Skip to content

Cowboys, Redskins lose their appeal on salary cap penalty

Redskins_Cowboys_Cap_Space_Punishments_Jerry_Jones_Dan_Snyder Getty Images

The Cowboys and Redskins have lost at least one battle in their attempt to get back the combined $46 million in salary cap space that the NFL took away from them.

NFL general counsel Jeff Pash told Judy Battista of the New York Times that Special Master Stephen Burbank dismissed the grievance filed by the Cowboys and the Redskins.

Dallas lost $10 million in cap space and Washington lost $36 million in cap space, to be divided between this season and next season, after the NFL — with the backing of the other owners — found that they violated the spirit of the rules in their spending during the uncapped year. Cowboys owner Jerry Jones and Redskins owner Dan Snyder argue that they didn’t violate anything because the lack of a salary cap meant there were no rules — in letter or in spirit — restricting how much money NFL teams could spend.

But Burbank has sided with the league on this one. Mike Florio will talk about what this means at the start of today’s PFT Live.

Permalink 92 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Dallas Cowboys, Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
92 Responses to “Cowboys, Redskins lose their appeal on salary cap penalty”
  1. gweez76 says: May 22, 2012 11:51 AM

    On to the courts we go.

  2. angrycorgi says: May 22, 2012 11:51 AM

    Burbank makes a career decision…side with Commish, ensure arbitration position. Another horse sh!t move by a biased person.

  3. gafraidh says: May 22, 2012 11:51 AM

    Wow! Who saw that coming??

  4. bigjdve says: May 22, 2012 11:52 AM

    How can you violate the spirit of a rule, if there is no rule to begin with?

  5. cash804 says: May 22, 2012 11:53 AM

    Now we get the “real” lawyers envolved…

    Thank you for wasting our time Mr Burbank…no issue identifying who’s pockets you’re riding.

    HTTR!!!

  6. deathtoromo says: May 22, 2012 11:55 AM

    Good job Mara. Burbank get a super bowl ring too?

  7. slugdc says: May 22, 2012 11:57 AM

    Of all the owners the League could’ve gotten into a scrap with over something like this, these are probably the poorest choices. This is not a battle the NFL should want, because there is no scenario where this turns out well for them. Given the language of the rules at the time and the approval of the contracts by the League, there isn’t an actual court that wouldn’t side with Washington and Dallas on this. The NFL better hope Snyder and Jones don’t decide to take it that day.

  8. realdeal12 says: May 22, 2012 11:57 AM

    Want to know what this means?

    WAR!!

    NFL and Union went too far on this one, Mara and Goodell should be banned!! They messed with the wrong rich guys.

  9. bigjdve says: May 22, 2012 11:58 AM

    Didn’t he just get fired from some other leagues?

  10. cleminem757 says: May 22, 2012 12:00 PM

    Well now we see if they have the balls to take it to the next step.

  11. eaglebobby says: May 22, 2012 12:00 PM

    You guys STILL don’t get it do you? Every team in the NFL got a letter saying they couldn’t sign players to huge contracts and use the year to dump salary. Jones and

  12. The Shoeman says: May 22, 2012 12:01 PM

    Jerry Jones and Redskins owner Dan Snyder argue that they didn’t violate anything.

    *********************************************************

    Because they are arrogant S.o.B. s ,
    who think they own the NFL.

    It’s like driving through a school zone,that you have done for years, with a posted 15 M.P.H. speed limit.
    Then the police decide to put up a new sign, and tell you 6 times, when we take the sign down, to change it for a new 15 M.P.H. sign, the limit is and always will be 15 M.P.H.

    then when Dan and Jerry fly through at 100 m.p.h., and get a ticket .. they argue : there wasn’t a sign .

  13. cooklynn17 says: May 22, 2012 12:01 PM

    First the Giants win the Superbowl and then the Cowboys and Redskins take it up the ass again from the court system.

    Love it…

  14. eaglebobby says: May 22, 2012 12:02 PM

    Snyder, because they think they’re above everyone else, decided to do it anyway. If the NFL is made up of 32 owners who are partners, you can’t have two of them turning on the other 30. Which is essentially what they did.

  15. blackqbwhiterb says: May 22, 2012 12:03 PM

    At some point, Mr. Goodell will be made to realize THE OWNERS OWN THE LEAGUE and he works for them, they are not beholden to him. He is their business administrator and they are his bosses.

    As far as Mr. Mara, somehow these two will get even. There’s just no justification for punishing these two and leaving other obvious cases of the same thing alone. Most notably, the Bears with the Peppers contract, but there are others.

  16. jgedgar70 says: May 22, 2012 12:03 PM

    As much pleasure as I generally get from any pain felt by the Cowgirls and Deadskins, I think they’re right on this one. Either there was no rule, therefore they didn’t violate anything, or there was outright collusion, one or the other.

  17. redskinspolo says: May 22, 2012 12:03 PM

    Complete BS!!!! I’m willing to bet some money was slipped into bitch Burbank pockets.. I don’t see how anyone with common sense can side with the NFL! Very disappointed right now..

  18. randomcommenter says: May 22, 2012 12:03 PM

    I can’t stand either of theses guys but they are getting screwed. The NFL approves all contracts. They approved of these contracts.

  19. lolb23 says: May 22, 2012 12:07 PM

    Goodell is just using this case to warm up for the hammer he’s about to drop on the Saints.

