NFLPA lawsuit: any chance to get our cap space back?

[hra8700]

Since we're not plaintiffs on the lawsuit, is there any chance if the NFLPA wins we will get our cap space back, and if so, by what mechanism?

Anyone know or have any thoughts?

I'd be happy even if we don't; just desserts.

 

[Direwolf63]

No chance. The NFLPA signed off on the cap penalties. That's not what this lawsuit is about.

 

[kmd24]

Neither team will get anything out of the NFLPA lawsuit as far as salary cap space.

However, Stephen Burbank expressly stated in his decision that the Cowboys and Commanders retained whatever avenues were available to them under contract and agency law. I suppose getting the cap space back could potentially be part of a judgement or settlement in the teams' favor.

It will be interesting if Mara and Goodell's words end up costing the Cowboys and Commanders despite the teams' refusal to participate in the conspiracy. If it were me, I'd definitely sue the NFL to get my money back.

 

[silverbear]

No chance. The NFLPA signed off on the cap penalties. That's not what this lawsuit is about.

No, but it will be exhibit A for the plaintiffs... count on it...

 

[silverbear]

Neither team will get anything out of the NFLPA lawsuit as far as salary cap space.

However, Stephen Burbank expressly stated in his decision that the Cowboys and Commanders retained whatever avenues were available to them under contract and agency law. I suppose getting the cap space back could potentially be part of a judgement or settlement in the teams' favor.

It will be interesting if Mara and Goodell's words end up costing the Cowboys and Commanders despite the teams' refusal to participate in the conspiracy. If it were me, I'd definitely sue the NFL to get my money back.

It seems to me that the Cowboys and Skins could use this penalty to prove that if there was collusion, they weren't part of it, and thus would be exempted from any judgement or damages awarded...

 

[Hostile]

Right now, what is staring the NFL squarely in the face is unfettered Free Agency and no revenue sharing. Which means Dallas and Washington would have their handcuffs taken off.

So even if Dallas never gets a penny back, you could see long term ripple effects from this that kill several NFL teams. John Mara may have to look a Ralph Wilson in the eye and tell him he's sorry that his efforts bankrupted the Buffalo Bills.

Now, having said that, I firmly believe that there is a chance the NFL may see the slippery slope and back off. Right now, their are staring at the abyss.

 

[junk]

Right now, what is staring the NFL squarely in the face is unfettered Free Agency and no revenue sharing. Which means Dallas and Washington would have their handcuffs taken off.

So even if Dallas never gets a penny back, you could see long term ripple effects from this that kill several NFL teams. John Mara may have to look a Ralph Wilson in the eye and tell him he's sorry that his efforts bankrupted the Buffalo Bills.

Now, having said that, I firmly believe that there is a chance the NFL may see the slippery slope and back off. Right now, their are staring at the abyss.

Personally, I think it just means the NFLPA has another piece of ammunition to use against the league the next time CBA negotiations come up.

What does that mean? The players might get back some of the overall revenue they gave up to the owners in this latest round of negotiations.

And, since I think the owners weren't ever in any danger of losing money in the first place and still managed to get a larger piece of the pie, it shouldn't impact any of the other teams. It just means that owners may have to figure out revenue sharing on their own......like they should have done this time around instead of deciding they'd just settle their differences by taking more from the players.

However, from what I've seen from the NFLPA lately, I doubt they are saavy enough to really take advantage of this anyway.

 

[ElGatoGrande]

crimony, I hope we don't have to go through another tortured period where we have to argue about how the players got robbed this time around but they weren't the ones doing the robbing the time before that...

the sport and the fans are the ones getting jacked up.

 

[perrykemp]

It seems to me that the Cowboys and Skins could use this penalty to prove that if there was collusion, they weren't part of it, and thus would be exempted from any judgement or damages awarded...

If the NFLPA wins the case, there is no way the Cowboys and Skins would be excluded. NFLPA is claiming the NFL/NFL owners cheated/colluded -- all the Cowboys and Redkins are guilty of is cheating <more> than the other owners (according to the NFL) thought was an appropriate level of cheating...

 

[THUMPER]

IMO this is an open and shut case. If there was no salary cap in 2010 then the Cowboys, Commanders, and every other team were free to sign players for whatever amount they wanted. If there was no rule to be broken then how did they break the rules? If there was an "unwritten rule" imposing a salary cap then that is collusion, plain and simple. The fact that teams were "warned" about it ahead of time also proves collusion.

The only issue that could muddy it is the NFLPA's greed in accepting the penalties on Dallas and Washington in order to gain $7M per team in cap space ($120M instead of $113M). All they saw was more money and jumped at the chance without thinking it through. Essentially they gave their "OK" to the unwritten cap by doing that.

If they can prove their allegations of strong-arming by the league regarding the cap for this year then that would be an even greater hit against the owners.

Personally, I would love to see the courts come down crushingly hard on Mara and Goodell to the point where Mara at least does some time. Not likely to happen but I can dream.

The uncapped year in the final year of the old CBA was to force the owners to negotiate a new CBA before it came to that but they didn't get it done. To then limit the teams to an unwritten cap is collusion without a doubt and should be punished.

 

[NinePointOh]

The only issue that could muddy it is the NFLPA's greed in accepting the penalties on Dallas and Washington in order to gain $7M per team in cap space ($120M instead of $113M). All they saw was more money and jumped at the chance without thinking it through. Essentially they gave their "OK" to the unwritten cap by doing that.

No, they didn't.

The league didn't tell them why they wanted to punish the Cowboys and Commanders, and the NFLPA would have had no reason in the world to assume it was for refusing to participate in collusion two years earlier. They couldn't give their "ok" to something they didn't even know about -- the NFL gave them an ultimatum, and they chose the option they liked better, based on the information the NFL provided.

If they had more information about the punishments, they wouldn't have agreed to them. (Source)

 

[silverbear]

If the NFLPA wins the case, there is no way the Cowboys and Skins would be excluded. NFLPA is claiming the NFL/NFL owners cheated/colluded -- all the Cowboys and Redkins are guilty of is cheating <more> than the other owners (according to the NFL) thought was an appropriate level of cheating...

I dunno, man, it seems to me that the team's lawyers can argue that they were fined because they didn't join in the collusion...