NFL takes cap space from Redskins and Cowboys

[rdub78]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/ey...-loading-deals

The Cowboys are docked 10 million while the Skins are docked a whopping 36 million in cap space.

They can split those figures through 2012 and 2013 though anyway they want.

[N51_rob]

So long $50 million in cap space and dreams of signing both Carl Nicks and Vincent Jackson. Redskins take one step forward and 4 backwards. Obviously they will split the penalty over 2 years, but why would they be so GD stupid.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Quote:

2010 was an uncapped year, as a result of the previous Collective Bargaining Agreement expiring. The Redskins and Cowboys, despite warnings from the NFL not to do so, front-loaded contracts to create more salary cap room going forward. CBSSports.com's Mike Freeman has confirmed an earlier report that the NFL has punished them for it, taking away $36 million in cap space from the Redskins and $10 million from the Cowboys because they front-loaded contracts in 2010. According to Freeman, the NFL warned both teams multiple times about front-loading deals. The news of the cap hits was first reported by ESPN's Adam Schefter. That money will be spread around to 28 other teams in the NFL, with each team receiving an additional $1.6 million in cap space. The Saints and the Raiders, according to Schefter, do not receive any cap relief, but will not be docked any cap space. Andrew Brandt of the National Football Post believes that it was the contracts of defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth and cornerback DeAngelo Hall that caused the NFL to punish the Redskins. (Ouch.) Haynesworth got $21 million in 2010, while Hall got $15 million in the uncapped year. Miles Austin's heavy cap number -- he received a $17 million base salary in 2010 -- resulted in the Cowboys being punished, according to Brandt. The Redskins had more than $30 million in cap space prior to the punishments, while the Cowboys only had a little less than $5 million in cap space. As a result of the punishments, it's going to be substantially more difficult for the teams to address their respective needs.

Well that answered my question in the other thread.

Lesson to be learned here(Hope your listening, Saints)when the NFL warns you not to do something, it's in your best interest not to ignore those warnings.

[areobee401]

This is exactly why I didn't want RG3 to end up in Washington. The franchise is no different than Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus. Always something with the Redskins.

[Hooe]

Either there was a salary cap or there wasn't. The NFL shouldn't be able to have it both ways.

Are teams who also didn't spend enough to reach the previously-existing salary floor (not a thing in 2010) also going to be punished?

EDIT: Further, wouldn't the NFL not having spending rules, but under-the-table telling teams not to spend much, open them up to a lawsuit for collusion?

[N51_rob]

Quote: Originally Posted by CHooe

Either there was a salary cap or there wasn't. The NFL shouldn't be able to have it both ways. Are teams who also didn't spend enough to reach the previously-existing salary floor (not a thing in 2010) also going to be punished? EDIT: Further, wouldn't the NFL not having spending rules, but under-the-table telling teams not to spend much, open them up to a lawsuit for collusion?

I feel the same way, but just to lazy to argue. Leave it to Roger Goodell to bring skins and cowboy fans together.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

[kingkilla56]

This is absurd. How can the NFL have a fantasy salary cap and punish the teams SO heavily afterwards. I understand the warnings and ignoring those warning but this punishment is rough.

Sorry Skins fans, not only did yall lose high draft picks to help RG3 for two years, the NFL decided to make your resurgence that much harder ruining you're significant cap advantage.

And Cowboys fans...tough cookies. Franchising Anthony SPencer makes your team deserve these punishments lol jk.

[p_rushing]

At first I couldn't think of any way this made since, but after reading it, I see what the league was doing. They told teams to not front load the contract to the uncapped year. Normally teams back load the deal and the NFL wanted to make sure that teams didn't sign guys to deals where the biggest cap hit would be in the uncapped year. That way teams couldn't evade the coming salary cap. The teams could have still gotten around this by signing 1 year deals and then resigning them later for a small amount because they payed up front, but the player and team would both take risks.