Skip to content

Bruce Allen: We haven’t contemplated a lawsuit


The Redskins held a press conference on Monday and General Manager Bruce Allen said that the team still hoped to recover some of the $18 million they’ve lost under the salary cap this year as punishment from the league, but they won’t be doing it through a lawsuit.

Allen said that the team has “never contemplated a lawsuit” as part of their fight against what Allen called “a travesty of fairness.” The Redskins will continue to consider their options to fight the penalty, but Allen didn’t sound particularly optimistic about the team’s chances of success.

“I don’t know if there’s anything to overturn,” Allen said, via the Washington Times. “This is an agreement made between the NFL and the NFL Players’ Association. They’ve agreed to this. And, as with any rule that is an agreement between the two, all the teams have to abide by it.”

The release of cornerback DeAngelo Hall left the Redskins about $1 million under the salary cap ahead of Tuesday’s deadline. If their efforts to get back any of the cap space are unsuccessful, the Redskins will have to make some more moves if they’re going to be doing much shopping this offseason.

Permalink 27 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
27 Responses to “Bruce Allen: We haven’t contemplated a lawsuit”
  1. chawk12thman says: Mar 11, 2013 5:40 PM

    Glad no law suit

  2. R3D says: Mar 11, 2013 5:43 PM

    Well they don’t have to worry about signing a 1 st round pick.. That’s a salary cap plus lol

  3. duece8 says: Mar 11, 2013 5:43 PM

    Are you kidding me???? What about the fans???? Do what’s right for us!!!! We want a team that can compete!!!! The giants owner made giants fans very happy on the flip side if the dirty quarter……

  4. dvdman123 says: Mar 11, 2013 5:46 PM

    Hey maybe the Saints can join his lawsuit and try to get that No. 2 pick back from the Bountygate fiasco.

  5. wryly1 says: Mar 11, 2013 5:46 PM

    Maybe Allen, Snyder & Shanahan (A.S.S.) might wanna contemplate putting some sort of reasonable playing surface on their stadium field … you know … just in case RGIII comes off the PUP list someday.

  6. tillihawk says: Mar 11, 2013 5:47 PM

    If they change the team name would they give them cap money back? Don’t do it Redskins !!

  7. aprilwalker2013 says: Mar 11, 2013 5:48 PM

    You did hear him also say they were never warned not to do the contracts? And that they had no clue this was coming and it came right after they made the trade for RG3??!!! Looks like that trade made them know Skins wasn’t gonna be in 4 place again this past season! That’s where Roger and Maras GMEN wanted them to stay! All the talk from everyone saying they were warned now should stop!

  8. wcman says: Mar 11, 2013 5:48 PM

    Please don’t give us another diatribe on how the Skins are shooting themselves in the foot if they do proceed with a lawsuit or how they are gutless if the don’t Florio. As anyone with common sense already knew, the Skins will do nothing because they can do nothing.

  9. peytonsneck18 says: Mar 11, 2013 5:53 PM

    redskins are the king of mediocrecy, fail!!!!

  10. beagle11 says: Mar 11, 2013 5:55 PM

    Why can’t the players union file a suit? This is obvious collusion and the penalty takes away money from the players

  11. chut26 says: Mar 11, 2013 5:55 PM

    This is the Native American gods way at seeking revenge for the racist organization making a mockery of the original people of this land.

  12. kaeperdicking says: Mar 11, 2013 6:03 PM

    I like this line: “a travesty of fairness”. Think about the meaning of it.

    He is saying the punishment is fair because they tried to cheat the rest of the teams out of the agreement they all made (I don’t care if its collusion, they all agreed to it). He is saying it is a travesty because they got punished for it and it is hurting the team. The travesty of fairness, what a perfect description of what has happened to the Skins. No team is above the rest no matter what Skins fans think of their market or their importance to the league.

  13. fuglyflorio says: Mar 11, 2013 6:09 PM

    How come 30 teams knew not to do this … and only the Redskins and Cowboys didn’t? How big a dumb fanboy do you have to be to believe that whopper?

  14. joedirte says: Mar 11, 2013 6:12 PM

    You know who should file a law suit against the Redskins: RG III and Chris Clemons for have unsafe working conditions with that craptacular field

  15. mjkelly77 says: Mar 11, 2013 6:17 PM

    I’ve said it many times before. The Redskins will not litigate. The owner would be ostracized from the “old boys club” and that’s the last thing he wants.

