woodpecker

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/35298372/watchdogs-question-finances-washington-commanders-charity
 

Big shocker even his charities are dirty. Just a reminder we should all be laser focused on getting rid of this despicable asshole. Stuff like coaching and who plays quarterback can wait, because none of it matters until then.

21 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

Look at David Bahktiari in Green Bay. Came back early and he’s pretty much done. Chase had some major surgery beyond an ACL. Dude is still super young. Need to be smart with him. 

I agree with that from the teams perspective, but would rather see the player pushing harder to play. Maybe I’m a little old-school on this.

I dunno man. Listening to his interviews lately, he barely sounds like he even wants to come back. Like he’s scared of getting injured again or something. I get being careful and all, but I want my supposed star player DEMANDING to play in a game like this until the team doctors say no. I still say we should look at trading him this off-season. Not saying give him away on the cheap, but if some team will give us close to value for him, we should do it. For me, a first round pick in the top 15 or so would work. At this point it seems more likely he’ll be a bust than a Hall of Famer, but I’m thinking there’s a team that will take a chance on him returning to his previous form now that he’s recovered from the injury. Note this is only assuming we are able to resign Payne.

13 hours ago, ClaytoAli said:

 

This picture makes me want to vomit 🤮 

1 hour ago, Professor_Nutter_Butter said:

I've mentioned it before but I'll say it again -- Washington winning this year could be disastrous for those wanting Snyder to sell. He'll see the winning, the crowds, support, etc., and think he's doing something right.

Which is why as much as I want to show up Sun night and support this team, and they deserve it, I still can’t do it. Not until the sale is final and he is definitely gone. 

1 hour ago, Wyndorf25 said:

 

Hence, your Extremeskins handle...lol

Yeah “battered fan syndrome“ makes me laugh every single time! I definitely have it.

So why isn’t Dan attending the meetings? Is he still on some kind of probation with the league? Just a coward?

5 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I think pretty much every team has at least a couple of games per year that are mostly decided on luck, whether it's a bad bounce, dumb penalty, missed penalty, dropped pass, whatever. So I don't think we and the Giants are really outliers there.

 

As far as a win over the Eagles, you were probably one of a tiny tiny number who thought we could win. Even God probably had money on us losing that game, and that dude is omnipotent.

Admittedly, I was just fired up about the Snyder news at the time, not sure I really believed it. Been a while since I’ve truly cared whether we won or lost, but the idea of Snyder being gone has gotten me back into it again. 

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

Let's not kid ourselves, here. If the Giants have had some lucky wins, then so have we. I actually think we were pretty lucky to come away from that last game with a tie.

Fair point, we’ve had a couple of lucky wins ourselves. GB and Chi come to mind. But, last 6 games: NY 1-4-1; Wash 4-1-1. So I’ll stick with my prediction. Note that I was laughed at on here when I predicted the win over the Eagles 😎

Giants had at least three completely lucky wins, plus didn’t deserve the tie with us. They are a 4-9 team posing as 7-5-1. Wash 30 NYG 13. Also predicting another sewage leak at the stadium, but this time into the owners box!

7 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Young's value is at an all time low. It would be moronic to trade a kid who's only 23 and won a DROY and is still on a rookie contract.

 

And this notion that we "can't pay everyone" is silly and has been proven false. I don't know why so many of our fans are allergic to keeping good players. I've seen contenders with more cap restraints not only keep their talent but add on to it. 

Well of course we’d all love to keep everybody. But I also think it’s OK to reallocate resources. I don’t see a problem with letting a good player go, if it gets us another just as good player that is a better fit. If “can’t keep everyone“ has been proven false, then why do you suppose KC was willing to let Tyreek Hill go?

As fun as it would be to keep all four studs across the defensive line, I don’t think it’s realistic with the salary cap. The money needs to be spread around to other positions, so one of the four at some point has to go. Never thought I’d say this, but we should look at trading Chase in the off season. Right now, the line is playing great without him. With his pedigree, and reasonable contract for the next couple years, I think his value is still very high despite the injury. I’m thinking we could get a solid first round pick for him, and doing so would give us big time flexibility in the draft to possibly trade up for a QB. This is all assuming we were able to resign Payne. If we can’t, then yeah just give that money to Chase. 

This is great news! Hopefully he’s gone even sooner. It seems he was dishonest to Congress about when he reported the airplane incident to the NFL, among other things. Any chance he gets a perjury charge out of this?

G’men are vastly overrated. They peaked in Sept. Wash 24 NYG 10. 

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

My in-laws are Giants fans as is my wife

I know a good divorce lawyer.....

1 minute ago, Riggo#44 said:

No you don't. It has nothing to do with what people would be for or against--it has to do with the likelihood of either happening. Neither are happening, so ranting about it is pointless and just taking up space.

Right. And like I said, that’s your opinion. Mahomes will def not be traded, but another rebrand under a new owner is definitely possible. That’s my opinion. Plenty of ranting from both sides, which I agree is pointless, at least for now. So I’ll let it go. I think we can both agree that any name will be fine as long as Snyder is gone!

1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said:

No, I get it. It’s just a bad comparison. There are good arguments on both sides of the name thing. Literally nobody would argue against trading for Patrick Mahomes. That you don’t think another rebrand is even remotely likely to happen, well that’s just your opinion. Not everyone agrees with you. The new owner will make the call, and for somebody who can spend 7 billion, a few more dollars for another rebrand is likely not going to be an issue.

12 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

You're absolutely right...lets talk hypotheticals. What do you all think about hypothetically trading for Patrick Mahomes? 

 

Because that is more viable and realistic than another name change.

Well you can discuss it but I don’t think you’re going to find anybody who is actually against trading for Mahomes?? That would be a no-brainer, as would be getting rid of commanders in my opinion.

22 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

There is nothing better.  That's the problem.  The only thing "better" is going back to Redskins and that's never going to happen. 

 

There is a vocal group who will never let go of Red Wolves.  But, honestly, that's just never going to happen with any new owner.  It's not a "timeless" name, it will age badly.  Timeless names are basically boring and mundane.  So, let's take Red Wolves off the table for the sake of argument.

 

What's better that a majority of fans are going to agree with?  The answer is nothing.

 

So the new owner will be asked to spend MILLIONS of dollars to come up with another brand/name that everybody is going to **** on.  And when they decide it's not Red Wolves, the Red Wolve fetishists will then come out and howl about how the new owner is just as stupid as the old owner.

 

When the new name is announced, and it would almost certainly be something bland and vanilla like Commanders, everybody is going to say "we went through all this again and you came up with that?"

 

The path of least resistance for a new owner is just to "clean up" the look and feel of Commanders.  

 

But here's the thing, we're massively putting the cart before the horse.

 

Step one is getting Dan gone.  The hope for that is March.  I'm still holding firm to that timeline, and I still think it gets done.  But all of the name conversation is pointless until we know who the next owner is and they make some decision on what they want to do.

 

I DO, however, think Brand Value is going to be a HUGE component of the valuation of the team.  So the new ownership group will know right away what they want to do. We might not hear about it for a while, but they will know, because they will do market studies and other things as part of diligence to determine if the name is truly an impediment to financial success (hint: it's not) but they will evaluate it.  If they deem the name/brand is weak, they will factor that into the deal thesis, and will effect the bids. 

Totally agree we are putting the cart before the horse. Yes, the most important thing by far is that Snyder is gone. Until he is, you are right we don’t need to be talking about this. In fact, we don’t need to be talking about anything concerning the team’s future until he is gone. But this is a message board, so hypotheticals are up for discussion. When it comes to changing the name again, I think the big disconnect is that you can’t stand the name red wolves and therefore do not see a viable alternative. But most of the polling I have seen throughout this saga, is that most fans seemed to prefer red wolves, especially over Commanders. And that includes the large chunk of fans who aren’t as concerned about the name and have accepted Commanders. I bet a good chunk of them, if the opportunity were presented, would gladly switch to it red wolves. For me, red wolves is fine. And it’s not a Snyder creation, in fact he rejected it which makes me like it even more! So basically, I like red wolves and despise commanders, simply because of Snyder. forgive me if my take is crazy, but my distaste for Snyder sometimes clouds my judgment.

7 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

Outside of this site it appears that most people like the name, are buying gear with the name, and the rebrand from the outside is considered a success. Extreme fans, like those of us on here, don't even make up half the fan base. Most people are fine/have adjusted to the name and aren't going to be hammering for another change. In fact I would say most people would roll their eyes a out changing the name again and all of their gear they just spent money on now being out of date. 

OK fair enough. It’s not like I’ve been to a game lately, so I’ll take your word for it. I suppose we are stuck with the name, but then again the only one who’s opinion really matters is whoever buys the team.

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

And when he finds something he deems better, half the fanbase will say it's not better and complain about that and ask for another re-brand. It's silly.

 

We are the Commanders until otherwise noted.

Half the fan base?? C’mon man, pretty much everyone has said they would like anything else better when the new owner takes over. At that point, defending the name Commanders will be akin to defending Snyder himself. Good luck with that, I seriously doubt anywhere near 50% will agree with you. And people are not going to keep demanding name changes over and over again. One more change, to exterminate the last vestiges of Snyder and then we are done.

Surprised this is even an argument. NOBODY liked or wanted Commanders. Nobody. Except Snyder (and possibly voice of reason?). Yes it’s a lame name, but that’s not why we hate it… We hate it because it came from Snyder! For those of you who think all of the other name suggestions are also lame, OK, but at least they didn’t come from Snyder. All things Snyder must be purged, and that starts with the name. It’s bad enough that we are forced to use the embarrassing wizards (🤮) name, but this is worse. Not only is it just as stupid, but it will always remind us of the hell Snyder put us through. It’s gotta go imo. 
 

Normally I would expect a very close game between two scrappy teams. But right now, every single player, coach, and fan of this team is sky high over lil dip**** selling. The falcons will be cooked sliced and drowned in gravy. Wash 30 Atl 3 happy thanksgiving everybody!

Definitely a letdown situation, but luckily for us Houston is tanking. And the team is still riding the wave of momentum over Snyder‘s departure. Good times roll Wash 27 Hous 13

Just now, ntotoro said:

Roger might be proper ****ed, too. Even though it’s a civil suit, there will be fallout.

Great! Roger and the other owners protected Snyder at first, and they deserve to pay a price for that.

It’s a no-brainer to start the Rookie. Just my opinion, but if he somehow can’t handle it then he is not the guy anyway. Obviously he’s probably not going to be the answer, but why not find out for sure? And for those who want to try to win now, the one in 1 million long shot that he turns out to be the next Brady is actually the only realistic chance for this years team to win anyway. Wentz and Heiney are roads to nowhere but mediocrity.