  20. gweez76 says: May 22, 2012 12:08 PM

    This just in, Goodell will from now on decide draft order according to “competitive balance”

  21. tundey says: May 22, 2012 12:08 PM

    When it comes down to it, the Redskins and Cowboys are going to have just 1 option left: file a lawsuit and embark on a scorched earth attempt to get the cap space back. Nobody that benefits will rule against God Goodell. Just like all the Saints players will lose every single appeal arbitrated by an NFL beneficiary. Seriously, in what world does it make sense for appeals to be adjudicated by the same guy who handed out the initial punishment?

  22. isphet71 says: May 22, 2012 12:09 PM

    I really dislike both of these franchises and owners…

    But this decision was wrong. The NFL couldn’t get their act together on time and there was NO salary cap that year. Don’t blame the inmates when you let them run the asylum.

  23. dallascarboys says: May 22, 2012 12:09 PM

    Can we sue Mara for defamation?

  24. gbmickey says: May 22, 2012 12:11 PM

    Good I’m glad to see it. Say what you want but it was Snyder and Jerry trying to flaunt their power once again and it came back to bite them. In the spirit of fair play and a level playing field amongst the owners those two tried to manipulate a loophole to give them an advantage. Regardless what they do they cant put a playoff caliber teame on the field.

  25. gweez76 says: May 22, 2012 12:11 PM

    eaglebobby says:
    May 22, 2012 12:00 PM
    You guys STILL don’t get it do you? Every team in the NFL got a letter saying they couldn’t sign players to huge contracts and use the year to dump salary. Jones and

     ——————–

    NO, YOU still don’t get it.

    There was no salary cap.

    The league office approved the deals.

    Then 2 seasons later they decided to take action when they had the PA on tilt.

  26. nineroutsider says: May 22, 2012 12:11 PM

    Here comes more tough talk, even more tough talk to placate the fans, then silence, and will end with no further action being taken; exactly as I predicted it would go. The Redskins and Cowboys (fine Raiders and Saints too) won’t get 1 cent of cap space back or any other type of restitution.

    I know, I know…the rules, what “rule” was violated? Business isn’t always black and white, often times its not. You win some, you lose some and these 2 guys just gambled wrong. I would start getting over it…

  27. JC says: May 22, 2012 12:12 PM

    The Shoeman says:

    Because they are arrogant S.o.B. s ,
    who think they own the NFL.

    It’s like driving through a school zone,that you have done for years, with a posted 15 M.P.H. speed limit.
    Then the police decide to put up a new sign, and tell you 6 times, when we take the sign down, to change it for a new 15 M.P.H. sign, the limit is and always will be 15 M.P.H.

    then when Dan and Jerry fly through at 100 m.p.h., and get a ticket .. they argue : there wasn’t a sign .
    ——————————————————

    Umm no, your analogy is idiotic at best. The Redskins and Cowboys violated no rules while the rest of the league colluded to do so. Wake up hater.

  28. smalltime2 says: May 22, 2012 12:13 PM

    Jerry and Dan, get your Al Davis on and sue the hell out of the NFL. How are they being puniched when there was no salary cap rules last year?

  29. tmkelley1 says: May 22, 2012 12:14 PM

    Only one thing you need to know–where are the headquarters of the NFL and the team known as the Giants? And in what division do the ‘Boys and ‘Skins play?

  30. gbmickey says: May 22, 2012 12:14 PM

    Tundy in the world of just about every employee of a company when management lays down a decision.

  31. kchoya says: May 22, 2012 12:14 PM

    Can all of you morons who are claiming the special master was biased or “is in the pockets” of the NFL please shut up (or at least educate yourselves). Stephen Burbank was was appointed by a federal court to hear claims. He wasn’t hired by one side to the dispute.

    Plus, the argument that he’s biased makes no logical sense. He ruled against one group of owners and, in essence, in favor of another group of owners. How is that biased? Do think Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder thought him to be biased when he ruled against the NFLPA last year in the fight over TV revenue?

  32. dirtybird28 says: May 22, 2012 12:16 PM

    The NFL authorized these moves and contracts at that time. Obviously, the contracts didn’t disrupt the ‘spirit of the cap’, which goes back to not punishing people years later over something that didn’t quite exist. Dallas and Washington are getting bent over. Hopefully they’ll go all out and win.

  33. jh012 says: May 22, 2012 12:17 PM

    Looks like Goodell is going to get sued AGAIN.

  34. torridphenix says: May 22, 2012 12:18 PM

    You guys don’t get it. What Jones and Snyder did was renegotiate existing big contracts to be dumped into that year. Had they just signed free agents to huge up front contracts then they have a case. However, what they did WAS against the spirit of the league. Even of it goes to the courts, and I doubt Jones/Snyder are ignorant enough to pursue litigation and possibly have their anti-trust exemption revoked, they likely won’t win.

  35. bigjdve says: May 22, 2012 12:19 PM

    eaglebobby: the teams didn’t get any letters, the league has admitted that there isn’t a written confirmation of any of this, that it is a spoken gentlemen’s agreement. That agreement was to circumvent a poison pill put in the CBA by the players to penalize the owners not getting a new CBA in place.

    The Shoeman: to make your analogy more correct. There is a 15mph speed limit for a long time. Then it is known that there is NO speed limit for a year, then it will be back to 15mph the following year but there is NO speed limit for a year. The drivers say well we will all stay at 15 anyway. Then Snyder and Jones decide to drive through at 100mph, then goodell decides to give them a ticket. There wasn’t a speed limit, however they got a ticket for speeding.

    That is how it was. The cap was out for a year, period. They decided to use that to their advantage. They are being penalized because they decided to use the non-capped year to their advantage, then got flagged for violating the cap.

