U.S. Court of Appeals overturns Judge Doty on 2012 collusion case

[slaga]

I doubt Dallas and Washington get anything back but I would be very happy if they did. To me it appears reversing the punishment and fighting collusion are 2 separate things, independent of one another. Even if the NFL reversed the punishment, the collusion still existed. Some teams did not spend as much as they may have wanted due to the threat of repercussions after the new CBA was signed. By that I mean some teams may have spent more had collusion not occurred and that money cannot be reintroduced back into the pool of money the players (may have) received after the fact. Reversing said penalties does not reverse collusion. At this point I think Dallas and Washington are defendants in the NFLPA's case against the NFL. We are getting penalized again for breaking no rules...

 

[Nightman]

If they wiped out Austin's dead money charge in 2015 that would seem fair, since it was his contract that caused all the trouble.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The Cowboys are not a plaintiff in the case and Jones is unlikely to change that.

What I want to see is Mara censured and banned from leadership positions beyond membership in the overall executive council of 32. He clearly abuses authority.

The Cowboys and Commanders lost cap space represents lost revenue for the players so I could see us getting it back. What would be awesome is it going to trial and Cowboys executives being called to witness. It would be a spectacle.

 

[Doomsday101]

Send Dez and Murray over to Mara house. "Jerry told us you got our money" lol

 

[slaga]

The Cowboys and Commanders lost cap space represents lost revenue for the players so I could see us getting it back. What would be awesome is it going to trial and Cowboys executives being called to witness. It would be a spectacle.

That cap space lost by the Commanders and Dallas was given to 28 ( I think) of the other 30 teams. The player's pool of cap dollars that could have been spent by all of the 32 teams remained the same before vs. after the cap penalty. The players lost revenue because cap space was taken away from teams the would have spent it and given to teams that notoriously do not spend anywhere near the salary cap.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That cap space lost by the Commanders and Dallas was given to 28 ( I think) of the other 30 teams. The player's pool of cap dollars that could have been spent by all of the 32 teams remained the same before vs. after the cap penalty. The players lost revenue because cap space was taken away from teams the would have spent it and given to teams that notoriously do not spend anywhere near the salary cap.

Good point. i could still see a judge deciding that the action was still an unfair restriction on trade and rescinding it.

 

[burmafrd]

if there is no cap yet the teams claim Wash and Dallas violated some 'kind of agreement' then how in the world is that not collusion? Have wondered how any court could rule otherwise.

 

[SkinsFan28]

Dallas and Washington won't gain anything from this, they will fight alongside the rest of the NFL to say there was no collusion. If the NFLPA were to win the collusion argument, then it could possibly force the NFL to re-negotiate the whole CBA, under court restrictions that would make it likely that the next one would be far more player friendly than this one. The salary cap penalties were - by most estimates - proof of collusion, but they in and of themselves aren't what's at issue, the validity and fairness of the CBA negotiations are what's at stake.

 

[SkinsFan28]

if there is no cap yet the teams claim Wash and Dallas violated some 'kind of agreement' then how in the world is that not collusion? Have wondered how any court could rule otherwise.

Doty ruled that the NFLPA had waived their rights to sue for collusion, he didn't rule on the merits of the collusion claim. The appellate court is saying that the NFLPA can still bring the lawsuit forward.

 

[Ashwynn]

my decision would to either:

1) Give Dallas and Washington the money they lost, you can spread it out over two years, just like the penalty was spread of two years, I think it was 10 for Dallas and 36 for Washington.

2) Would be to make all other clubs lose 23 million in salary cap for 2 straight years, just as Dallas and Washington lost salary cap for two straight years. Or they can choose to take the hit in 1 year. their choice.

This penalizes the teams that joined Mara and the clubs that said nothing and let Dallas and Washington get railroaded.

 

[casmith07]

I don't think Dallas or Washington would get any cps space back. If anything the NFLPA would get money.

The real question is who this judge doty clown is and why he ruled the way he did in the first place. It was clearly collusion. Wanna know who's lining his pockets

Federal judges are generally very anti-plaintiff and protective of corporations, for whatever reason. It's not just Doty. The outcome of the O'Bannon v. NCAA case will be interesting at the trial level, especially because it's a bench trial.

 

[dogunwo]

Wr

I think it would put the rest of the league at a disadvantage to just give a bunch of extra cap space back. I don't know that you can do that.

Well it was unfair to impose an invalid penalty which benefited every other team. I would be in favor of just receiving an extra 2nd round pick since the penalty hurt our ability to sign players.

 

[casmith07]

my decision would to either:

1) Give Dallas and Washington the money they lost, you can spread it out over two years, just like the penalty was spread of two years, I think it was 10 for Dallas and 36 for Washington.

2) Would be to make all other clubs lose 23 million in salary cap for 2 straight years, just as Dallas and Washington lost salary cap for two straight years. Or they can choose to take the hit in 1 year. their choice.

This penalizes the teams that joined Mara and the clubs that said nothing and let Dallas and Washington get railroaded.

The most realistic remedy is to reverse the penalty and give Dallas and Washington a cap credit spread over two years.

The most LIKELY remedy is nothing more than injunctive relief, and possibly monetary damages.

 

[SkinsFan28]

The most realistic remedy is to reverse the penalty and give Dallas and Washington a cap credit spread over two years.

The most LIKELY remedy is nothing more than injunctive relief, and possibly monetary damages.

