Cowboys and Redskins hit with cap penalty..

Well, it wasn’t just a rumor.

We explained an hour ago that there has been talk of the NFL taking action against teams that deliberately dumped salaries into the uncapped year of 2010.

At least two of the violators are the Cowboys and Redskins, according to Adam Schefter of ESPN. Per Schefter, the league will punish the teams by removing millions in cap dollars.

How many millions? Schefter reports that the Cowboys will lose more than $10 million — and that the Redskins will lose $36 million. (And now we know why the Redskins got the Griffin deal done last week; the Rams likely would have wanted even more for the second overall pick now.)

The teams can divide the cap losses between 2012 and 2013 in any portion they want. As of Sunday, the Redskins more than $30 million in cap space in 2012. The Cowboys had less than $5 million.

The money will be reallocated to the other teams, with every franchise except the Saints and Raiders picking up $1.6 million in extra cap space.

The Saints and Raiders presumably don’t get the extra money as their own punishment for engaging in similar tactics in 2010.

So, for the second time in 10 days, the NFL has acknowledged cheating. Though this isn’t as serious as the Saints’ bounty system, it’s still cheating. And the consequence demonstrates what the league thinks of it.
seems like a crock of ****...and I don't even like either of those teams.
I don't get it? So it was "uncapped" but you sure as hell better not go over the cap or we'll fine you three years after the fact...?
Little more on it:

The CBA that expired one year today removed the salary cap for the final year, as an incentive to get a new deal in place with more than a year left on the old one. Once the owners fully appreciated the ramifications of the uncapped year (i.e., no salary floor and two extra years to unrestricted free agency), the league had no qualms about proceeding.

But while most teams opted not to break the bank in a season without a banker, the NFL instructed teams not to use the uncapped years as a way to dump money in order to ensure that cap numbers in years with a salary cap would be lower.

And there’s currently a rumor making the rounds that multiple teams will be smacked for doing just that: using 2010 as a cap dump aimed at either keeping the numbers manageable in 2009 and previously, or in 2011 and subsequently.

It widely was believed in 2010 that the Cowboys and Redskins had worked the system to take full advantage of the absence of a cap. Dallas, for example, gave receiver Miles Austin a base salary of $17 million in 2010.

Though not as troubling as the Saints’ bounty program, we’re hearing that punishment of some sort could be coming for the teams deemed to have disregarded the directive.
my God wtf!?
nice move day before Free Agency opens! BS
Does this mean that Jerry will start making Stephen wear the Rowdy costume and Jerry Jr. will be the Cowboys new capologist?
i need a video of jerry receiving this news
if the teams did it after being warned about it i have no problem with the penalty itself.

i have a problem with the timing of the announcement. a day before free agency is bad judgement at the very least (unless he was really personally trying to stick it to Snyder and Jerry)
The CBA that expired one year today removed the salary cap for the final year, as an incentive to get a new deal in place with more than a year left on the old one. Once the owners fully appreciated the ramifications of the uncapped year (i.e., no salary floor and two extra years to unrestricted free agency), the league had no qualms about proceeding.

It seemed like the owners knew about it and the league was ok with the uncapped year but wanted you to act in the best interest or you could see trouble down the road..

Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the teams were told “at least six times” during ownership-level meetings that there would be “serious consequences” for any team that used the uncapped year as an occasion to dump salaries.

Where are the Bears with Pepper’s $35M salary in 2010?

This was in the comments section... I'm curious of that as well.
I thought I recalled that while it was an uncapped year, there were still rules on paper that limited overloading a player's salary in 2010. I just assumed the teams were required to follow them at the time just like they are with the normal salary cap. So I'm surprised to see something like Miles Austin's situation surface this long after the fact.
I think this will end badly, and Goddell overstepped. I think this is the turning point in his tenure. Its one thing to go overboard on player discipline, but those owners pay his salary. Publicly making an example of the two most valuable franchises in the sport will not end well for him, even if they weren't run by people like Jerry and Dan.

On a separate note, wtf? There are no rules for governing cap or spending this year, but don't break the "unwritten rule that we have no jurisdiction to enforce" rule? Did the new collective bargaining agreement authorize retroactive cap penalties?
DMN saying Cowboys docked $10 mil & Skin to lose $36 mil over 2012&13
Yeah, they can split the penalty however they see fit over the 2 years.

I have to throw in an additional wtf to this thread.

I've been a huge fan of Goddell's up to this point, but I do view this as a bit...petty, not to mention borderline collusion in the eyes of the NFLPA.

I don't care about verbal warnings, I'm pretty sure the Cowboys/Redskins could successfully challenge this in court. I'm not sure I hope it goes that route, but it still seems wrong.
Someone brought up a great point. Why aren't the Bears being penalized for paying Julius Peppers $35 million in 2010?
Just wow!
exp you are needed back here in this thread
why did the NFL approve the contracts if they were going to penalize the teams later on?
more info:
I remembered enough about the uncapped year to remember, once hearing about rumors of cap maneuverings on Monday, that the Cowboys and Redskins were the most likely targets of any effort to rob from the rich and give to the poor. Along with pretty much everyone else.