    How can you violate a cap, when there is no cap?

  36. giantlucksacks says: May 22, 2012 12:20 PM

    cooklynn17 says:
    May 22, 2012 12:01 PM
    First the Giants win the Superbowl and then the Cowboys and Redskins take it up the ass again from the court system.

    Love it…

    ___________________

    lol, giants are a joke, it took several miracles for them to win their last 3 super bowls…. no team in sports history has ever been as lucky or had more things fall into their laps… they won the lottery… other than those two miracle runs they havent won a playoff game in 12 years…. yeah thats a real great consistent team…. you guys wanted Coughlin gone midseason… worst team to ever win a super bowl…giants wont make playoffs next year

    must be nice to be league darlings and also have your owner head a NFL committee where you can make decisions against division rivals….lol GTFO here, spoiled brats of the nfl

  37. 1920gsh says: May 22, 2012 12:20 PM

    I love all of the people claiming that Burbank is employed by the NFL and making biased decisions.

    Burbank was appointed to be the Special Master by a federal judge about a decade ag0 – the NFL cannot fire him at their whim.

    He is highly respected both in legal and academic communities and handling the NFL issues is just one small part of a much larger career. For him to risk his reputation by making blatantly biased decisions would be imprudent and put everything that he has worked for and accomplished over the past 40 years of his legal career at risk.

  38. gpete1962 says: May 22, 2012 12:22 PM

    The Cowboys and Redskins are being punished for trying to turn the NFL into MLB.

  39. thingamajig says: May 22, 2012 12:27 PM

    Tundy says : Seriously, in what world does it make sense for appeals to be adjudicated by the same guy who handed out the initial punishment?

    It’s only allowed because the NFLPA signed up to it in the CBA, guess it made sense to them.

  40. stanklepoot says: May 22, 2012 12:27 PM

    cash804 says: May 22, 2012 11:53 AM

    Now we get the “real” lawyers envolved…

    Thank you for wasting our time Mr Burbank…no issue identifying who’s pockets you’re riding.

    HTTR!!!
    ________________________________
    This again? Let me be very clear about this. Neither Snyder nor Jones will take this to a real court. Why? Because if they win, it means the Judge is ruling that those operating the internal workings of the league are making decisions that violate the rights of various team owners. That opens the door for that Judge to put his/her self (or appoint a third party) into a supervisory position like Judge Doty did. As desperate as the owners were to get rid of Doty, they’d be much more desperate to get rid of this judge. Why? Because Doty intervened only in cases where there was a dispute between the owners and the players. If this judge inserts him/her self into this situation, it will be because he/she finds fault with the way the inner workings of the league itself operates. That means the judge could be in a position where he/she would need to give consent on everything from changes made by the rules committee to how revenue is shared by the teams. For instance, an advertising or sponsorship deal could be nixed because the judge believed it favored some teams’ interests over others. No matter how upset Snyder and Jones are right now, that is not something they will be willing to risk. The fact that they own two of the most valuable franchises in the league means they have more to lose from anything that hurts the league.

  41. rickastleydancemoves says: May 22, 2012 12:28 PM

    Told you the NFL is untouchable.

  42. rgwhodey says: May 22, 2012 12:28 PM

    finally someone in Washington is being held accountable for over spending… just sayin’

  43. saintsfan26 says: May 22, 2012 12:31 PM

    Goodell played a game of gotcha with you both. He has been known to do that.

  44. randyd223 says: May 22, 2012 12:31 PM

    Shoeman- Tat could possibly be the dumbest analogy I’ve ever heard! It’s nothing like that at all! There was no rule against what they did AND the contracts were approved by the league office. Get your facts straight

  45. bigblackanvil says: May 22, 2012 12:31 PM

    Very unfortunate. I’m a Redskins fan. I hate Roger !!!!!

  46. erod22 says: May 22, 2012 12:32 PM

    Get a rope.

  47. kliplee says: May 22, 2012 12:32 PM

    The Shoeman says:
    May 22, 2012 12:01 PM

    then when Dan and Jerry fly through at 100 m.p.h., and get a ticket .. they argue : there wasn’t a sign .

    =-=-

    Now add this: The police gave the speeders thumbs up while doing it, let them do it for a year without problem. And then one day the police mail a ticket for every day they were speeding because the police changed their mind.

  48. rodgers419 says: May 22, 2012 12:35 PM

    Cant stand the cowboys or redskins but this is 100% garbage. They violated rules that didn’t exist…NFL just making it up as it goes along…give me a break.

  49. rainaer says: May 22, 2012 12:35 PM

    It’s called collusion… plain and simple..

    the players put the uncapped year into the previous CBA for a reason.. so that they would have some leverage during negotiations… the NFL and OWNERS COLLUDED so that the players wouldn’t have that power…

    So, 2 teams didn’t go along with the plan because in all honesty.. it was wrong to limit spending in the first place.. either in spirit or otherwise.. and now Goddell is punishing these 2 teams for not playing along.

    Go Chiefs.

  50. bigblackanvil says: May 22, 2012 12:36 PM

    @Shoeman…..I mean no harm but that was pretty lame. Is that you Roger???

  51. dvdman123 says: May 22, 2012 12:36 PM

    Can we call this “Capgate”?

  52. imalwaysdissapointed says: May 22, 2012 12:36 PM

    Will be interesting to see what the Skins do. May not be fair but business partners don’t like to be sued. Washington has made noise in the past about chasing a Super Bowl. The reality is support for that goal dries up when you alienate the votes you need to make that happen.

