Jumbo Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 What else would you expect with this outfit? Thank you, sir, may I have another! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 I had contemplated putting it in the tailgate--but this had everything to do with this thread. Whatever your (the collective 'your,' I am not addressing anyone in particular) personal politics aside--anyone who basically decries a charity--whatever the motivations behind it are--by basically saying "They have tons of money now, we gave them Casinos!" deserves to be called on the carpet. It further goes to show who is concerned about the welfare of Native Americans (you know, clearly the driving force behind the name debate ) and who is concerned with getting their name in print and/or bash Dan Snyder. Harry Reid should be ashamed of his comments. I agree with you, I can't stand that man. Never have and never will. But in the words of the late Bubba9497, "No Politics in the Stadium!" Just looking out for ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 This Edwards this is pretty crappy. Sometimes it feels like the stuff Snyder is still involved with is run by some pretty shady folks. I know a lot of folks don't think Tony Wylie is doing a good job. But we all knew Vinny wasn't. We know Larry Michael doesn't. This program was going to come under a lot of scrutiny immediately. They needed to have every person involved triple checked. It needed to be flawless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Oh dear: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ceo-of-new-washington-redskins-foundation-connected-to-defective-federal-contract/2014/03/28/382142b4-b678-11e3-a7c6-70cf2db17781_story.html Personally, I find it in no way surprising that this hatchet job came out so quickly, but the Post has written nothing on Halbritters far more shady history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Personally, I find it in no way surprising that this hatchet job came out so quickly, but the Post has written nothing on Halbritters far more shady history It seems to be a trend now days that if you can't attack the message put forth then you find whatever you can to discredit the messenger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 It seems to be a trend now days that if you can't attack the message put forth then you find whatever you can to discredit the messenger. Fine, I'll attack the message. I work in government contracting, I write government proposals. You know how often this actually happens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Fine, I'll attack the message. I work in government contracting, I write government proposals. You know how often this actually happens? lol, I was talking about attacking Edwards history. It's straight out of the political playbook. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 I was a dumbass and had the wrong Riggo--and 44 was so solid an ES'er he was even cool enough to address me in PM to kindly clear it up so as not to derail the thread. I called myself names and apologized to him. So the only worthwhile message I have now is for everyone to avoid tangents from slinging the typical right/left political arguments in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 lol, I was talking about attacking Edwards history. It's straight out of the political playbook. I Well, I think we agree then--the Post blows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyandSam Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Geez Dan, don't you ever hire competent people? Is doing a basic background check really that hard? You can't hire competent coaches, players, front office staff, non-football operations people, PR staff.... You make it so incredibly difficult to defend a team I have followed and cherished for 46 years. We started with a racist owner, followed by the boring but mild mannered Edward Bennett Williams, then on to the egotistical skirt chasing headline making boorish JKC, and then the young incompetent egotistical afraid of the fans and media Dan Snyder. What is ****ing wrong with my football team? Why can't we have a competent owner? What should have been a positive step forward is now a cluster****. Now, Dan, you need to hires someone to keep an eye on your new CEO so that he correctly spends the foundation's money because you sure as hell can't trust him now. ARRRRGGGHHHHHH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyandSam Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Well, I think we agree then--the Post blows I don't like the Post's coverage of Dan Snyder and the Redskins either. But this is not the fault of the Post or some anti-Redskins name secret source. This is all on Dan Snyder, Bruce Allen and whoever is advising the two on this foundation. Where was the background check? This required absolutely no real effort. Snyder and his henchmen keep shooting themselves in the foot over and over again. It is really getting old. And all this criticism comes from someone who supports the Redskins name and generally defended Snyder as at least making the effort over the years. But his constant failure to make the right decisions and improve the football team and it and his image is getting old even for this 46 year Redskin fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 I don't like the Post's coverage of Dan Snyder and the Redskins either. But this is not the fault of the Post or some anti-Redskins name secret source. This is all on Dan Snyder, Bruce Allen and whoever is advising the two on this foundation. Where was the background check? This required absolutely