NFL Penalizing Salary Cap for Cowboys and Commanders

Cowboy Junkie

leonargized
Messages
2,512
Reaction score
1
AdamJT13;4448997 said:
Scratch the part about Tramon Williams. Apparently, there initially was an error in the way that the contract was processed, and it has since been corrected. I was looking at info from the end of the 2010 season to see what we and other teams did that year. I've since looked at more recent information that clears up Williams' situation. The numbers that I posted for the other players are correct, though.
Quick question Adam.
Do you believe the Cowboys will still be able to do all they want to or will this handicap them too much?
 

NinePointOh

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,583
Reaction score
78
AdamJT13;4448997 said:
Scratch the part about Tramon Williams. Apparently, there initially was an error in the way that the contract was processed, and it has since been corrected. I was looking at info from the end of the 2010 season to see what we and other teams did that year. I've since looked at more recent information that clears up Williams' situation. The numbers that I posted for the other players are correct, though.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the contracts to Julius Peppers and Eric Weddle massively frontloaded as well?
 

sonnyboy

Benched
Messages
7,357
Reaction score
0
RS12;4448994 said:
Somebody said earlier that money goes back to other teams. Who always has their palms out at league meetings. Not hard to figure where this came from. BTW Mike Brown is pretty much dispised by other owners for just this reason.


I hear what you're saying, but it really doesn't add up.

Those owners are concerned with money in their pocket. Giving them 1.6 mil additional cap money relative to us and the Skins losing 46 million in cap money, isn't improving their profitablility. If anything, you putting them on the hook to spend 1.6mil more without any additional revenue.

This smacks of a division team crying about a competitve disadvantage. And who cries more than the ****** eagles.
 

sacase

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,401
Reaction score
2,705
I wonder if Jerry and Dan just said, ok fine us. Good luck in getting that revenue sharing thing in the next CBA. Lord knows Jerry hates revenue sharing.
 

firehawk350

Active Member
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Galian Beast;4449009 said:
They just ruined our season...

No, I don't think so. I think Jones' will roll the entire hit to the 2013 season which doesn't change anything. The Skins are $44-47M under the cap (that includes the franchise tag to Davis and cutting Atogwe and Sellers) and could take the entire hit in 2012. That would change their plans quite a bit but I think it's more likely that they distribute it evenly and end up with around $30M in cap space which is more than enough.
 

sonnyboy

Benched
Messages
7,357
Reaction score
0
AdamJT13;4448997 said:
Scratch the part about Tramon Williams. Apparently, there initially was an error in the way that the contract was processed, and it has since been corrected. I was looking at info from the end of the 2010 season to see what we and other teams did that year. I've since looked at more recent information that clears up Williams' situation. The numbers that I posted for the other players are correct, though.


OK I'm going to make a real stretch here and just assume everything you say is correct.:rolleyes:

How is this singling out of us and the Skins justifiable?

And what can be or would be done about it?
 

Hoofbite

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,893
Reaction score
11,620
Anyone wanna see dumping?

http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/ScreenShot2012-03-12at24108PM.jpg http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/ScreenShot2012-03-12at23744PM.jpg

http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/ScreenShot2012-03-12at23849PM.jpg http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/ScreenShot2012-03-12at24005PM.jpg

Gotta tell ya, KC really takes the cake. Basically escaped a rookie top pick contract on the books by loading him up heavy for years 1 and 2.
http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/ScreenShot2012-03-12at23729PM.jpg http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/ScreenShot2012-03-12at24029PM.jpg

And I can't find a breakdown like that for Fat Albert but here's what they do have on him.

http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/ScreenShot2012-03-12at25120PM.jpg

Not sure if those are base salaries or what but I don't see how the Commanders were dumping. Haynesworth had no fat bonus or base salary in 2010. There must be more to his contract.
 

firehawk350

Active Member
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Hoofbite;4449040 said:
Not sure if those are base salaries or what but I don't see how the Commanders were dumping. Haynesworth had no fat bonus or base salary in 2010. There must be more to his contract.

Haynesworth had a guaranteed roster bonus of $21M in 2010 which could be converted into a signing bonus. I think that's where the league hit the Skins.
 

Chocolate Lab

Run-loving Dino
Messages
37,323
Reaction score
12,013
cobra;4448958 said:
First off, fans have no standing to file suit. So you can drop that thought.

The teams and players could be the applicants for injunctive relief.

The fact that there was "unofficial agreement" or "edict" to really have an unofficial salary cap in 2010--an agreement that is not part of the CBA--is an agreement itself that is a price restraint not evidenced by the CBA which is the exclusive location for such agreements per the NFL's anti-trust exemption.

For those that aren't certain, here is a very simplistic explanation of the law: 32 companies cannot get together and decide they'll have a cap (or floor) as to how much they are willing to pay. That conduct violates the Sherman Antitrust Act.