  53. vetdana says: May 22, 2012 12:39 PM

    If there is… no Law[ rule]… there can be no spirit, or letter of that law…period. You either have a rule in place or you do not.There was no cap space rule in place at the time these two clubs acted and said actions were okay-ed by the League. Even my teenage daughter can figure this out ! What Law School did Mr. Burbank attend ?

  54. hatesycophants says: May 22, 2012 12:40 PM

    Hey JC,

    Shoeman posts a reasoned, cogent argument and you respond with.”Wake up hater”. Ridiculous.

    Go Lions! Go Badgers!

  55. demskinsbaby says: May 22, 2012 12:43 PM

    Countless posts from idiots who act like Jerry and Dan are the only two to violate this unwritten rule. This is simply 29 owners who are sticking it to two of the owners of the two “wealthiest” franchises in the league. It’s also a personal jab from an inner division team owner, because Chicago violated the rule worse than the Cowboys did. As well as about 5 or 6 other teams that violated this unwritten rule. Jerry and Dan were not the only ones. Someone please eduacte these dumba$$es.

  56. tundey says: May 22, 2012 12:43 PM

    To those arguing that the Redskins and Cowboys violated some unwritten rule, what about the Bucs that refused to spend and thus violated the salary cap floor…if there had been a salary cap? Why weren’t they punished for not spending in the uncapped year and thereby having an unfair advantage after the work stoppage? Look the fact here is clear: the entire league colluded to not spend in the uncapped year in order to kneecap the players’ union. Redskins and Cowboys didn’t agree and are getting punished for not going along with the collusion. In what world will the players’ union agree to take money from notorious big spenders like the Skins and Cowboys so that it can be spread around (thinly)? They wouldn’t have if that money hadn’t been needed to increase the cap for this year (i.e. players would have revolted if the cap went down 1 year after the new agreement).

  57. iknowurider72 says: May 22, 2012 12:49 PM

    Good. i thought the league made it very clear to all teams not to pursue such actions in the non-cap year. They both chose to try to buy a championship team, and both deserve the consequences.

    Good for the NFL to keep an equal playing field. There is a reason the NFL is exciting every weekend.

  58. stanklepoot says: May 22, 2012 12:53 PM

    blackqbwhiterb says: May 22, 2012 12:03 PM

    At some point, Mr. Goodell will be made to realize THE OWNERS OWN THE LEAGUE and he works for them, they are not beholden to him. He is their business administrator and they are his bosses.

    As far as Mr. Mara, somehow these two will get even. There’s just no justification for punishing these two and leaving other obvious cases of the same thing alone. Most notably, the Bears with the Peppers contract, but there are others.
    _______________________________
    Many of you just don’t get the point apparently. This isn’t the league (aka Goodell) against Snyder and Jones. the league didn’t bring this complaint against the Redskins and Cowboys. It was the other owners that filed the complaint and demanded punishment. Goodell’s role in this case is that of an agent carrying out the wishes of his bosses. Yes, that involves punishing two of his bosses’ teams, and that seems like something he wouldn’t want to do. When you consider that 29 or 30 of his 32 bosses want you to, however, it makes the decision a whole lot easier. Remember, Snyder and Jones tried to appeal the punishment to the other owners first, and of the 30 voting : 29 voted to keep the punishment as is, and 1 abstained.

    As for the “violation” the Redskins and Cowboys are being punished for, it has nothing to do with spending too much money. Nor does it have anything to do with signing free agents. What these teams are being punished for is reworking or extending contracts of players already on their rosters in such a way that it dumped an inordinate amount of money into the uncapped year. This would make it possible for these teams to keep big money players on their rosters at backup player rates once the salary cap kicked back in. So, it’s not about these teams gaining an advantage in the uncapped year, but about using the uncapped year to gain an advantage once the salary cap was reinstated. It’s obvious this is what they’re being punished for because the salary cap hits are the same amount as the money dumped into the uncapped year by these reworked contracts. For the cowboys, I believe it was Miles Austin’s extension that was flagged, and Albert Haynesworth (ironic) and DeAngelo Hall for the Redskins. Other teams may have done similar things, but the other owners viewed Snyder’s and Jones’ actions as excessive and chose to punish them. Either way, the owners aren’t going to punish Goodell for doing what they told him to do.

    As for Mara, I think you underestimate how influential he is among the owners. Snyder’s franchise may be one of the most valuable ones in the league, but Snyder isn’t viewed as a major player by the other owners. Jones is, but he’s also had his own run-ins with some of the other owners, and even if he hadn’t he still isn’t any more influential than Mara. Mara owns a rather valuable team in his own right, and his lineage works well for him in a group that is truly an old boys club. Remember, it was Wellington Mara that first pushed for the current revenue sharing system, and that’s likely to have earned a lot of good will from the medium and smaller franchises around the league.

  59. barrstarr says: May 22, 2012 12:54 PM

    Go ahead Roger. Keep your hand on the stove.

  60. jiggy3198 says: May 22, 2012 12:54 PM

    Not a fan but how can they say they violated rules when they approved the contracts and said it was an uncapped year. Makes no sense to me.

  61. ghlatty says: May 22, 2012 12:56 PM

    Don’t like either team but if there is a penalty, the teams that went below the cap floor should have to pony up. Total BS.

  62. nebster21 says: May 22, 2012 12:56 PM

    Ok lets just say for a mere second that there was a rule that the 2 clubs broke for spending to much.

