BB never ever ever denied taping signals. BB cooperated fully and turned in all the tapes to Goodell. That was the first situation that Goodell blew completely by the way he handled it. Foreshadowing at its finest.
Broncos get Sanchez from Philly
- Thread starter Mazz22
- Start date
Share this page
BB never ever ever denied taping signals. BB cooperated fully and turned in all the tapes to Goodell. That was the first situation that Goodell blew completely by the way he handled it. Foreshadowing at its finest.
O_P_T
Why Be Normal
Explain to me just when the Patriots organization tried to "weasel" out of the punishment.
Spygate?
Nope, paid the fine and lost the draft choice.
Deflategate?
Nope, paid the fine, will lose the drtaft picks,even though the Wells report said the following.
The loss of the draft picks and fine was for failing to produce the two ball boys for another interview, (the 6th or 7th IIRC).
Are you suggestion TFB+'s appeal of his suspension is an example of the organization "weasling" out of the punishment?
Does that mean that if any NFL player appeals a suspension, their team is acting just like you think the Patriots are?
Does that mean that you think Dallas (Greg Hardy) , Minnesota (Adrian Peterson), Baltimore (Ray Rice, Ed Reed), New Orelans (Bountygate), Detroit (Ndamukong Suh), Seattle (Brandon Browner), Washington (Brandon Meriweather), Tampa Bay (Dashon Goldson), Cincinnati (Cedric Benson), Pittsburgh (Ben Roethlisberger), and Kansas City (Jared Allen) are just like the Patriots?
Oh and let's not forget Denver (Brandon Marshall, Aqib Talib)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28969-2004Sep17.html
Broncos Penalized Again for Salary Cap Violations
By Mark Maske
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 17, 2004; 5:37 PM
The penalties imposed Thursday on the Denver Broncos for violations of the league's rules regarding the disclosure of deferred compensation to players and the salary cap were the second sanctions against the team for similar infractions in less than three years.
In December 2001, the Broncos were fined $968,000 and lost a third-round pick in the 2002 draft for violations reportedly relating to $29 million in deferred payments to quarterback John Elway and running back Terrell Davis.
On Thursday, the league announced that the Broncos have been fined $950,000 and will lose a third-round selection in next year's draft for circumventing the salary cap between 1996 and '98. The penalties were set in an agreement between the league, the Players Association and the Broncos and resolve a case against the team brought before the sport's special master by the NFL's Management Council in January 2003, the league announced.
The penalties could be viewed as further vindication for Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis, who has said in the past that Broncos owner Pat Bowlen should be suspended for salary cap violations. Davis has contended that the Broncos' circumvention of the salary cap helped them win the Super Bowl in the 1997 and '98 seasons.
Bowlen said in a written statement released Thursday by the Broncos that the club gained no competitive advantage from these cap violations.
"The non-disclosures brought to my attention by the National Football League took place in the mid-1990s," Bowlen said. "We cooperated with the NFL throughout their examination of the situation. While I regret that the circumstances took place, it is important to note that there was no competitive advantage gained by our organization, nor was there any involvement or responsibility by anyone who is currently with the Broncos in any capacity.
"We accept our penalty, will pay our fine as directed and from this point on put the issue behind us. Our entire organization is working toward a great season in 2004."
Harold Henderson, the chairman of the Management Council and the NFL's executive vice president of labor relations, confirmed in a written statement released by the league that "the individuals responsible for the violations are no longer with the team" and that the Broncos "have been cooperative throughout the investigation." Henderson did not directly address the issue of whether the club gained a competitive advantage but said the Broncos circumvented the cap to help pay for costs related to the construction of Invesco Field at Mile High.
"The investigation resulted in the discovery of undisclosed agreements between the club and Broncos players during the same period [1996-1998] pursuant to which various players agreed to defer certain compensation in exchange for a commitment to pay interest on the deferred amounts," Henderson said in the statement. "These agreements were plainly designed to help the club cope with seasonal cash flow problems exacerbated by the Broncos' need to fund front-end expenditures associated with development of the new stadium in Denver."
The Broncos reportedly were responsible for about $100 million of the approximately $401 million cost of Invesco Field at Mile High, which opened in 2001 and replaced Mile High Stadium as the team's home.
This set of violations, the league said, was related both to agreements between the team and "several" unidentified players to defer salary payments with interest and to a 1997 agreement between the club and a former player to not waive the player prior to a certain date. "Both types of agreements raised salary cap accounting issues," the league said.
Henderson said of the agreement not to waive the player before a certain date: "That commitment had the effect of converting the player's roster bonus into a guarantee, which affected the timing of the salary cap treatment of a portion of the bonus."
Henderson said the league considered the settlement terms "satisfactory to resolve the dispute."
An unidentified agent for a former Broncos player will donate $100,000 to charity without admitting wrongdoing in the case, according to the league.
