Endymion said:

In light of the discipline now administered to the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins, this form of punishment is now a very realistic possibility for the Saints and other bounty-gate teams. The NFL and PA Union have determined that a team that willfully disregards the spirit of the collective bargaining agreement can be docked salary cap space, provided that docked amount is distributed to the other teams.

In terms of the Saints and other bounty-gate teams, they have provided additional compensation to players (beyond the terms of the collective bargaining agreement) for players to hurt other players. This type of infraction would make a salary cap penalty a realistic possibility and the PA would support such an action in the name of player safety. However, in order for it to have any realistic impact, the salary cap hit would have to be significant (greater than 10%) and probably extended (more than 1 year). The loss of a first round draft pick, has the potential to impact a team for 4-5 years, while the financial impact to that team (under the new agreement) is insignificant.

Yes, I see what you are saying. By the way, I came up with this "Salary Cap penalty" concept before I ever heard anything about the Skins and Cowboys getting hit by it.

But I see that the Player's Assoc. is saying: "Teams should be hit by salary cap penalty, but our player's should not", so that is where the "spreading of the penalty to other teams" concept comes from.

It may not be surprising if the Saints are hit with both the loss of a draft pick and a salary cap penalty.

@the-gipper said:

If the salary cap is, say, 80 million and a team were docked and only be allowed to have a 75 million salary cap while it opponents enjoy the 80 million cap, that could mean something.

In light of the discipline now administered to the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins, this form of punishment is now a very realistic possibility for the Saints and other bounty-gate teams. The NFL and PA Union have determined that a team that willfully disregards the spirit of the collective bargaining agreement can be docked salary cap space, provided that docked amount is distributed to the other teams.

In terms of the Saints and other bounty-gate teams, they have provided additional compensation to players (beyond the terms of the collective bargaining agreement) for players to hurt other players. This type of infraction would make a salary cap penalty a realistic possibility and the PA would support such an action in the name of player safety. However, in order for it to have any realistic impact, the salary cap hit would have to be significant (greater than 10%) and probably extended (more than 1 year). The loss of a first round draft pick, has the potential to impact a team for 4-5 years, while the financial impact to that team (under the new agreement) is insignificant.

Endymion said:

The Gipper Wrote:

I believe the NFL can not do this, as the Players Assoc. would file a grievance and win. Docking the salary cap affects the employees of said organization, while allowing the owners to net more profit from said organization. The NFL can only fine an organization and/or remove draft picks. The NFL rarely takes 1st round draft picks away, the Patriots were the first (for Spygate).

OK, makes sense....but, as I said, fining a team means absolutely nothing except to those whose pockets the money is taken from....and that is something no fan should give a shit about.

The draft picks though is a definite punishment.

@the-gipper said:

The only other thing they could do....which would be creative, is to say: You are docked X amount from you salary cap. If the salary cap is, say, 80 million and a team were docked and only be allowed to have a 75 million salary cap while it opponents enjoy the 80 million cap, that could mean something.

I believe the NFL can not do this, as the Players Assoc. would file a grievance and win. Docking the salary cap affects the employees of said organization, while allowing the owners to net more profit from said organization. The NFL can only fine an organization and/or remove draft picks. The NFL rarely takes 1st round draft picks away, the Patriots were the first (for Spygate).

@brownindian said:

Bottom Line: RedSkins are very much in the RG3 contest.

NSS

@baybrownsfan said:

Dude the value chart doesn't matter anymore. The new rookie salary structure has changed it massively.

No it hasn't.

Contract value does not affect pick value. The value you are thinking of is not...in fact....pick value.

@ballpeen said:

It may impact us. Fujita is one of the players the league is investigating.

It's hard for me to imagine Fujita hurting anyone, and I don't mean that in a good way.

@kerrigan91 said:

If I'm Washington's front office I'm offering a swap of firsts and our third and fourth. The difference in value on the chart is 200 points. Our third is worth 240 and our fourth is worth 92.