    What happens to the clubs that spent to little?

  63. londonfletcher says: May 22, 2012 12:58 PM

    Goodell is just acting like this league is his own personal game of Calvinball.

    “OH OH New Rule! New Rule!”

  64. stanklepoot says: May 22, 2012 12:59 PM

    bigjdve says: May 22, 2012 12:19 PM

    eaglebobby: the teams didn’t get any letters, the league has admitted that there isn’t a written confirmation of any of this, that it is a spoken gentlemen’s agreement. That agreement was to circumvent a poison pill put in the CBA by the players to penalize the owners not getting a new CBA in place.

    The Shoeman: to make your analogy more correct. There is a 15mph speed limit for a long time. Then it is known that there is NO speed limit for a year, then it will be back to 15mph the following year but there is NO speed limit for a year. The drivers say well we will all stay at 15 anyway. Then Snyder and Jones decide to drive through at 100mph, then goodell decides to give them a ticket. There wasn’t a speed limit, however they got a ticket for speeding.

    That is how it was. The cap was out for a year, period. They decided to use that to their advantage. They are being penalized because they decided to use the non-capped year to their advantage, then got flagged for violating the cap.

    How can you violate a cap, when there is no cap?
    _______________________________
    Your counter analogy actually works against you. Technically speaking, you can be ticketed even if you’re not exceeding the posted speed limit. How’s that? The posted speed limit is based on average road condition. If the road condition is poor due to snow/ice or a large amount of rain, you can still be ticketed for reckless driving despite the fact that there’s no official posting of what your speed should be under bad conditions. The law considers it an accepted understanding that you shouldn’t be driving any faster than is safe under the current road conditions, even if the posted speed limit doesn’t take them into account.

  65. andyreidisarrogantandfat says: May 22, 2012 1:00 PM

    What you are all missing here is that although goddell did not hear the case, the arbitrator was from the university of penn. This is of course in philadelphia. he is probably a birds fan. they had no chance.

    goddell got away with it again. the unions better man up on this guy before he gets completely out of control.

    best chance for the skins and boys is to go to court and go after the nfl big time.

  66. bhindenemylines says: May 22, 2012 1:04 PM

    So now can the NFL go after Tampa Bay and the other teams that were below the cap? I believe that would be a “violation of the spirit of the rule” that is competitive balance, right?

  67. redskinsreloaded says: May 22, 2012 1:05 PM

    Some words of wisdom for Mr. GODell, If I were you I would stay the F#*K away from either one of these training camps this year if you value your own safety. The way some of the fan bases are for these two teams may put your health a high concern. Why does Congress go after small fish to fry, but in a case like this that envolves not only the Skins and Cowboys but the league as a whole they stay away from completely. Isn’t colusion within a business a federal crime?

  68. evomike06 says: May 22, 2012 1:10 PM

    This is about to get really nasty. If Danny and Jerry file a law suite which they should, this is gonna get nasty fast. Theres no way possible the court will side with the NFL on this.

  69. the3taveren says: May 22, 2012 1:11 PM

    The Shoeman says:

    Because they are arrogant S.o.B. s ,
    who think they own the NFL.

    It’s like driving through a school zone,that you have done for years, with a posted 15 M.P.H. speed limit.
    Then the police decide to put up a new sign, and tell you 6 times, when we take the sign down, to change it for a new 15 M.P.H. sign, the limit is and always will be 15 M.P.H.

    then when Dan and Jerry fly through at 100 m.p.h., and get a ticket .. they argue : there wasn’t a sign .
    ___________________________________

    Here I’ll help you out in this analogy to make it more accurate:

    There was a 15mph speed limit. All of the city officials, law enforcement officers and drivers agreed that if they couldn’t agree on a new speed limit there would be NO SPEED LIMIT for a year.

    The Skins, Cowboys, and SEVEN MORE TEAMS requested clearance from the NFL to go through that area at various speeds ranging from 18 to 29 mph (NO ONE went 100 mph). And since there wasn’t any speed limit the police approved their request to exceed the old, now non-existent speed limit.

    Several other teams in fact decided to “grandma” it through at 10 mph which would have been illegal under the old speed limit too.

    The only two teams that got speeding tickets were in the division of the Mayor of Competition Committee City! (THAT stinks to high heaven!!!)

    John Mara and Roger GoDaHell wouldn’t have been able to pull this off without NFPA buy in. And how did they get that… through extortion or bribery, whatever you want to call it!!! They would have kept the cap floor lower than what it was had the NFLPA not agreed to this illegal act of extortion, Grand Larceny, and competitive collusion.

  70. tommythek says: May 22, 2012 1:13 PM

    Good job Roger, spank their hiney’s. I can’t wait to see 5 rookies blocking for RG3 next year.

  71. calizcowboyz says: May 22, 2012 1:15 PM

    jerry and danny expected this ruling, but they have to go through the steps. now on to the real justice system “the courts”. you cant rule in favor of the nfl when your only card on the table is “the spirit of the game”. no cap, no cba, contracts approved, case closed in favor of jerry and danny!

  72. stanklepoot says: May 22, 2012 1:18 PM

    gweez76 says: May 22, 2012 12:08 PM

    This just in, Goodell will from now on decide draft order according to “competitive balance”
    _______________________________
    Hey brainiac, the draft is already ordered with an eye on competitive balance. That’s why the team with the worst record gets the first pick and the SB champs get the last pick. Oh, and like most major decisions, it was made by the owners.

