View Full Version : BTB: Report: Cowboys Will Not Challenge League On $10 Million Salary Cap Penalty
cowboyjoe
03-16-2012, 11:18 AM
Report: Cowboys Will Not Challenge League On $10 Million Salary Cap Penalty
http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/3/16/2877285/report-cowboys-will-not-challenge-league-on-10-million-salary-cap?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
by KD Drummond on Mar 16, 2012 11:00 AM CDT in Dallas Cowboys News
After proving that there's more than one way to skin a cat, it appears that the Cowboys will simply move on from the $10 million penalty imposed on the franchise by the NFL's Management Council. Docked the figure due to violating unwritten code-of-conduct rules effectively "imposed" during the uncapped season of 2010, Dallas was considering a few options. They could have appealed the decision, or they could have taken their grievance the legal route; possibly opening up the league for collusion investigations.
.....
The Dallas Cowboys are unlikely to challenge the NFL’s decision to cut the team’s salary cap space by $10 million over the next two seasons, a person familiar with the case said Thursday.
The person with knowledge of the case said Thursday that the Cowboys probably would do nothing but that the Redskins “might be considering some legal options.”
cowboy_ron
03-16-2012, 11:20 AM
I think Jerry feels that would hinder us getting another super bowl awarded here if he did
Illini88228
03-16-2012, 11:26 AM
I think Jerry feels that would hinder us getting another super bowl awarded here if he did
That or JJ's going to use this as leverage the next time he wants something from the commish.
WPBCowboysFan
03-16-2012, 11:38 AM
That or JJ's going to use this as leverage the next time he wants something from the commish.
Or both . . . . . .
burmafrd
03-16-2012, 12:28 PM
not surprised all that much. I really wanted Danny Boy and Jerruh to take the NFL into court on this; that would have scared the crap out of them and probably made them rescind the fine.
dogberry
03-16-2012, 02:08 PM
Is the Super Bowl ever going to Washington? What club does the league have on the Redskins to keep them from suing?
Cowboys22
03-16-2012, 02:13 PM
Smart move. $10 million is easily absorbed and won't be missed at all. Let Snyder fight it and if he wins, Dallas will win too and Jerry won't have spent a dime on lawyers.
ABQCOWBOY
03-16-2012, 02:31 PM
Is the Super Bowl ever going to Washington? What club does the league have on the Redskins to keep them from suing?
The Skins won't sue. At least, not immediately. They will spend until the reach the imposed cap limit and wait for the NFL to document, in writing, the rule that was broken. Then, they will let nature take it's course. I doubt that the NFL will do that.
wittenacious
03-16-2012, 03:12 PM
I think Jerry feels that would hinder us getting another super bowl awarded here if he did
Thought the very same thing with Super Bowl L being something he will be wanting to go after in a big way.
cowboy_ron
03-16-2012, 03:18 PM
Thought the very same thing with Super Bowl L being something he will be wanting to go after in a big way.
Yea, Jerry probably figures losing 10M in monopoly money is a small price to pay for another SB at the palace...if the Skins sue and win it will be awarded back to us anyway without looking like the bad guy:)
FLcowboy
03-16-2012, 03:52 PM
That or JJ's going to use this as leverage the next time he wants something from the commish.
I think he just bought another Super Bowl.
dogberry
03-16-2012, 03:56 PM
The desire for revenge against Mara is strong.
mmillman
03-17-2012, 10:00 AM
yet another, in a string of boneheaded moves, by Jerruh.
We may never know but did Dallas' free agency plans change because of this? Is it why they overpaid for mediocre guards instead of going for a Grubbs or Mathis?
cowboy_ron
03-17-2012, 02:05 PM
yet another, in a string of boneheaded moves, by Jerruh.
We may never know but did Dallas' free agency plans change because of this? Is it why they overpaid for mediocre guards instead of going for a Grubbs or Mathis?
:bang2:
cajuncocoa
03-17-2012, 02:07 PM
*sigh*
RastaRocket
03-17-2012, 02:22 PM
yet another, in a string of boneheaded moves, by Jerruh.
We may never know but did Dallas' free agency plans change because of this? Is it why they overpaid for mediocre guards instead of going for a Grubbs or Mathis?
Is that you Matt Millen? The millman?
speedkilz88
03-17-2012, 02:38 PM
PFT is saying the opposite. Who knows right now.
RastaRocket
03-17-2012, 02:55 PM
PFT is saying the opposite. Who knows right now.
My theory is, when it comes to things such as law suits you keep that behind closed doors. You don't go and tell people you are about to sue, it never works that way and can hurt your case. We will never know untill it happens. JJ and Stephen will be denying everything until a law suit does or does not come up. Don't you find it ironic that on the exact same day the cowboys and skins release similar statements? Both saying we did nothing wrong but are committed to the upcoming season as always.
Randy White
03-17-2012, 06:22 PM
just about the same thing I just finished posting on another thread.
Cool heads prevail and logical thinking triumphed. The Cowboys are too smart to cut off their noses to spite their faces. I'm sure the Deadskins will follow also.
As I also said on that same thread: NY is going to want another SB in the future. They're going to need the support of Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder who are still very influential.
" forgive, but not forget "..
Yakuza Rich
03-17-2012, 06:44 PM
Smart move. $10 million is easily absorbed and won't be missed at all. Let Snyder fight it and if he wins, Dallas will win too and Jerry won't have spent a dime on lawyers.
