ST:In an official team statement, defiant Cowboys say they complied by league rules

[cowboyjoe]

In an official team statement, defiant Cowboys say they complied by league rules in 2010

Here is a statement from the Cowboys spokesman Rich Dalrymple on the $10 million cap hit imposed by the league for taking advantage of the uncapped year:

"The Dallas Cowboys were in compliance with all league salary cap rules during the uncapped year. We look forward to the start of the free agency period where our commitment to improving our team remains unchanged."

Read more here: http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.com/cowboys/2012/03/in-an-official-team-statement-defiant-cowboys-say-they-complied-by-league-rules-in-2010.html#storylink=cpy

[supercowboy8]

Does this mean and I hope it does, that Jerry will get his team of attorneys and pay the Commish a visit with a threat of a law suit.
If Jerry and Snyder can team together and get their attorneys together, the NFL doesn't stand a chance.

[Canadian BoyzFan]

Suck it Roger.

[AsthmaField]

Does this mean and I hope it does, that Jerry will get his team of attorneys and pay the Commish a visit with a threat of a law suit.
If Jerry and Snyder can team together and get their attorneys together, the NFL doesn't stand a chance.


I think he should get Rob Ryan to pay Roge a visit.

[WPBCowboysFan]

Does this mean and I hope it does, that Jerry will get his team of attorneys and pay the Commish a visit with a threat of a law suit.
If Jerry and Snyder can team together and get their attorneys together, the NFL doesn't stand a chance.

I would think a resolution is reached before it gets to that point. If other teams did similar things the league has no ground to stand on.

It could all be a smokescreen. 30 teams are jealous of the 2 teams that were penalized. The commish has to work with all of them. He hands out the penalty. There is all the hoopla. He looks good to the 30 teams. Jerry and Danny Boy threaten to fight it becasue they didnt violate any rules. Roger compromises and a resolution is reached and he can say to the 30 teams he did all that was in his power, but the legal battle would be damaging to the league, blah, blah, blah so its resolved.

[gimmesix]

I think he should get Rob Ryan to pay Roge a visit.

Why? You think Rob can eat $10 million worth of food and pin the tab on Goodell?

[pjtoadie]

Why? You think Rob can eat $10 million worth of food and pin the tab on Goodell?

:laugh1: :lmao2:

[Risen Star]

I would think a resolution is reached before it gets to that point.

A resolution was reached. The Cowboys lose 10 million of cap. The Redskins 36 million. And that will be that.

What are you gonna do? Appeal? To who? The same guy who slapped that penalty on you? Good luck with that.

[AMERICAS_FAN]

Jerry needs to put a bounty on Goodell. :D

[supercowboy8]

A resolution was reached. The Cowboys lose 10 million of cap. The Redskins 36 million. And that will be that.

What are you gonna do? Appeal? To who? The same guy who slapped that penalty on you? Good luck with that.

you can place a law suit on the NFL. Take it to court and lock it up for years.

[Hoofbite]

you can place a law suit on the NFL. Take it to court and lock it up for years.

You think Jerry or Dan, two of the biggest cash cows in the NFL, are going to make that much noise over salary cap restrictions?

As of now, they haven't lost a dollar.

Let it get really ugly to the extent of some sort of decline in revenue and they will lose more money than all the other owners on top of all the money they've spent getting to that point.

And what are they suing them for? The league is going to stand on their "competitive balance" podium all damn day.

[mmillman]

injunction!

Redskins made the draft move thinking they could manuever in free agency better than the now see possible.

Dallas made the move under the rules that existed.

What about the teams that violated the salary floor? Did they get penalized?

Injunction followed by lawsuit.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

A resolution was reached. The Cowboys lose 10 million of cap. The Redskins 36 million. And that will be that.

What are you gonna do? Appeal? To who? The same guy who slapped that penalty on you? Good luck with that.

I am sure the NFL charter has an appeals process. I don't know and i know you don't know any specifics but if it makes you feel better to act like you do then go for it.

Then of course there is federal court.

What was the basis of penalizing the Cowboys?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You think Jerry or Dan, two of the biggest cash cows in the NFL, are going to make that much noise over salary cap restrictions?

As of now, they haven't lost a dollar.

Let it get really ugly to the extent of some sort of decline in revenue and they will lose more money than all the other owners on top of all the money they've spent getting to that point.

And what are they suing them for? The league is going to stand on their "competitive balance" podium all damn day.

Dan Snyder? What might he do to get his way? He has shown no compunction about who or what he destroys to get what he wants up to and including himself and his properties.

I do not like the man but i would not mess with him in this type of arena. He is ruthless and arrogant. Not a good combo to hope for farseeing magnanimity.

[Teague31]

The league approved the contracts! They can't come back two years later and complain. Jerry should sue the hell out of them.

[Hoofbite]

The league approved the contracts! They can't come back two years later and complain. Jerry should sue the hell out of them.

They couldn't reject them.

[tupperware]

"The Dallas Cowboys were in compliance with all league salary cap rules during the uncapped year. We look forward to the start of the free agency period where our commitment to improving our team remains unchanged."

So like every other year then? Cool.

[Idgit]

"The Dallas Cowboys were in compliance with all league salary cap rules during the uncapped year. We look forward to the start of the free agency period where our commitment to improving our team remains unchanged."