no real effort. Snyder and his henchmen keep shooting themselves in the foot over and over again. It is really getting old. And all this criticism comes from someone who supports the Redskins name and generally defended Snyder as at least making the effort over the years. But his constant failure to make the right decisions and improve the football team and it and his image is getting old even for this 46 year Redskin fan. Did you consider this was, actually, the best candidate? That they did all the vetting and this was the best choice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyandSam Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Did you consider this was, actually, the best candidate? That they did all the vetting and this was the best choice? Then you keep looking. Not only does the contract issue look bad from a PR standpoint, it risks the wasteful spending of millions of dollars raised by the foundation....it's also a competence issue. And if you cannot find an above reproach candidate to lead your foundation, then you do not start the foundation. This was going to be a highly visible position that was going to be scrutinized heavily for who they hired and how they raised the money and how they spent the money. 24 hours and Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen et. al. failed miserably. I spent 18 years working in the public sector including stints with two governors. I know just a little about how you vet candidates for controversial positions. I should add that this is just another of many decisions made by the Snyder regime that has been implemented very badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZRagone Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Hatchet job is an accurate statement. And it's laughable that they do this within a week on Edwards while the guy leading Oenida gets next to no scrutiny. However, if one actually had some intellectual honesty to look at the whole of what NNALEA has done within that community rather than latch onto one hatchet job article, it's hard to really fault Dan for who he picked. NNALEA is also a FAR larger, more established, and wider ranging organization than the one Dan just started...but shocker, it's only when it came be used to attack the Redskins that the papers decide to post some big negative story about something relating to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Combined posts below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 By Monday, few will remember/care about the shaky past of Edwards. The topic will fade just like the dirt on Halbritter. Personally, I find it in no way surprising that this hatchet job came out so quickly, but the Post has written nothing on Halbritters far more shady history Nothing? http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/oneida-indian-nation-is-the-tiny-tribe-taking-on-the-nfl-and-dan-snyder-over-redskins-name/2013/11/16/10ef9290-4c88-11e3-be6b-d3d28122e6d4_story.html The negative text on Halbritter under "Bitter infighting" is almost the same amount of ink you'll find in today's soiling of Edwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 By Monday, few will remember/care about the shaky past of Edwards. The topic will fade just like the dirt on Halbritter. Nothing? http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/oneida-indian-nation-is-the-tiny-tribe-taking-on-the-nfl-and-dan-snyder-over-redskins-name/2013/11/16/10ef9290-4c88-11e3-be6b-d3d28122e6d4_story.html The negative text on Halbritter under "Bitter infighting" is almost the same amount of ink you'll find in today's soiling of Edwards. The main difference, though, is that the "soiling" of Edwards was not couched in a lengthy positive article on the man, like was done with Halbritter...the soiling is the sole focus of the article. At least with Halbritter, the article gives him 20 paragraphs of props before going into the "soiling" section, but then wraps it up with more positive spin. In Edwards' 20 years of service, the only thing worth writing about is this application issue? Was the story about whether or not Gary Edwards should overall be seen as a good hire, or was the story "Hey, look, Snyder and the Redskins screwed up again!"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Then you keep looking. Not only does the contract issue look bad from a PR standpoint, it risks the wasteful spending of millions of dollars raised by the foundation....it's also a competence issue. And if you cannot find an above reproach candidate to lead your foundation, then you do not start the foundation. This was going to be a highly visible position that was going to be scrutinized heavily for who they hired and how they raised the money and how they spent the money. 24 hours and Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen et. al. failed miserably. I spent 18 years working in the public sector including stints with two governors. I know just a little about how you vet candidates for controversial positions. I should add that this is just another of many decisions made by the Snyder regime that has been implemented very badly. So are you saying that the application issue should define Edwards' 20 years of service? