]

Re: The NFL Thread

It makes sense with Ward retiring. A good signing for depth, but not anything exciting about it. The Steelers operate this way though, and it works.