  73. drbrousters says: May 22, 2012 1:23 PM

    “Of all the owners the League could’ve gotten into a scrap with over something like this, these are probably the poorest choices…”
    Exactly right. Jerry Jones said, when he bought the Cowboys, he wanted to make them the Raiders of the NFC. He appears to have assumed the role of Al Davis. No doubt that this will go to court.
    “Had they just signed free agents to huge up front contracts then they have a case. However, what they did WAS against the spirit of the league.”
    So, let me understand… Violating rules that were not in effect is OK as long as you violate the right rules?
    What they did was NOT against rules, as none existed, and the other owners could have done the same. These two just happen to understand the LAW and knew they were acting within it. The future of the NFL was uncertain and they were acting in the best interest of their club, and why not?
    No way this will hold up in a court of law.

  74. koolrepetoire says: May 22, 2012 1:26 PM

    This reaks of jealousy. Amazing how the Top 2 owners that make the most revenue yearly for a decade manage to get screwed out of 46 million when they do the most revenue sharing every year for the past 10 years. You have 2 owners that had their own team’s stadiums built, they are the biggest in the NFL, you have Mara the greedy, jealous owner sharing revenue with the Jets in a brand new stadium coming off 2 SB’s in the last 4 years. Don’t you find it interesting he promised Osi his money & never paid him? Not only that, the other owner in the NFC EAST in an uncapped year assembled a DREAM TEAM. Did Mara hate on Lurie? Nope. How are the Eagles to this day still like 16 million UNDER the cap? You mean to tell me people are mad at my Redskins for getting rid of McNabb who is washed up, and for Haynesworth who was later cut by 2 teams? Seriously? The NFL approved the guaranteed money 2 both players and now it was wrong? And exactly how did Chicago pay Peppers over 30 million guaranteed in an uncapped year? Interesting alliances.

  75. kingcarlbanks says: May 22, 2012 1:32 PM

    Please, all the bad will be hashed out on a golf course somewhere. You honestly believe this is going to get ugly? One thing you must realize is these owners aren’t going to let anything slow up there money. This is little tiff isn’t going to be an issue in 4 months. And @giantlucksacks, you are either the dumbest football fan on the anet or your not a real fan at all. Your just one of those people who don’t root for any team but root against them all. Moron.

  76. cowdog1 says: May 22, 2012 1:35 PM

    It’s like driving through a school zone,that you have done for years, with a posted 15 M.P.H. speed limit.
    Then the police decide to put up a new sign, and tell you 6 times, when we take the sign down, to change it for a new 15 M.P.H. sign, the limit is and always will be 15 M.P.H.

    then when Dan and Jerry fly through at 100 m.p.h., and get a ticket .. they argue : there wasn’t a sign .

    ___________________

    Terrible analogy. There was no “speed limit” idiot. It’s more like the speed limit WAS 55, then they removed the speed limit completely. Then send out a message recommending that you don’t go too fast or too slow. The Cowboys and Redskins received tickets for violating a recommendation not to go too fast. The teams that went too slow didn’t get a ticket for violating this same recommendation. Oh, and a recommendation is not a rule, or law. You could fight that ticket in court and not pay a dime.

  77. joegalvan02 says: May 22, 2012 1:40 PM

    this analogy is great, but totally off base.

    a more accurate version would be, ‘take it easy while we remove the sign to determine the new speed.’

    ———————

    It’s like driving through a school zone,that you have done for years, with a posted 15 M.P.H. speed limit.
    Then the police decide to put up a new sign, and tell you 6 times, when we take the sign down, to change it for a new 15 M.P.H. sign, the limit is and always will be 15 M.P.H.

    then when Dan and Jerry fly through at 100 m.p.h., and get a ticket .. they argue : there wasn’t a sign .

  78. thraiderskin says: May 22, 2012 1:41 PM

    Well, I thought the skins and boys would roll in arbitration… I was clearly wrong.

  79. stanklepoot says: May 22, 2012 1:53 PM

    OK, I know I’m about to get a bunch of thumbs down clicks on this because I intend to rationally discuss the situation…and it seems like ridiculous statements, insults, and threats are the only things in this topic getting thumbs up. So, enjoy your clicking, but the truth is the truth.

    For those saying Jones and Snyder should sue the league, you seem to forget that these two (and the teams they own, of course) are a part of the league. Anything that hurts the league as a whole hurts them. Going to court invites the risk of having whatever Judge hears the case put him/herself in a position to oversee various aspects of the league’s inner workings. How? Because the judge would have to find that the league was acting in a way that violated the rights of the owners/teams involved. That’s the exact way that Judge Doty managed to put himself in a position to rule on all future disputes between the owners and the players. The league finally rid itself of Doty with this new CBA. How soon do you think the owners want to risk having a new judge interfere with their business, especially when this one would be in a position to have an impact on pretty much every part of the league’s operations?

    As for Goodell, if you want to hate him for how he came down on the Saints, have at it. This isn’t his doing, however. This issue was pushed by the other owners, and Goodell is just carrying out their orders. Goodell won’t be fired or reprimanded in any way for doing what at least 29 of the owners wanted him to do. Ownership loves Goodell, so you might as well get used to him being the commissioner. He’s not going anywhere anytime soon.

    The Redskins and Cowboys are not being punished for spending too much money, nor for signing free agents. They’re being punished for reworking the contracts of players already on their rosters in such a way that it dropped a huge amount of their money in the uncapped year. That’s a competitive advantage designed not for the uncapped year, but for when the salary cap is reinstated. If you want to debate something, debate whether or not THAT violates anything, not whether or not these teams spent too much money.

