Cap Control; Why Dallas and Washington were Penalized............

Cap Control

Going inside the Redskins-Cowboys penalties Andrew Brandt

Share
Print This March 29, 2012, 06:01 AM EST http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c191...c/hotsheet.png


At the NFL meetings this week my sense is things were a bit, uh, awkward. Earlier docked $36 million and $10 million, respectively, for Cap “abuse”” during the uncapped year of 2010, the Redskins' Dan Snyder and the Cowboys' Jerry Jones -- faced with a 29-0 vote from ownership approving the sanctions against them -- raised the stakes, filing a grievance against the NFL challenging the imposition of such penalties.


Beyond vague comments from Giants owner John Mara about the teams “violating the spirit of the uncapped year”, the league has been mum on details. Here is the best I can surmise as to what is behind this dispute.


The background

As NFL teams entered the uncapped year of 2010, many wondered if teams such as the Redskins and Cowboys would be “Steinbrenneresque” in their spending with none of the previous limits that the Cap had imposed in previous years.


As it turned out, the Cowboys and Redskinsdid not engage in disproportionate cash spending. However, they did engage in disproportionate Cap spending. To the league, therein lies the problem.


The deals

http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c191...iwyg/romo8.jpg
The Miles Austin contract caught the attention of the NFL.


Notorious for writing large signing bonuses to push out proration into future years and keep the first-year Cap number as low as possible, the Cowboys went the other way with Miles Austin. They loaded all $17 million of what would have ordinarily been a “bonus” into salary, thereby containing the Cap hit in 2010 alone.


Interestingly, this is the kind of Cap management that I have lauded, one being used in Tampa with their recent deals for Vincent Jackson and Carl Nicks. This structure, however, was completely out of character for the Cowboys, and has been out of character since.


The Redskins, in contrast, did not front load new contracts in 2010, as the Austin deal described above. Rather, they restructured existing contracts, negotiated in 2009, to bring forward future proration amounts from the “out” years into 2010. Restructured contracts for DeAngelo Hall and Albert Haynesworth alone accelerated $15 and $21 million of future Cap into the uncapped year. That $36 million just so happens to be the amount the Redskins have been docked.


At the time, I noted how two teams that traditionally have pushed their Cap problems into the future had become more prudent. As it turned out, they were ignoring warnings not to do so.


The warnings

I remember the NFL Management Council starting to advise clubs as far back as 2007 that, in the event of an uncapped year, they could not press “File Delete” in 2010.


These warnings continued with more urgency in 2009, that it would be “taking unfair advantage” of the uncapped year in gaining a competitive edge by Cap-dumping into a year without a Cap.


Let’s look at the arguments from each side.


Warnings

• The Cowboys and Redskins will argue that there were no written warnings against what they did.
• The NFL will argue that there were repeated and strident verbal warnings as far back as three years prior to the uncapped year.

Approvals

• The Cowboys and Redskins will argue that the front loaded negotiations and Cap restructures were approved by the NFL -- as all contracts must be -- which represented a tacit approval of their structure.
• The NFL will argue that it is irrelevant that the contracts were approved. There was no Salary Cap and thus no Salary Cap rules to manage.

Competitive edge

• The Cowboys and Redskins will argue that the league should look into teams like the Buccaneers and Chiefs, teams that underspent in 2010, and their competitive edge gained by under spending.
• The NFL will argue that teams were not advised to spend or not to spend; only to not engage in accounting practices that took advantage of a unique year on the calendar.

The arbitration will be an intriguing study of the interplay, alliances and coalitions among NFL owners and the league office.


Whither the NFLPA?

Interestingly, the penalties to the Cowboys and Redskins were part of a joint agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA. The union’s primary concerns were to ensure (1) no reduction in Cap room league-wide, and (2) the team Cap number would exceed-- if only barely -- the number from 2011 (it did, with a $120.6 million number compared to $120.375 in 2011).


The problem for the NFLPA is that, in their zeal to prop up the 2012 Cap number, the NFLPA have borrowed from the future. Thus, the Cap “spike” that some project in 2014 when the new television contracts activate may not materialize the way the union, players and agents are hoping.


Fun times this week in South Florida this week. The faces of Jones and Snyder were quite red, a skin tone from anger rather than the sun.



Follow me on Twitter at adbrandt.

Interesting in that the two wealthiest owners of two of the leagues most valuable franchises chose to flaunt the rules once too often..........and got burned as a result. Couldn't have happened to two nicer guys. (massive sarcasm employed here)

What thrills me is that both tend to be hands on owners (especially Jones) so there's no way for either to plead ignorance or malfeasance by an employee when they were warned personally not to do what they did. I guess that "the rules apply to everyone else but me" approach failed you boys this time. A 29-0 vote (Raider's probably abstained as usual) against you is a pretty good whack in the ass huh?

I didn't understand the issue of the league approving contracts that violated the rules until now. All the league does it assure that the contract doesn't violate cap rules. No cap, therefore no cap rules. I think the "Boys" and "Skins" thought they could sneak something by on this one.

Well it's not over til it's over and both teams filing grievances so who sorts that out? If a grievance is filed with the entity who just sanctioned you how likely is it that they'll reverse their own decision. Whatever, but in the meantime their faces red with anger should blend nicely with the yellow from the egg now there as well.

All I can say is move over Broncos, Pats and Saints you aren't the only ones to be sent to the NFL's version of the bad boys room. :kick2nuts: :spank: