Arch Stanton
it was the grave marked unknown right beside
- Messages
- 6,474
- Reaction score
- 0
Teague31;4449271 said:Jerra should refuse to appear on national tv until the rescind this ridiculous penalty.
:laugh2:
Teague31;4449271 said:Jerra should refuse to appear on national tv until the rescind this ridiculous penalty.
Officials of the league and the NFL Players Association agreed to the reduction in the salary cap for the two teams in deliberations over the past week, said the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic.
The union agreed to the resolution reluctantly, the person said. Union officials believe that neither team did anything wrong or attempted to circumvent the salary cap. But the union acquiesced to the decision because the league would have lowered the salary cap for all 32 teams if it did not.
Who said we couldn't? The bridge jumpers in here who are selling their TVs on craigslist and heading into the cellars with an extra armful of canned beans, that's who.Risen Star;4449252 said:Because no matter what they do, they still lost 10 million. You can cut, restructure, do whatever you can do to create room, you won't get back that space.
But I agree that we should still be able to do some things. Who ever said we couldn't?
MichaelWinicki;4449270 said:I understand the disappointment.
And Risen Star is right. The money (or cap space) is gone.
But it can be compensated for to a large degree, so all is not lost.
I'm not quite as down on the whole thing because I didn't think the team was going to spend $100 mill on Mario Williams and $70 mill on Carl Nicks.
fanfromvirginia;4449282 said:Who said we wouldn't? The bridge jumpers in here who are selling their TVs on craigslist and heading into the cellars with an extra armful of canned beans, that's who.
Teague31;4449271 said:Jerra should refuse to appear on national tv until the rescind this ridiculous penalty.
Teague31;4449271 said:Jerra should refuse to appear on national tv until the rescind this ridiculous penalty.
MichaelWinicki;4449270 said:I understand the disappointment.
And Risen Star is right. The money (or cap space) is gone.
But it can be compensated for to a large degree, so all is not lost.
I'm not quite as down on the whole thing because I didn't think the team was going to spend $100 mill on Mario Williams and $70 mill on Carl Nicks.
Jerry's got a case. That's what this says to me. It doesn't mean he would ever pursue it. (Unless he signed off on it.)BRAVEONAWARPATH;4449280 said:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ars/2012/03/12/gIQABbe27R_blog.html#pagebreak
AmishGangsta;4449297 said:I wonder if this has something to do with the Skins trading away all their first round picks...
Risen Star;4449178 said:It's 10 million to acquire talent lost.
AdamJT13;4449305 said:We didn't "lose" the entire $10 million. We already HAVE more cap room because of the contract that caused the penalty. If we hadn't structured Austin's contract this way, we'd have less cap room right now.
The question is how high we could have pushed Austin's 2010 cap number before being penalized and how much the penalty would have been. We set it at $17.078 million. The league penalized us as if we should have set it at $7.078 million. If it had been $8.078 million, would we have been penalized $1 million? Who knows? If not, then the amount that we "lost" actually is only whatever amount we could have added to Austin's cap number before being penalized. Everything else is already included in our cap room.
AdamJT13;4449305 said:We didn't "lose" the entire $10 million. We already HAVE more cap room because of the contract that caused the penalty. If we hadn't structured Austin's contract this way, we'd have less cap room right now.
The question is how high we could have pushed Austin's 2010 cap number before being penalized and how much the penalty would have been. We set it at $17.078 million. The league penalized us as if we should have set it at $7.078 million. If it had been $8.078 million, would we have been penalized $1 million? Who knows? If not, then the amount that we "lost" actually is only whatever amount we could have added to Austin's cap number before being penalized. Everything else is already included in our cap room.
AdamJT13;4449305 said:We didn't "lose" the entire $10 million. We already HAVE more cap room because of the contract that caused the penalty. If we hadn't structured Austin's contract this way, we'd have less cap room right now.
The question is how high we could have pushed Austin's 2010 cap number before being penalized and how much the penalty would have been. We set it at $17.078 million. The league penalized us as if we should have set it at $7.078 million. If it had been $8.078 million, would we have been penalized $1 million? Who knows? If not, then the amount that we "lost" actually is only whatever amount we could have added to Austin's cap number before being penalized. Everything else is already included in our cap room.
Cajuncowboy;4449220 said:Here's my understanding of this debacle. We did everything legal. But there was some backroom deal that the owners agreed to violate the anti trust laws and collude NOT to dump or front load contracts.