    As for collusion, the league operates on collusion. That’s why they need a CBA, so they keep their anti-trust exemption. Oh, and for those saying the Redskins and Cowboys are being punished for not colluding, we’re not talking about innocents here. Jones and Snyder have been a part of numerous collusive activities. In this case, they were part of an agreement that they backed out of as soon as the other owners and the league no longer had the power to enforce it. Furthermore, neither Jones nor Snyder can file a suit claiming collusion. They’re ownership, and only labor can claim collusion…and even they can only do so if there’s no CBA. Besides, even if they could, I’d simply refer you to the reasons why going to court and complaining about how the league is run could blow up in their faces.

  80. patsaintsbroncoscheat says: May 22, 2012 1:57 PM

    vetdana says: May 22, 2012 12:39 PM

    If there is… no Law[ rule]… there can be no spirit, or letter of that law…period. You either have a rule in place or you do not.There was no cap space rule in place at the time these two clubs acted and said actions were okay-ed by the League. Even my teenage daughter can figure this out ! What Law School did Mr. Burbank attend ?
    __________________
    I have nothing against the cowboys or the skins but seriously these fans need to quit playing armchair lawyer and take their medicine. The boss (NFL) told you not to do it. In any situation in the real world you would be fired, fined, reprimanded, or whatever for disobeying your boss, supervisor, or director. You guys can say there was no hard and fast rule all you want but in the end they knew what they did would have repercussions. Shut up and take your medicine. It is not as though the exorbitant spending had been helping you guys lately anyway.

  81. cliffordc05 says: May 22, 2012 2:12 PM

    Gosh, what a surprise. The dispute goes to arbitration and the losers decide that the arbitrator is biased.

  82. stanklepoot says: May 22, 2012 2:19 PM

    koolrepetoire says: May 22, 2012 1:26 PM

    This reaks of jealousy. Amazing how the Top 2 owners that make the most revenue yearly for a decade manage to get screwed out of 46 million when they do the most revenue sharing every year for the past 10 years. You have 2 owners that had their own team’s stadiums built, they are the biggest in the NFL, you have Mara the greedy, jealous owner sharing revenue with the Jets in a brand new stadium coming off 2 SB’s in the last 4 years. Don’t you find it interesting he promised Osi his money & never paid him? Not only that, the other owner in the NFC EAST in an uncapped year assembled a DREAM TEAM. Did Mara hate on Lurie? Nope. How are the Eagles to this day still like 16 million UNDER the cap? You mean to tell me people are mad at my Redskins for getting rid of McNabb who is washed up, and for Haynesworth who was later cut by 2 teams? Seriously? The NFL approved the guaranteed money 2 both players and now it was wrong? And exactly how did Chicago pay Peppers over 30 million guaranteed in an uncapped year? Interesting alliances.
    _________________________________
    1. The Cowboys and Redskins aren’t getting screwed out of $46 million. They’re being deprived of the opportunity to spend $46 million.

    2. Mara isn’t jealous because the Giants are hurting for money. The Giants are a rather valuable franchise in their own right. Oh, and they’re not really sharing much stadium revenue with the Jets. It’s mostly costs they’re sharing. Each team has the same number of home games, and each team keeps what they make during those games. Naming rights and such are shared though.

    3. You really messed up when talking about the Eagles. The Eagles spent all that money on FAs the season the cap was reinstated, not in the uncapped year. They were able to do so because of years of careful cap management, and because they chose not to keep any of their own FAs that year. So, between those two factors, the Eagles had a lot of cap room to work with, and seeing the unusually high number of quality players in FA that offseason they pounced. Oh, and it wasn’t as costly as it seems. Other than Nnamdi, they got fairly favorable deals with most of the players they picked up, and DRC was still on his rookie contract. As for why they have the available cap space they do now, they traded Asante away to make sure they did. There’s no conspiracy there. Eagles front office has been great at cap management for quite a while. That’s why the Colts chose one of them for their new GM. The Colts have a lot of work to do rebuilding their roster and getting their cap money spent in the right way.

    4. McNabb has nothing to do with the Redskins cap penalty. The penalty represents the amount of money the Redskins dumped into the uncapped year when they reworked the contracts of Albert Haynesworth and DeAngelo Hall. In fact, in both cases, teams were penalized not for new contracts (such as FAs), but for reworking the contracts of players already on the roster (Miles Austin for the Cowboys). That’s the only reason I can think of that the Peppers signing wasn’t included. He represented a new contract rather than a reworked contract for a player already on the team.

  83. steelpalace302 says: May 22, 2012 2:25 PM

    Vetdana , Go look at Julius Peppers contract at the same time then come back and run your mouth. You dont have a clue about what you are talking about.

  84. mungman69 says: May 22, 2012 2:30 PM

    Jones and Snyder never worried about a cap before.

  85. macwomack says: May 22, 2012 2:40 PM

    I’ve said it before — the Redskins need to point out that Haynesworth would never have been a Patriot without them having redone his deal. Therefore the Patriots upset the competitive balance. If the split is 20 mil for Haynesworth and 16 mil for Hall then the Skins need to inform the league that they have effectively transferred 20 million of their penalty to the patriots.

  86. hendawg21 says: May 22, 2012 2:50 PM

    First Mara is a tool…GODdell is a bigger tool!!! And yet neither nor has anyone else explained what competive balance did they actually get??? And for years your Tampa’s, Arizona’s, Cincinatti’s etc., you know the teams who don’t spend squat weren’t they guilty of screwing with the competive balance by spending way below the cap??? You can hate Jones and Snyder all you want but this totally wrong and I hope they sue the hell out of all of those involved.

