Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

NFLPA wins appeal in the 2012 Collusion Case against the NFL
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Babylon


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1298
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:31 am    Post subject: NFLPA wins appeal in the 2012 Collusion Case against the NFL Reply with quote

So Cowboys and Washington fans can have a little fun today:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/20/appeals-court-reinstates-collusion-case/

Quote:
he U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has overturned a decision by Judge David Doty dismissing the NFLPA’s effort to claim collusion against the NFL made in the wake of the salary-cap penalties imposed on Dallas and Washington in 2012.

The case is now expected to proceed to the discovery process, which will force the NFL to disclose information about whether and to what extent teams were told to treat the uncapped year of 2010 under the prior labor deal as something other than, you know, an uncapped year.


If I had to put my lawyer hat on, they'll still likely lose, but the discovery phase will be quite fun. Can't wait to see those Mara - league office emails.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BenderRodriguez


Joined: 14 May 2014
Posts: 1605
Location: #SteelerNation Check Out My Sig Gallery
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I expect the NFLPA to ultimately lose as well.
_________________

Quote:
[Ultron defeats all the Avengers]
Ultron: You are nothing to me. One by one, I will destroy you. I will never tire, I will never show mercy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wwhickok


Joined: 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 12326
Location: Montgomery, PA aka Steeler Nation!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Honestly, I see this whole situation as bogus, teams not wanting to be held responsible for doing something irresponsible.

To me, no one wins here.
_________________


Sig courtesy of IDOG

PSN (PS3) -- wwhickok
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MKnight82


Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Posts: 6726
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 1:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wwhickok wrote:
Honestly, I see this whole situation as bogus, teams not wanting to be held responsible for doing something irresponsible.

To me, no one wins here.
I think irresponsible is the wrong word to use, I don't really understand that. If you want to say they violated the spirit of the uncapped year by clearing out bad contracts and frown on that fine. But anyone that says they violated rules, or did anything in violation of the NFL salary cap is wrong. There was no salary cap, and there were no rules. You shouldn't be able to punish someone when no rules were violated. And don't say, oh well there was an agreement amongst teams to not go over the salary cap, because that would be collusion which is illegal.
_________________

Thanks to mike23md for the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HTTRG3Dynasty


Joined: 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 2963
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ross Tucker ‏@RossTuckerNFL

Quote:
There was either collusion in 2010 or NFL wrongly punished Skins/Cowboys. Can't have it both ways.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Babylon


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1298
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HTTRG3Dynasty wrote:
Ross Tucker ‏@RossTuckerNFL

Quote:
There was either collusion in 2010 or NFL wrongly punished Skins/Cowboys. Can't have it both ways.


Well, the thing is (and I pretty much fully agree with MKnight82) is that the NFLPA agreed not to sue the league over that collusion in the CBA.

This lawsuit came up because, by fining the cowboys and washington, they created acts after the fact the NFLPA could go after. That said, because of that agreement, they have a pretty low chance of winning this, despite being most likely guilty as sin of collusion.

So yeah, the league probably will get this both ways. What we get out of it is now the discovery process will happen and we'll get to see what payments went where and who said what in emails.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Matts4313


Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 37176
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Cowboys got fined for giving Miles Austin a big contract.

Signing him was penalty enough....


I hope Mara goes down hard for this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sciz


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 15735
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it still collusion if the NFL said "spend whatever you want but don't organize contracts for future unfair advantage"? That was what the NFL called it, which appears to be quite a difference from "don't spend more than this imaginary cap."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 14128
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Babylon wrote:
HTTRG3Dynasty wrote:
Ross Tucker ‏@RossTuckerNFL

Quote:
There was either collusion in 2010 or NFL wrongly punished Skins/Cowboys. Can't have it both ways.


Well, the thing is (and I pretty much fully agree with MKnight82) is that the NFLPA agreed not to sue the league over that collusion in the CBA.

This lawsuit came up because, by fining the cowboys and washington, they created acts after the fact the NFLPA could go after. That said, because of that agreement, they have a pretty low chance of winning this, despite being most likely guilty as sin of collusion.

So yeah, the league probably will get this both ways. What we get out of it is now the discovery process will happen and we'll get to see what payments went where and who said what in emails.


This ^^^

What's done is done now for the Redskins and Cowboys. We already got screwed over and it affected more than just those two years of salary cap penalty. We can't go back in time and get those years or money back.

I hope during discovery that this is VERY embarassing for the NFL and for Mara specifically.

But the NFLPA is the real bad guy here for me. They want to have it both ways while simultaneously screwing over the Redskins and Cowboys.

To this, I say that not only do I hope they lose this case, I hope that in the next CBA negotiations they end up "settling for less" more than they did in this past one.
_________________


Being Vague Is Almost As Much Fun As That Other Thing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 14128
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sciz wrote:
Is it still collusion if the NFL said "spend whatever you want but don't organize contracts for future unfair advantage"? That was what the NFL called it, which appears to be quite a difference from "don't spend more than this imaginary cap."


The structure of the contracts is not at issue. Redskins used a contract maneuver that has been used many times before by other teams. They performed that maneuver by making sure the money paid out was in the uncapped year. This is the crux of the issue. As such, it really is about spending more in the uncapped year than what the NFL wanted teams to do.
_________________


Being Vague Is Almost As Much Fun As That Other Thing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gmen


Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 15658
Location: Myyyyy precioussss
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is a pointless exercise. The courts aren't going to find out anything that we didn't know. Let's face it - there was collusion. But 30 teams played by the rules established by the NFL, 2 did not. So the NFL penalized those 2 teams for not playing by their rules.

