RealGM

In which Wise asserts that the Redskins deserved the $36 million cap penalty. It's stupid, even for Wise. I responded to it over at the blog.

Wise sorta glides past certain facts like...

...The side agreement between some owners to limit player salaries during the uncapped 2010 season was illegal.

...The Redskins are being penalized for doing stuff in 2010 that, in the opinion of the owners and the league office, gave them a competitive advantage in future years. However, had their been a salary cap, there also would have been a salary floor. That floor would have been ~$112 million. Nine teams spent solidly less than $112 million, including the Chiefs ($27.5 million less) and Buccaneers ($31.2 million less). Yet somehow, hoarding cash by not spending was not deemed a competitive advantage for future years.

...The league office approved the revised contracts for Albert Haynesworth and DeAngelo Hall at the time. The reason they approved those contracts is that they violated no rules.

^ Agreed, completely ridiculous column. I couldn't even finish it, and I tend to like Wise more often than not. It's clear that the owner's colluded, and Demaurice Smith and the Players Union ok'd it by allowing this penalty. It was a total travesty when it was initially announced and nothing that has been said or written since has even come close to explaining it otherwise.

After enough time passes, and there's a new commissioner and union leader, I can't wait for the ESPN 30-for-30 on this conspiracy. That is, if ESPNFL will even do it.

Imagine if this guy still had his radio show, he'd go nuts with this topic. Wise is a professional troll. Dude got a lot of hate on Twitter, which means he did his job.

LyricalRico wrote:^ Agreed, completely ridiculous column. I couldn't even finish it, and I tend to like Wise more often than not. It's clear that the owner's colluded, and Demaurice Smith and the Players Union ok'd it by allowing this penalty. It was a total travesty when it was initially announced and nothing that has been said or written since has even come close to explaining it otherwise.

After enough time passes, and there's a new commissioner and union leader, I can't wait for the ESPN 30-for-30 on this conspiracy. That is, if ESPNFL will even do it.

The players union and Smith seem to have been duped into approving the cap penalty. What I read was that the league office didn't tell the union that the owners had conspired to operate within the constraints of a salary cap during that uncapped year. Not sure why the union didn't delve deeper or ask more questions, but they apparently thought the Skins and Cowboys were being penalized for violating rules that gave them an unfair advantage in future years. Plus, the players would still (in theory) get the money because that cap space taken from the Skins and Cowboys was redistributed in the form of cap room to the other teams.

At any rate, as soon as the NFL got the sign-off from the union, it ratified the agreement (redistributing the cap space) into the CBA (over the objections of the Redskins, Cowboys, Saints and (maybe -- if I remember right) the Raiders). Ratifying the provision made it something the Redskins and Cowboys couldn't take to an arbitrator (that's why the arbitrator dismissed the case last year), AND made it virtually impossible for the union to come after the owners for collusion. The union tried anyway, and got nowhere.