It's crap. Jerry has been declawed. Can't start calling the players gutless without calling Jerry gutless first from now on. Well, at least he's proud of his Giants now. ;)
YR
FuzzyLumpkins
03-17-2012, 06:52 PM
It's crap. Jerry has been declawed. Can't start calling the players gutless without calling Jerry gutless first from now on. Well, at least he's proud of his Giants now. ;)
YR
I have to admit that if Jones just sits back and takes this laying down, I will lose that much more respect for him. I don't like him as PT Barnum or Bob Bass but to make him a coward as well doesn't sit well.
Hoofbite
03-17-2012, 07:49 PM
I have to admit that if Jones just sits back and takes this laying down, I will lose that much more respect for him. I don't like him as PT Barnum or Bob Bass but to make him a coward as well doesn't sit well.
I expected this.
I didn't see where he can actually make a claim that he didn't do something that was universally regarded as unfair on behalf of the league and that he shouldn't be punished by the collective when he entered into an agreement giving them the power to.
I don't have a problem with his decision unless he ACTUALLY did it for another Superbowl.
I don't think he did but if he did he's essentially putting his wallet ahead of the team.
FuzzyLumpkins
03-17-2012, 08:05 PM
I expected this.
I didn't see where he can actually make a claim that he didn't do something that was universally regarded as unfair on behalf of the league and that he shouldn't be punished by the collective when he entered into an agreement giving them the power to.
I don't have a problem with his decision unless he ACTUALLY did it for another Superbowl.
I don't think he did but if he did he's essentially putting his wallet ahead of the team.
If he felt that he was being compelled to do something illegal by not trying to take advantage of the ruleset as it was then they have every right to appeal to the courts. that fits within the definition of extortion.
the NFL is trying their same rejected temporal argument. just because they are doing it now and have since come to a settlement with the individual the proposed crime was to take place against does not mean that you don't consider the actions all within their temporal context.
i have read all of the NFL rulings over the last 30 odd years and one thing NFL counsel is not good at its creating new arguments. 'Competitive balance' and 'this situation has now changed form what is was then' have both been rejected by SCOTUS. Its not like the NFL even has a good track record in federal court. They lose a lot.
Randy White
03-17-2012, 09:00 PM
there are much bigger fish to fry in the future. Jerry is doing the smart thing here. I know it sticks in the proverbial craw the way it came down, but there's not much to gain by fighting this. The Cowboys weren't hurt one bit with this decision, nor it prevented anything they wanted to accomplished and had control over.
Doesn't make sense to start or escalate any litigation.
FuzzyLumpkins
03-17-2012, 10:57 PM
there are much bigger fish to fry in the future. Jerry is doing the smart thing here. I know it sticks in the proverbial craw the way it came down, but there's not much to gain by fighting this. The Cowboys weren't hurt one bit with this decision, nor it prevented anything they wanted to accomplished and had control over.
Doesn't make sense to start or escalate any litigation.
I get the notion that discretion is the better part of valor.
i don't buy that it didn't hurt us. We could have made a run at one of the top guards or centers had we not been docked. As it stands now we only have a couple of contracts that we can restructure whereas with $5m in additional space and without the Livings contract you have enough to put together a package for a top OG. We never made a play.
Dan Snyder is the one that I am banking on forcing the issue because as arrogant and myopic as the NFL has been on this, Dan loves the scorched earth policy.
Beast_from_East
03-18-2012, 03:28 AM
Very smart move by Jerry and this is why............
A. Jerry wants another SB and "taking one for the team" keeps him high on the list. If he sued, you can kiss any chance of getting another SB goodbye.
B. $5 million hit this year and next is not going to cripple the franchise, especially considering that we have almost $30 million in dead money coming off the cap next year.
C. The Skins are the ones that are more likely to take legal action being docked almost $40 million. Let the Skins become the new "Raiders" of the league and become the outcast like Al Davis was.
D. Even if the Skins actually won their lawsuit, Dallas would benefit as well without being the "bad guy" in all of this.
Brilliant move by Jerry!!!!
Randy White
03-18-2012, 11:55 AM
I don't know that we were interested in paying for one of the top guards. Going by this administration's reputation, if they were, they would have gone after him. Or it could be the case that neither guards was interested in playing in Dallas ( yea, I know, but it happens )..
Eskimo
03-18-2012, 01:15 PM
Just Jerry proving that he cares more about money and his own reputation within the league than trying to build a winning team for the fans.
I lose more respect for him every day.
I pray that he develops massive financial troubles and has to liquidate the team so someone else can buy the team and restore it to glory on the field which is where it counts to the fans.
Yakuza Rich
03-18-2012, 07:16 PM
I don't buy into the 'he can kiss his chance at getting a SB goodbye if he sues the NFL.'
Even if the Super Bowl is held at Cowboys Stadium, there's a LOT more people and politics involved than Jerry and Goodell. He may make it a pain in the arse, but it could still very well happen given the stadium and the city.
Still...
I
DO NOT
CARE.
My fandom of the Cowboys has nothing to do with the stadium getting to host some Super Bowls. The fans and the Cowboys should be Jerry's #1 priority. Apparently they are not.
I remember him as a renegade owner. Now he's just neutered.
YR
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.