Broncos Penalized Again for Salary Cap Violations
By Mark Maske
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 17, 2004; 5:37 PM
The penalties imposed Thursday on the Denver Broncos for violations of the league's rules regarding the disclosure of deferred compensation to players and the salary cap were the second sanctions against the team for similar infractions in less than three years.
In December 2001, the Broncos were fined $968,000 and lost a third-round pick in the 2002 draft for violations reportedly relating to $29 million in deferred payments to quarterback John Elway and running back Terrell Davis.
On Thursday, the league announced that the Broncos have been fined $950,000 and will lose a third-round selection in next year's draft for circumventing the salary cap between 1996 and '98. The penalties were set in an agreement between the league, the Players Association and the Broncos and resolve a case against the team brought before the sport's special master by the NFL's Management Council in January 2003, the league announced.
The penalties could be viewed as further vindication for Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis, who has said in the past that Broncos owner Pat Bowlen should be suspended for salary cap violations. Davis has contended that the Broncos' circumvention of the salary cap helped them win the Super Bowl in the 1997 and '98 seasons.
Bowlen said in a written statement released Thursday by the Broncos that the club gained no competitive advantage from these cap violations.
"The non-disclosures brought to my attention by the National Football League took place in the mid-1990s," Bowlen said. "We cooperated with the NFL throughout their examination of the situation. While I regret that the circumstances took place, it is important to note that there was no competitive advantage gained by our organization, nor was there any involvement or responsibility by anyone who is currently with the Broncos in any capacity.
"We accept our penalty, will pay our fine as directed and from this point on put the issue behind us. Our entire organization is working toward a great season in 2004."
Harold Henderson, the chairman of the Management Council and the NFL's executive vice president of labor relations, confirmed in a written statement released by the league that "the individuals responsible for the violations are no longer with the team" and that the Broncos "have been cooperative throughout the investigation." Henderson did not directly address the issue of whether the club gained a competitive advantage but said the Broncos circumvented the cap to help pay for costs related to the construction of Invesco Field at Mile High.
"The investigation resulted in the discovery of undisclosed agreements between the club and Broncos players during the same period [1996-1998] pursuant to which various players agreed to defer certain compensation in exchange for a commitment to pay interest on the deferred amounts," Henderson said in the statement. "These agreements were plainly designed to help the club cope with seasonal cash flow problems exacerbated by the Broncos' need to fund front-end expenditures associated with development of the new stadium in Denver."
The Broncos reportedly were responsible for about $100 million of the approximately $401 million cost of Invesco Field at Mile High, which opened in 2001 and replaced Mile High Stadium as the team's home.
This set of violations, the league said, was related both to agreements between the team and "several" unidentified players to defer salary payments with interest and to a 1997 agreement between the club and a former player to not waive the player prior to a certain date. "Both types of agreements raised salary cap accounting issues," the league said.
Henderson said of the agreement not to waive the player before a certain date: "That commitment had the effect of converting the player's roster bonus into a guarantee, which affected the timing of the salary cap treatment of a portion of the bonus."
Henderson said the league considered the settlement terms "satisfactory to resolve the dispute."
An unidentified agent for a former Broncos player will donate $100,000 to charity without admitting wrongdoing in the case, according to the league.
king of kings
Grammar offender
Here your problem. No one wants to talk football . When ever your talking about the pats winning . It's always the same BS the patriots are cheaters. They can't win without cheating . My favorite the refs gave them all the calls.
Patriots71
datebest.net - visit website and win smartphone!
- Joined
- May 27, 2015
- Messages
- 8,688
- Reaction score
- 514
- Points
- 113
- Location
- https://t.me/pump_upp
- Website
- t.me
I've used this one a lot. I actually had one amoeba-brained Donkey fan tell me that the WaPo was no different than the Enquirer.
RodgerGoodell
Member
Why do you guys talk so much shit?
TheBSPolice
Active member
You left this part unbolded.
Thanks for bolding the part where the NFL labor VP specifies that this was for cash flow alleviation and not an issue of squeezing extra players in under the cap.
Second sanctions is not the same as separate infractions. The issues for which they were punished all happened between 1996-1998. There was a round of fines in 2001, then further investigation resulted in a second set of fines in 2004. People in this thread have implied the Broncos committed an infraction, then repeated it after being fined. That's just not the case.
Some of the players you're using in your comparison were suspended for off-field, non-football related infractions, and the league's rights and responsibilities are under a lot of scrutiny, for being too harsh and too lenient depending on who you ask. Players like Hardy, Peterson, and Rice, for example, undoubtedly committed crimes. The only question brought to court is if the NFL has the authority to punish them. Situations like this aren't comparable to infractions that are part of or affect the play of the game.
With regards to those that are comparable, PEDs, personal fouls, etc., most of them appeal their punishment to the league and then abide by whatever that decision is, rather than going to court. I actually still get irritated when players from any team appeal a punishment that is obviously warranted, even if it's just to the league. I am not familiar with all of the cases above, but I can use the ones I know as examples.