  16. officialgame says: Mar 11, 2013 6:20 PM

    If Skin fans weren’t such arrogant aholes I might feel bad. But they are. They haven’t won a playoff game in 2 decades and after one winning season they act like they own the league. You would think RG3 injury would have humbled them? Nah, to stupid to figure out things can change in a hurry.

  17. tmkelley1 says: Mar 11, 2013 6:22 PM

    You don’t have to be a big dumb fanboy to know what happened after Mara opened his big mouth. Not for nothing are the NFL and the Giants in the same town…

  18. joparks2012 says: Mar 11, 2013 6:36 PM

    Regarding the last 2 posts – 1) It’s a travesty of fairness because it’s not fair. The league told them that they didn’t do anything wrong yet they still fined them 36M in cap space. Now if anyone just imposed a fine of 150 bucks on you and you had to pay it because you were locked into an organization all the while telling you that you didn’t violate any of the rules – you wouldn;t think that would be fair and you would think it was a travesty.
    2) The fact that 30 teams knew not to do this is simply inaccurate. The Skins were not told anything. They and the Cowboys were fined the most but the Saints and the Raiders were also punished to a lesser extent. In the uncapped year, there was technically no ceiling and also no floor and there were several teams that spent well below the minimum (had there been a cap) and those teams gained the vaunted competitive advantage that they accused the Skins and the Cowboys of doing. The fact that there were several teams, below the Skins and Cowboys and above the previous year’s cap number suggests that it probably wasn’t a well known fact or the parameters lacked detail. Now if the Skins and the Cowboys were at 200M and the other 30 teams were at 125M, that would support your point but that simply wasn’t the case. But Fugly, never let the facts get in the way of a good argument.

  19. batchuck says: Mar 11, 2013 6:41 PM

    It would be nice if the non-Redskins fans had the balls to mention the team they support when making comments. Better yet, mind your own business.

  20. wcman says: Mar 11, 2013 6:58 PM

    They were told about it, as in the league sent out a memo and said so at the league meetings that teams were not to use the uncapped year as a get out of cap jail free opportunity. The Skins can spin it so they appear to not have blatently done that, but they did and so did the Cowboys. There will be no lawsuit because Danny will be filing against himself when the suit leads to a antitrust investigation later on. The players attempt to sue for collusion was shot down by their favorite judge. It’s over and the Skins can do nothing.

  21. tmkelley1 says: Mar 11, 2013 7:14 PM

    ‘Skins fans arrogant? You’ve got to be kidding. No one’s arrogant after losing for 20 years, dude. But we are dang happy after one winning year, that’s for sure! Especially after beating the Giants 3 of the last 4 meetings. Maybe that’s what got Mara so ticked.

  22. bauman007 says: Mar 11, 2013 7:26 PM

    I still don’t understand how a league can punish a team for a “gentlemans agreement” then say it wasn’t collusion… Then again this is Rogers NFL where he can play god whenever he wants… Ask the Saints and James Harrison about that

  23. bauman007 says: Mar 11, 2013 7:31 PM

    But no worries, the Redskins won the east with the same restrictions last year, that should really show how embarrassed the Giant and Eagles that they did less with more… (Cowboys were in a similar fate as the Redskins, yet those two were playing meaningful football week 17)

  24. advancedcooking says: Mar 11, 2013 7:40 PM

    Before the illegal and immoral collusion agreement that occurred amongst the billionaire owners to force the players to accept a really franchise focused CBA there was another agreement all 32 teams and the NFLPA and commercial partners all agreed to.. one that was legally binding and had been in place for a number of years ..

    The previous CBA ..

    That had the cap less season in it depicted in complex and binding leagaleze … every knew the capless season was coming and what it meant.. but did nothing to avoid it …until 2 years after the fact …

  25. officialgame says: Mar 11, 2013 8:27 PM

    ‘Skins fans arrogant? You’ve got to be kidding. No one’s arrogant after losing for 20 years, dude.

    I’m happy your happy but you can check out some of your fellow Skin posters for yourself. It’s downright scary. All I’m saying is have a little humility it’s good for the Karma.

  26. sparky151 says: Mar 11, 2013 8:40 PM

    Apart from the fact collusion is illegal, whether the union settled all claims or not, why aren’t the Bears being penalized for the Peppers contract? It included 35 mil in the uncapped year, and was clearly structured to take advantage of the lack of a cap.

  27. boyshole25 says: Mar 12, 2013 5:51 AM

    Hey officialgame. The last playoff win was against the bucs in 06. Also it’s “too stupid” not “to stupid” (moron)

Leave a Reply

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