Was there collusion? Yes. Were the Redskins and Cowboys unfairly punished? No. They were illegally punished. But at this point it's water under the bridge. The penalties have been imposed. What can the courts do? Fine the NFL for collusion? Ok, so the government takes some money from a bunch of billionaires. Who cares? Laughing
_________________


"Has courage and poise. In my opinion, most of all, he has that quality you can't define. Call it magic."

- Ernie Accorsi scouting report of Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HTTRG3Dynasty


Joined: 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 2963
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
This is a pointless exercise. The courts aren't going to find out anything that we didn't know. Let's face it - there was collusion. But 30 teams played by the rules established by the NFL, 2 did not. So the NFL penalized those 2 teams for not playing by their rules.

Was there collusion? Yes. Were the Redskins and Cowboys unfairly punished? No. They were illegally punished. But at this point it's water under the bridge. The penalties have been imposed. What can the courts do? Fine the NFL for collusion? Ok, so the government takes some money from a bunch of billionaires. Who cares? Laughing


Laughing

Does not compute. Are you Mara?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gmen


Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 15658
Location: Myyyyy precioussss
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HTTRG3Dynasty wrote:
Gmen wrote:
This is a pointless exercise. The courts aren't going to find out anything that we didn't know. Let's face it - there was collusion. But 30 teams played by the rules established by the NFL, 2 did not. So the NFL penalized those 2 teams for not playing by their rules.

Was there collusion? Yes. Were the Redskins and Cowboys unfairly punished? No. They were illegally punished. But at this point it's water under the bridge. The penalties have been imposed. What can the courts do? Fine the NFL for collusion? Ok, so the government takes some money from a bunch of billionaires. Who cares? Laughing


Laughing

Does not compute. Are you Mara?

Maybe an analogy would help you compute.

10 kids at the playground all agree not to touch a plate of cookies. 2 kids break the rules, and eat a cookie. The 8 other kids get together and beat up those 2 kids. Those 2 kids go crying to mommy.

Illegal to beat someone up, yes. But easily justified.

I hope that helps.
_________________


"Has courage and poise. In my opinion, most of all, he has that quality you can't define. Call it magic."

- Ernie Accorsi scouting report of Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HTTRG3Dynasty


Joined: 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 2963
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gmen wrote:
HTTRG3Dynasty wrote:
Gmen wrote:
This is a pointless exercise. The courts aren't going to find out anything that we didn't know. Let's face it - there was collusion. But 30 teams played by the rules established by the NFL, 2 did not. So the NFL penalized those 2 teams for not playing by their rules.

Was there collusion? Yes. Were the Redskins and Cowboys unfairly punished? No. They were illegally punished. But at this point it's water under the bridge. The penalties have been imposed. What can the courts do? Fine the NFL for collusion? Ok, so the government takes some money from a bunch of billionaires. Who cares? Laughing


Laughing

Does not compute. Are you Mara?

Maybe an analogy would help you compute.

10 kids at the playground all agree not to touch a plate of cookies. 2 kids break the rules, and eat a cookie. The 8 other kids get together and beat up those 2 kids. Those 2 kids go crying to mommy.

Illegal to beat someone up, yes. But easily justified.

I hope that helps.


No, that doesn't help at all. 10 kids agreeing not to touch a plate of cookies isn't illegal. 32 teams "agreeing" not to spend money above a certain limit in an uncapped year is illegal. And if 10 kids agreeing not to touch a plate of cookies were illegal, those kids would have been appropriately punished for breaking the law.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Keleth


Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 2859
Location: Restaurant at the end of the universe
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HTTRG3Dynasty wrote:
Gmen wrote:
HTTRG3Dynasty wrote:
Gmen wrote:
This is a pointless exercise. The courts aren't going to find out anything that we didn't know. Let's face it - there was collusion. But 30 teams played by the rules established by the NFL, 2 did not. So the NFL penalized those 2 teams for not playing by their rules.

Was there collusion? Yes. Were the Redskins and Cowboys unfairly punished? No. They were illegally punished. But at this point it's water under the bridge. The penalties have been imposed. What can the courts do? Fine the NFL for collusion? Ok, so the government takes some money from a bunch of billionaires. Who cares? Laughing


Laughing

Does not compute. Are you Mara?

Maybe an analogy would help you compute.

10 kids at the playground all agree not to touch a plate of cookies. 2 kids break the rules, and eat a cookie. The 8 other kids get together and beat up those 2 kids. Those 2 kids go crying to mommy.

Illegal to beat someone up, yes. But easily justified.

I hope that helps.


No, that doesn't help at all. 10 kids agreeing not to touch a plate of cookies isn't illegal. 32 teams "agreeing" not to spend money above a certain limit in an uncapped year is illegal. And if 10 kids agreeing not to touch a plate of cookies were illegal, those kids would have been appropriately punished for breaking the law.


I really don't understand why you cannot understand his original point.
There was collusion although it seems that Washington and Dallas were also involved in the collusion but then they decided to break the agreement they made and dumped money.
So what Dallas and Washington did was not technically illegal but they broke an agreement and basically tried to get an advantage over 30 other teams which obviously the other teams were not happy with.
So they were punished which they legally should not have been but the punishment was fair,not legal but fair.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group