Talib should have accepted his punishment for the eye poke without appeal. He did it, he knows he did it, we all know he did it, it was on video. An appeal in that situation is unwarranted. Von appealing his 4 game suspension was another unwarranted appeal, and it cost him an additional 2 games. While it was frustrating losing a player of his caliber for 6 games, he was wrong twice and deserved what he got. Although, I laugh at people who try to call it a PED violation when his chosen vice is weed, which is about as far from a performance enhancer you can get.
So yes, I believe any player from any team when caught doing something wrong should take their punishment and not try to weasel out. It's one thing to appeal a suspension on a late or forceful hit that you believe is borderline. It's quite another to choke up the disciplinary process with challenges to discipline that is unquestionably warranted.
AkPatsFan
Well-known member
You have no standing here fool so just STFU.
PatsFanLisa
No filter
Man, you sure do talk a lot of bullshit.
I guess he just doesn't understand that difference between speculation and absolute proof.
Big/Sky/Fly
370hssv vw6!s tu36v
I dunno...the guy does know his BS, every time I read anything from him...all I read is BS.
AFC West:
1. Rivers
2. Smith
3. Carr
4. Sanchez ROFL
AFC North:
1. Roflsberger
2. Flacco
3. Dalton
4. Whoever the Browns send out at QB.
AFC South:
1. Luck
2. Bortles
3. Mariota
4. Osweiler
AFC East:
1. Brady
2. Taylor
3. Tannehill
4. Whoever the Jets are lining up at QB.
1. Rivers
2. Smith
3. Carr
4. Sanchez ROFL
AFC North:
1. Roflsberger
2. Flacco
3. Dalton
4. Whoever the Browns send out at QB.
AFC South:
1. Luck
2. Bortles
3. Mariota
4. Osweiler
AFC East:
1. Brady
2. Taylor
3. Tannehill
4. Whoever the Jets are lining up at QB.
AkPatsFan
Well-known member
What if they do sign Kaepernick, what has he done that would lead one to believe he is a good QB? He had 2 good years then sucked the last 2, going to the Broncos isn't going to automatically turn him into an all star caliber QB. He's not even a good game manager and apparently JE doesn't think he's a great QB considering they don't think he's worth more than a 4th rounder.
Honestly, I don't care who they get at QB, their offense is mediocre at best and their defense has taken a step backwards since free agency started.
Honestly, I don't care who they get at QB, their offense is mediocre at best and their defense has taken a step backwards since free agency started.
Ok I'll play along. The first infraction in 2001 was because they deferred the 29 million dollar payments claiming they were short on cash fair enough. After the 2001 investigation the league said ok we trust you it was just 2 years into the cap era you made a mistake. Davis kept making a stink this was no innocent mistake the money was never counted against the cap. So the NFL opened the investigation again. Found it was a few players 1996 -1998. Won a Superbowl 1997 Elway's cap hit was 2.1 million his 1998 cap hit was 2.5 million and retired right after. The average QB cap hit was 7.0 million with the exception of Young (SF was also being investigated for cap violations but let face they were also being investigated for gambling). The money owed was never counted toward the cap for more then just Elway and Davis. Innocent mistake sure
Your right it was the same infraction but because Denver never happened to mention some pertinent facts during the first investigation ........................they were fined again.~Dee~
TheBSPolice
Active member
Oh no, I have no "standing" here. That breaks my heart.
Says the person who doesn't understand restricted free agency...
I guess he just understands that the preponderance of evidence standard used in civil court cases and the NFL CBA is different than absolute proof.
The Broncos don't need Kaepernick to be a good quarterback, they need him to not be a dumpster fire. He quarterbacked a team to two NFC championship games, winning one of them. At his best he certainly isn't garbage. With his athletic ability in the Kubiak offense he could be very dangerous. He could also be as bad as the last two years have indicated. No way to really know without trying.
I think Elway's unwillingness to trade much for him is less an indictment of his assessment of Kaepernick and more of an unwillingness to risk very much without a more certain result, especially for a player that I imagine John is banking on being available April 1 for nothing.
While the defense has possibly regressed slightly, I would expect them to be fine with even minimal improvement on offense. I don't think they will get that from Sanchez though, so I am hopeful that there is something else coming. If not, I expect the Broncos' season will be as laugh worthy as you're all hoping.
PatsFanLisa
No filter
Oh, I understand it perfectly. What I don't understand is some arrogant, mouthy a$$hole that goes to another team's board to tell them what cheaters they are and then makes every excuse in the book for their own sleazy team.
That would be you.
PatsFanLisa
No filter
You have to HAVE evidence for there to be a preponderance.
Again, you don't know jack shit about law or about arbitral law, so stop pretending you actually know something.
You don't.
There has to be evidence no? Even the NFL admitted in court they had no evidence.
~Dee~
OP
OP
Mazz22
A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies.
Cheers to that!!