Just a reminder, Dallas and Washington are part of the defendants (NFL) in the case. It's highly unlikely that the court, if it found merits in the case would impose any ruling that split the defendants, First Dallas or Washington or both would have to request to be part of the plaintiffs, and again, it's highly unlikely that Jones or Snyder is going to go Al Davis on the league's a** and join on the NFLPA's side, when the NFLPA originally agreed to both Washington and Dallas getting the penalty in the first place.

 

[casmith07]

Just a reminder, Dallas and Washington are part of the defendants (NFL) in the case. It's highly unlikely that the court, if it found merits in the case would impose any ruling that split the defendants, First Dallas or Washington or both would have to request to be part of the plaintiffs, and again, it's highly unlikely that Jones or Snyder is going to go Al Davis on the league's a** and join on the NFLPA's side, when the NFLPA originally agreed to both Washington and Dallas getting the penalty in the first place.

I haven't seen the full caption for the case at bar, but I doubt that Dallas and Washington are among the named defendants along with the NFL.

Also, the NFLPA, as the plaintiff, represents the fair earning potential of all players in the league, as collectively bargained. That earning potential was infringed by the collusion by the competition committee and John Mara. I'm not sure how it would work out in the remedy phase, but the argument can (and should) be made that a cap credit to those two franchises restores the equitable balance to the clients of the Players' Association to work and therefore earn wages.

 

[Ashwynn]

Just a reminder, Dallas and Washington are part of the defendants (NFL) in the case. It's highly unlikely that the court, if it found merits in the case would impose any ruling that split the defendants, First Dallas or Washington or both would have to request to be part of the plaintiffs, and again, it's highly unlikely that Jones or Snyder is going to go Al Davis on the league's a** and join on the NFLPA's side, when the NFLPA originally agreed to both Washington and Dallas getting the penalty in the first place.

Boo

 

[Ashwynn]

I haven't seen the full caption for the case at bar, but I doubt that Dallas and Washington are among the named defendants along with the NFL.

Also, the NFLPA, as the plaintiff, represents the fair earning potential of all players in the league, as collectively bargained. That earning potential was infringed by the collusion by the competition committee and John Mara. I'm not sure how it would work out in the remedy phase, but the argument can (and should) be made that a cap credit to those two franchises restores the equitable balance to the clients of the Players' Association to work and therefore earn wages.

Yeah!!!

 

[SkinsFan28]

I haven't seen the full caption for the case at bar, but I doubt that Dallas and Washington are among the named defendants along with the NFL.

Also, the NFLPA, as the plaintiff, represents the fair earning potential of all players in the league, as collectively bargained. That earning potential was infringed by the collusion by the competition committee and John Mara. I'm not sure how it would work out in the remedy phase, but the argument can (and should) be made that a cap credit to those two franchises restores the equitable balance to the clients of the Players' Association to work and therefore earn wages.

The case goes back to the uncapped year of 2010, not to the salary cap penalty assigned by the Competition committee and Mara, that's just used as point blank evidence of the earlier collusion. And although Dallas and Washington broke with the group on some parts in 2010, they certainly are going to be considered part of the NFL, unless they file paperwork that puts them on the NFLPA's side. There really is no way in the world that either Dallas or Washington would do that. For example, the NFLPA made the following statement after the notification:

"We are pleased that the Eighth Circuit ruled that players have the opportunity to proceed with their claims," the NFLPA said. "Through discovery and a hearing, we can understand how collusion took place. We have notified the NFL of its obligations to preserve all relevant documents and communications."

I am confident that the NFLPA alleges that Dallas and Washington knew of the collusion, and did not immediately report it, thus they are guilty of it as well.

I couldn't find the header, but this article says the 'Skins were named defendants in the original case: http://dc.sbnation.com/washington-C...ders-named-defendants-nflpa-collusion-lawsuit

 

[casmith07]

The case goes back to the uncapped year of 2010, not to the salary cap penalty assigned by the Competition committee and Mara, that's just used as point blank evidence of the earlier collusion. And although Dallas and Washington broke with the group on some parts in 2010, they certainly are going to be considered part of the NFL, unless they file paperwork that puts them on the NFLPA's side. There really is no way in the world that either Dallas or Washington would do that. For example, the NFLPA made the following statement after the notification:




I am confident that the NFLPA alleges that Dallas and Washington knew of the collusion, and did not immediately report it, thus they are guilty of it as well.

I couldn't find the header, but this article says the 'Skins were named defendants in the original case: http://dc.sbnation.com/washington-C...ders-named-defendants-nflpa-collusion-lawsuit

It's entirely possible I'm confusing the collusion case with Snyder's case for cap relief against the NFL, which if I recall correctly, the Cowboys declined to join as plaintiffs.

I agree with what you're saying here as well. That being said, this is much to do about nothing re: the cap penalty, as you've stated. And thus, it's not necessarily anything of interest to the fans, either.

 

[Wood]

don't know that this will get the cap space back but i could. the case is really not about that, it's about the collusion and this just happens to be the best proof of it. i've always thought this case would get to court. it's just so obvious that nfl team did conspire to lower salaries and thats collusion. by punishing those who did'nt that made the case even stronger against them. in the end if the nflpa wins it may still not get back to cap space we lost but it could cost the rest of the nfl a ton of money

oh I think it definitely means cap space being added for both teams (skins/dallas) and potential loss of draft picks for teams involved.