So for example, say the 5 biggest computer manufacturers said "we will not pay more than $1 for a processor." That would be the same as the salary cap, because paying for labor is the same as paying for component parts. Well, processor makers would be forced to sell for that amount because it is an agreement between the guys who control the market.

That is "price-fixing" or "price restraint" and it is prohibited anti-competitive behavior.

Congress granted the NFL a waiver of anti-trust allegations when the merger occurred. That allowed the NFL to engage in such decisions but the only mechanism by which they are permitted to do it with respect to labor is through the CBA. It is the exclusive mechanism. If they are making agreements not contained in the CBA, they have a problem.

This also has an over-lapping issue with the NLRA as it relates to the wages of a union separate from the CBA, which is the exclusive bargaining provision for working with a union.

This is really a legally dicey move by the NFL.

I've seen some suggestion that this was an agreed result. If that is the case, then it may be a non-issue. But I have a hard time believing Jerry agreed to this. And if it a punitive measure against a dissenting voter, there are other issues regarding collusion.

I'll be interested to reading the formal wording of this because it smacks of being problematic.

Oh, and if there are equally bad "violaters" but certain firms are singled out for punishment, it makes it more likely this is anti-competitive behavior (as the standards are adjudged on a rule of reason that looks for neutral application).

My first thought was that the players' union should have a beef with the cap being decreased, but then I remembered that 1.6 increase for what, 28 other teams (everyone minus us and the Skins, Saints, and Raiders).

So I'm guessing that 1.6 number is really 1.64, which is 46 (the amount they took away)/28.

That returns the total cap number to what it was. They just redistributed the money.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Only issue I have is how is it the Cowboys and the Skins the only teams who did this?

Dallas will be able to overcome this but I find it hard to believe given the contract that were being tossed around in the uncapped year that only these 2 teams were in violation?
 

Goku

Benched
Messages
388
Reaction score
0
im full of fury right now. does anybody have that dictator's contact info?
 

speedkilz88

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,012
Reaction score
23,185
Doomsday101;4449056 said:
Only issue I have is how is it the Cowboys and the Skins the only teams who did this?

Dallas will be able to overcome this but I find it hard to believe given the contract that were being tossed around in the uncapped year that only these 2 teams were in violation?
They're not the only ones, just deemed that they took it too far. It's ridiculous.
 

AdamJT13

Salary Cap Analyst
Messages
16,583
Reaction score
4,529
NinePointOh;4449013 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the contracts to Julius Peppers and Eric Weddle massively frontloaded as well?

Nope. Peppers' cap number went down a little, but it was still $12,783,333 in 2011. Weddle was still on his rookie contract during the uncapped year.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
speedkilz88;4449060 said:
They're not the only ones, just deemed that they took it too far. It's ridiculous.

I agree. Either you were in violation or not. "Taking it too far" becomes an opinion.
 

firehawk350

Active Member
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Doomsday101;4449056 said:
Only issue I have is how is it the Cowboys and the Skins the only teams who did this?

Dallas will be able to overcome this but I find it hard to believe given the contract that were being tossed around in the uncapped year that only these 2 teams were in violation?

It appears to actually be somewhat personal or, at least, arbitary. I'm guessing the small market owners (Jags, Bucs for example) were tired of getting outbid by Snyder and Jones in particular and threw a hissy about it. Instead of reviewing every contract's structure, Goodell threw up his hands and said, "fine whatever, I'll dock them the contracts' in penalties and give it to everybody else". The small market owners presumably clapped in delight.
 

TwoCentPlain

Numbnuts
Messages
15,241
Reaction score
11,136
No big deal. Quit crying. I know it isn't fair. $10M ain't all that bad. Cut Newman, Kosier, and Beuhler and you get the $10M back. Those three were getting cut anyway.

Jerry Jones has $10M less to spend on salaries which means he has $10M more in his pocket. The other owners have $1.6M more available to spend on salaries if they so choose. But they have to spend $1.6M from their pockets if they do. I think.
 

sonnyboy

Benched
Messages
7,357
Reaction score
0
One good thing about this developement is the unifying factor.

Homers and Haters united in their common fury.


Except of course for the few true Cowboy hating trolls/*******s. They can't help but reveal themsleves at a time like this.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
firehawk350;4449070 said:
It appears to actually be somewhat personal or, at least, arbitary. I'm guessing the small market owners (Jags, Bucs for example) were tired of getting outbid by Snyder and Jones in particular and threw a hissy about it. Instead of reviewing every contract's structure, Goodell threw up his hands and said, "fine whatever, I'll dock them the contracts' in penalties and give it to everybody else". The small market owners presumably clapped in delight.

Jags and Buc have a ton of space under the cap, that is their choice to go out and spend it or not. I can't see how what Dallas did was an unfair advantage
 

gmoney112

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,589
Reaction score
15,694
Well, no NFL games for me this season. NFL Redzone and NFL network just got cancelled. **** you Goodell.
 
Top