  87. gromry says: May 22, 2012 3:15 PM

    May 22, 2012 11:52 AM
    How can you violate the spirit of a rule, if there is no rule to begin with?

    And god knows we don’t want to violate spirits!

  88. beelicker says: May 22, 2012 3:25 PM

    I’m onboard with stanklepoot & it’s the point I’ve been making all along about this issue. The violations were for reworking existing contracts to be dumping legitimate cap charges FROM OTHER CAPPED YEARS (I’m assuming both past & present) into the uncapped year via contractual devices, which effectively altered the competitive balance going forward – from those capped years going forward into AFTER the uncapped year.

    Cowpokers/Dreadskins alleviated themselves of legitimate cap responsibilities by “dumping” those legitmate cap charges into the uncapped year (which is the “spirit of rule”), therefore this action of the Commissioner merely restores those legitimately acquired charges back onto the books & maintains the status quo competitive balance going forward. Both teams end up having legitimate cap charges reinstated which they sought to unburden themselves of through illegitimate means during the uncapped period.

    Due to their status of having more revenue than most other teams they had money to burn in this way … they already spent it in this way, so they’re not “losing” that amount, they ALREADY spent it to bail them out for having overspent their way into cap constraints before the uncapped year… just in a way that they thought would allow them to reset with a clean(er) slate to be able to spend the same as everybody else in the capped league when they returned to a capped year.

    They sought to clean up their excesses from outside the uncapped year by taking unfair advantage during that uncapped year. This restores that level of excess back on them going forward. They were warned not to do this but they did it anyway.

    Technically, it didn’t violate the rules of the uncapped year but it violates the cap balance from previously & which was restored.

  89. koolrepetoire says: May 22, 2012 3:39 PM

    Stanklepoot get a clue. The smart-alleck jargon approach is useless. 1. Penalized 46 million & not being able to spend it is the same thing. Especially in this year when it has been said that there won’t be a FA class this deep for years to come. 2. The Giants share revenue & costs with the Jets at The Meadowlands Stadium at a 50/50 split. The Giants are 4th behind the Redskins, Cowboys, & Patriots despite being in the marketing capital of the entire world. 3. If Mara wasn’t jealous why did he seek to hate on 2 divisional foes that didn’t even make the playoffs? Why would he make a statement about both teams being lucky it wasn’t draft picks? Why was he the only owner bumping his gums? 4. The Redskins & Cowboys have shared more revenue combined than any teams in NFL History, do the math. What competitive advantage came from dumping Haynesworth, reworking Hall’s contract & Austin’s contract? Did Jones & Snyder hate when Mara & Archie Manning manipulated the NFL Draft when Eli came out? Was that in the spirit of competitive balance? 5. Despite his obvious greed & jealousy the Redskins & Cowboys still made moves in FA & the NFL Draft. The Redskins manuevered & got RG3, the scary mixture of Warren Moon with Vick’s wheels with Peyton’s mental aptitude, while the Cowboys manuevered to get Claiborne, a possible Deion meets Rod Woodson mixture. Oh & both teams kept all key FA’s they wanted anyway.

  90. slick3 says: May 22, 2012 10:32 PM

    stanklepoot says: May 22, 2012 12:59 PM

    bigjdve says: May 22, 2012 12:19 PM

    eaglebobby: the teams didn’t get any letters, the league has admitted that there isn’t a written confirmation of any of this, that it is a spoken gentlemen’s agreement. That agreement was to circumvent a poison pill put in the CBA by the players to penalize the owners not getting a new CBA in place.

    The Shoeman: to make your analogy more correct. There is a 15mph speed limit for a long time. Then it is known that there is NO speed limit for a year, then it will be back to 15mph the following year but there is NO speed limit for a year. The drivers say well we will all stay at 15 anyway. Then Snyder and Jones decide to drive through at 100mph, then goodell decides to give them a ticket. There wasn’t a speed limit, however they got a ticket for speeding.

    That is how it was. The cap was out for a year, period. They decided to use that to their advantage. They are being penalized because they decided to use the non-capped year to their advantage, then got flagged for violating the cap.

    How can you violate a cap, when there is no cap?
    _______________________________
    Your counter analogy actually works against you. Technically speaking, you can be ticketed even if you’re not exceeding the posted speed limit. How’s that? The posted speed limit is based on average road condition. If the road condition is poor due to snow/ice or a large amount of rain, you can still be ticketed for reckless driving despite the fact that there’s no official posting of what your speed should be under bad conditions. The law considers it an accepted understanding that you shouldn’t be driving any faster than is safe under the current road conditions, even if the posted speed limit doesn’t take them into account.
    ———————————————————————————–

    Aha! Your counter-counter analogy is flawed. Because it doesn’t factor in the fact that you can only be ticketed for reckless driving if it results in accidental death, bodily injury, or property damage. Otherwise, you can drive in those conditions relative to the posted speed limit(s).

  91. stercuilus65 says: May 27, 2012 6:02 AM

    Get over whiners…especially angrycorgi, the biggest wet diaper baby of them all.

  92. jkb0162 says: May 29, 2012 5:09 PM

    Although Jones and Snyder may have violated the spirit of the law there is in fact no such thing as “the spirit of the law.” You either violate the law or you don’t. If there is no CBA there is no salary cap, and although Jones and Snyder are notorious overspenders they can not be punished for finding loopholes to improve their team moving forward.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!