So like every other year then? Cool.

Fault them if you like, but they try to put a competitive team on the field each year.

[Nav22]

They couldn't reject them.There's a reason for this.

[Rascal07]

Suck it Roger.

I don't know why but this made me laugh

[Doomsday101]

A resolution was reached. The Cowboys lose 10 million of cap. The Redskins 36 million. And that will be that.

What are you gonna do? Appeal? To who? The same guy who slapped that penalty on you? Good luck with that.

You use the courts if collusion can be proved. Al Davis battled and beat the NFL a number of times to act like you have to surrender and not fight it is not correct.

[Outlaw Heroes]

They couldn't reject them.

Why? Because it would give credence to any claim the players might make of collusion in the face of what was then an impending labor dispute? If so, what does that suggest about the legitimacy of this penalty? Or do you think that the league (or any other governing body) should be able to impose penalties after the fact for behavior that it would not have been legally permitted to restrict ex ante?

[stasheroo]

I'd fight it.

The league itself approved these contracts.

And now two years later they want a re-do?

On what grounds? That the Cowboys and Redskins failed to comply with the league's salary cap collusion regarding what was an 'uncapped year'?

Or was that in name only? Just so we're clear.

I don't think any court in the world wouldn't throw this ruling out or consider it illegal.

[Doomsday101]

I'd fight it.

The league itself approved these contracts.

And now two years later they want a re-do?

On what grounds? That the Cowboys and Redskins failed to comply with the league's salary cap collusion regarding what was an 'uncapped year'?

Or was that in name only? Just so we're clear.

I don't think any court in the world wouldn't throw this ruling out or consider it illegal.

I would think the skins will challenge it considering how much they have to lose

[Dhragon]

You use the courts if collusion can be proved. Al Davis battled and beat the NFL a number of times to act like you have to surrender and not fight it is not correct.

Yeah, and Al Davis' Raiders have been the most penalyzed team in the league for how many years?

The NFL can get you back via the refs.

[Doomsday101]

Yeah, and Al Davis' Raiders have been the most penalyzed team in the league for how many years?

The NFL can get you back via the refs.

Raiders earn their penalties. Don't blame that on the refs or the league. Also Raiders went to the SB 1999 and won a SB right after sueing the NFL because the league tried to stop Davis from moving the Raider to LA.

This notion you don't fight the league is a joke, of course you fight it if what they have done is wrong.

One last thing Dallas was already the 5th most penalized last season before all of this and the Raiders as always was up towards the top.

[Hoofbite]

Why? Because it would give credence to any claim the players might make of collusion in the face of what was then an impending labor dispute? If so, what does that suggest about the legitimacy of this penalty? Or do you think that the league (or any other governing body) should be able to impose penalties after the fact for behavior that it would not have been legally permitted to restrict ex ante?

Everything you say, I agree with.

However, it is possible the claim by the league that those contracts were a threat to competitive balance could be viewed to extend beyond just the year the contract is signed because Dallas has benefitted over the last two seasons from a cap figure that is nearly 1/3 to 1/4th the going rate for a player of Austin's caliber.

Obviously they aren't punishing teams for exceeding the non-existant cap. They're punishing them for structuring a contract to get a leg up on the competition in terms of FA spending in 2011 and 2012.

It's not so much the act itself they are being punished for it's the resulting imbalance that was created for years following that were subject to the salary cap.

It's entirely subjective on behalf of the league but they made the call. Just gotta live with it at this point I suppose.

Quick question to you though as I remember you being very help during the labor deal. Could the league have legally rejected those contracts? Forget the pending labor dispute, would rejecting them without a CBA have opened themselves up to a whole new mess?

[Outlaw Heroes]

Quick question to you though as I remember you being very help during the labor deal. Could the league have legally rejected those contracts? Forget the pending labor dispute, would rejecting them without a CBA have opened themselves up to a whole new mess?

I have to confess that I'm not as familiar with the ins and outs of the old CBA as I would need to be in order to be able to properly address this question.

I will say this, however. There was, in fact, a CBA in place in 2010, even though (by the terms of that CBA) it was an uncapped year. If the league had purported to reject the contracts it would obviously have had to do so on a basis other than a violation of the cap rules, given that it was an uncapped year by the terms of the CBA. So far as I know (and this is where my lack of detailed knowledge of the relevant provisions of the old CBA prevents me from being definitive) the league could not have rejected the contracts on the basis that they would upset competitive balance in future years, even if permitted by the letter of the cap rules (though I find your ex post facto argument in this regard interesting and creative).

Failing that (or some other obscure "interest of the game" basis for rejecting the contracts), any attempt to reject the contracts on the grounds that too much of the cost was allocated to an uncapped year would look very much like trying to impose a cap in 2010 outside the confines of the CBA. Any such cap that was not agreed to as part of a collective bargaining process would not enjoy the benefits of the non-statutory labor exemption from antitrust law and would therefore be subject to legal attack.

[ABQCOWBOY]

The Cowboys could simply not comply with the League's mandate. Simply don't recognize it. That seems to be what the Skins have decided to do.

[Future]

I am sure the NFL charter has an appeals process. I don't know and i know you don't know any specifics but if it makes you feel better to act like you do then go for it.

Then of course there is federal court.

What was the basis of penalizing the Cowboys?
A bunch of other owners got butt-hurt