I’d forgotten some of the details. Fortunately, a few of you have better memories than me.

On September 18, 2010, we explained that, in the absence of the salary cap, Dallas owner Jerry Jones and Washington owner Daniel Snyder had dumped millions into the uncapped year. For the Cowboys, the number was $166.5 million. For the Redskins, it was $178.2 million.

“Both teams run the risk that the new CBA will include some type of reallocation provision aimed at reversing the effects of contracts engineered to take full advantage of the uncapped year,” we wrote at the time. “Though Jones and Snyder may regard such an outcome as unfair, two votes wouldn’t be enough to block the move.”

The problem is that the new CBA didn’t attempt to reallocate cap dollars, most likely because any effort to ding the Redskins and Cowboys for taking advantage of the rules of the uncapped year would have made the NFLPA even more convinced that the teams were indeed colluding in 2010 to hold down spending in the uncapped year. (Indeed, the league said nothing at all about the Cowboys/Redskins issue during the uncapped year, or during the CBA discussions.)

So instead the NFL waited until 2012, when the NFLPA was “scrambling” to find a way to prevent the team-by-team salary cap from shrinking for the first time ever. So instead of regarding the league’s proposal as the “Eureka!” moment that confirmed the existence of collusion prior to the lockout, NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith apparently embraced the opportunity to avoid the challenge of explaining to the Executive Committee and the Board of Player Representatives at the upcoming annual meeting how and why the new CBA resulted in a salary cap that somehow dropped.

At the other extreme in 2010 were four teams who remained under $100 million: the Cardinals, Jaguars, Chiefs, and Buccaneers. If the league is so concerned that the Redskins and Cowboys skewed competitive balance by forcing too many dollars into the uncapped year, why isn’t the league equally concerned that the teams that didn’t spend contributed to any actual or perceived issues of competitive balance?
Thanks Bilbo. If the new CBA doesn't contain a provision for this, then where does Goddell get the authority to impose penalties?
Mike and Mike discussed this subject this morning.

From the article on -

According to sources, the Cowboys and Redskins took immediate cap hits during the 2010 season that normally would have been spread out over the length of the contracts, giving them an advantage that other NFL owners found unfair.

Julius Peppers base salary in 2010 was $20MM. His base salary in 2011? $900,000.


The cap hit for Peppers in 2010? $34MM. The cap hit for peppers in 2011? $13.8MM.


just a little more info...

The league has yet to alert NFL teams of the specific cap penalties to Dallas and Washington, according to league sources.

Teams were sent a memo, however, saying that the NFL Management Council and the NFL Players Association entered into an arrangement on March 11 that resulted in $1.643 million in additional cap space being awarded to every team except for Dallas, Washington, New Orleans and Oakland.

The other 28 teams must notify the NFL by 4 p.m. ET Tuesday, whether they are taking that cap credit in 2012 or using it toward 2013.

NFL executives anticipate that penalized teams must notify the league of how much of the penalty they will assume in 2012 by the 4 p.m. deadline, as well, though that was not stipulated in the memo.

The NFL is not addressing additional questions around the cap penalties beyond the statement released to the media Monday.
After reading that article and some others, this sounds even worse. It seems that the salary cap was about the shrink for this year, which would have been an awful slap in the face to the NFLPA after this last summer. So the Execs and the NFLPA decided to retroactive penalize Dallas and Washington to spread more money to all the other teams so their cap number would slightly increase. Basically, taking from the rich to give to the slightly less rich.

The fact that the Cowboys and Skins seem to be rolling over on this makes me think it happened with their permission. If not, it will be Goddell's swan song.
I still am unsure if the $1.643m is included in or on top of the $120,600,000 salary cap number....because they say teams have the choice as to how the break up the $1.643m number between 2012 and 2013. If a team chooses to push it all to 2013, their cap number isn't $120,600,000.

[This message has been edited by bikerack (edited 3/13/2012 10:48a).]
The fact that the Cowboys and Skins seem to be rolling over on this makes me think it happened with their permission. If not, it will be Goddell's swan song.

This is what I don't get...2 normally vocal owners seem to be strangely quiet over what amounts to a big deal for the Cowboys, and a huge deal for the Redskins. I would have thought there would be more outrage over this, especially when it seems to me that Goodell is overlooking other offenders, ie the Bears with Julius Peppers
Your analysis about Goodell deciding this and it being Godell's swan song ignores the fact a committee of owners decided on this.

From what I read the first number reported on the cap for this year was suppose to be around 116 but now sits at 120.6.. Who knows.

Didn't Goodell just have his contract extended?? Doubt he is going anywhere. Seems people saw it coming.
Peppers as an individual might have had a front-loaded contract, but what did the Bears look like as a team?
Actually, I just looked at Austin's same deal on that website, and it's pretty clear that while Chicago may have been taking advantage of the uncapped year, their violations weren't as egregious as the Cowboys with Austin.
Page 1 of 3
Verify your student status
See Membership Benefits >