Dude the value chart doesn't matter anymore. The new rookie salary structure has changed it massively.

@the-gipper said:

That might be the same source that said Hillis may want a job with the CIA. So don't think it necessarily reliable.

And you know what, here is a deal I have heard about: Redskins give the Browns their pick in the second round. Browns agree not to use 4th pick in 1st round. You pick RGIII at #6....we all go home happy?

(or Browns take him at #4...and trade him for your #6 and your second round pick...that way it is assured that someone doesn't jump you and take him at #5).

Deal?

(it assumes of course that the Browns don't really want RGIII)

If I'm Washington's front office I'm offering a swap of firsts and our third and fourth. The difference in value on the chart is 200 points. Our third is worth 240 and our fourth is worth 92.

@kerrigan91 said:

http://www.whotv.com/sports/sns-rt-fbn-saints-newssx1347aa1-20120305,0,6101713.story

Non-story now. Redskins are still in the running for RG3

That might be the same source that said Hillis may want a job with the CIA. So don't think it necessarily reliable.

And you know what, here is a deal I have heard about: Redskins give the Browns their pick in the second round. Browns agree not to use 4th pick in 1st round. You pick RGIII at #6....we all go home happy?

(or Browns take him at #4...and trade him for your #6 and your second round pick...that way it is assured that someone doesn't jump you and take him at #5).

Deal?

(it assumes of course that the Browns don't really want RGIII)

@harry-buffalo said:

Plus just because the Redskins are not being investigated now, doesn't mean they won't in the future. I would expect the NFL to follow up on all those teams just to figure out who all knew what was going on.

They already looked into the Skins. We are in the proverbial clear.

@ballpeen said:

It may impact us. Fujita is one of the players the league is investigating.

Same goes for Young.

Plus just because the Redskins are not being investigated now, doesn't mean they won't in the future. I would expect the NFL to follow up on all those teams just to figure out who all knew what was going on.

The Bills, Titans and Redskins are not being investigated by the NFL, NFL.com reported, based on a source, but the Saints are.

Non-story now. Redskins are still in the running for RG3

@kerrigan91 said:

This isn't the homer in me talking at all. The most the Redskins will face is a fine, for a number of reasons:

• 
   
  
• Gregg was five years and two regimes ago. We only have three defensive players, one coach, and the owner around from when he was here.
  
• Williams' "bounty" system also stopped when Blatche took over right after he left.
  
• Gibbs didn't know about it, otherwise he would have ended it (he didn't know about the "missing man formation" that Williams planned after Sean Taylor died)
  
• The NFL didn't tell the Redskins to stop it, only to be ignored.
  

I agree, it is far more likely that the Saints will be punished by the loss of draft choices than the Skins would be....nevertheless, if Goodell wants to send a really harsh message, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the will slap more than one franchise.

Because, here is the deal, in my opinion: Fines don't mean shit to an NFL franchise. That is no punishment. It just means the owner writes a check,and for most of them they could care less.

But the loss of a draft pick is a real punishment...though with Washington I suspect it would be a low round pick if any. The Saints can expect maybe even the loss of their first rounder.

The only other thing they could do....which would be creative, is to say: You are docked X amount from you salary cap.

If the salary cap is, say, 80 million and a team were docked and only be allowed to have a 75 million salary cap while it opponents enjoy the 80 million cap, that could mean something.

• 
   
  
• Gregg was five years and two regimes ago. We only have three defensive players, one coach, and the owner around from when he was here.
  
• Williams' "bounty" system also stopped when Blatche took over right after he left.
  
• Gibbs didn't know about it, otherwise he would have ended it (he didn't know about the "missing man formation" that Williams planned after Sean Taylor died)
  
• The NFL didn't tell the Redskins to stop it, only to be ignored.
  

I hope he finds gainful employment selling lint brushes door to door.

-jj