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyandSam Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 So are you saying that the application issue should define Edwards' 20 years of service? Application? You mean federal contract? IF all they could find was a couple out of 500 referrals that were bad for some reason, no. But this was an investigation by the Inspector General of that agency who concluded that virtually no value was provided in return for $1 million. Yeah, I got a problem with that kind of incompetence. He may have been a great secret service agent. (but do we really know that?) He may have been a proud Cherokee (Are we really sure of that considering Snyder has highlighted other guys who said they belonged to a tribe and did not.) But clearly he was fairly incompetent in performing the requirements under the contract. The OIG clearly thought so. If Edwards runs an organization that pisses away $1 million, I would not want him anywhere near my foundation given its visibility it will have with the media and the fans. Just because a guy is a nice guy does not mean he is competent to run a multi-million dollar foundation. I have to add....how can you freakin' defend someone who pissed away $1 million of our tax money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedr01 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 The IG isn't as all-knowing as you'd like everyone to believe. Having worked for a few of them and knowing them personally, they sign papers and a majority of the time have no idea what they are signing. You are getting way too upset about an article that was clearly done to poke holes in an otherwise great charity. It comes off as someone who actually doesn't like Snyder and has an agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Application? You mean federal contract? IF all they could find was a couple out of 500 referrals that were bad for some reason, no. But this was an investigation by the Inspector General of that agency who concluded that virtually no value was provided in return for $1 million. Yeah, I got a problem with that kind of incompetence. Application issue, meaning the quality (or lack thereof) of the applications sent into the government. And you didn't answer my question, you answered a question you wanted asked. I asked if this issue should be how Edwards' 20 years of service should be defined. Yes? No? Not sure? He may have been a great secret service agent. (but do we really know that?) He may have been a proud Cherokee (Are we really sure of that considering Snyder has highlighted other guys who said they belonged to a tribe and did not.) But clearly he was fairly incompetent in performing the requirements under the contract. The OIG clearly thought so. I'm still asking the same question...and just to inform you, the question was NOT "did the NNALEA handle this $1 mil contract with the government in an incompetent manner?". From all evidence it appears the incompetence was spread out evenly over both the government and the NNALEA. I'm asking (yet again) if this issue itself should be how Edwards' 20 years of service should be defined. From what you've written before, it appears nothing else he has done (which I'm positive you know very little about) matters, only this one issue does. Was there a pattern of incompetence in the NNALEA under Edwards? Article doesn't say. Was the application issue a result of Edwards' lack of appropriate oversight? Was it incompetence? Was it a directive from Edwards? Article doesn't say. Will Edwards' role with OAF be identical enough to his role/responsibilities with NNALEA? Article doesn't say. Will OAF be set up and run in a manner that negates the types of issues the NNALEA found themselves facing? Article doesn't say. Do you have the answers for any of these quesitons? Doesn't look like it. So do we know enough to say without question that Edwards should or should not have been hired by the Skins to head up the OAF? In my mind, hell no. I'd hate to have my worst failing over the last 20 years be the only thing anyone used to assess my ability and qualifications. If Edwards runs an organization that pisses away $1 million, I would not want him anywhere near my foundation given its visibility it will have with the media and the fans. Just because a guy is a nice guy does not mean he is competent to run a multi-million dollar foundation. I have to add....how can you freakin' defend someone who pissed away $1 million of our tax money. Every single politicain in Washington has pissed away at least $1 mil of our tax dollars every stinkin' quarter. I have a HUGE amount of experience with government bureaucracy and the numerous money issues that go along with it...I may be jaded but I yawn at the idea that $1 million tax dollars wasted is a sign of overall incompetence. How and why the money gets "pissed away" matters more to me than the amount. Unfortunately, the article doesn't go into the "how" and "why", outside of the fact that an embarrasingly small number of applications submitted by NNALEA were actually worthwhile. Was it orchestrated...were fake applications handed in like those fake petition signatures that lazy volunteers in "Get Out The Vote" drives submit in order to get their paycheck?...Was it due to the wording of the government contract? Have any of us read that contract? (is it available anywhere?)...I've also done a crapload of contract work with the government and even came scarily close to getting into a troubling argument with a Master Chief on a military base over a government contract I had with the military...then went on to have an equally troublilng argument with the union--all because the contract my company was under was worded too vaguely in too many spots. Both sides thought they could define those vague areas as they saw fit. Looking at thie logically instead of emotionally, my guess is that Edwards has a large amount of contacts within both the government and the NA community that will help the efforts of OAF in numerous ways. He brought something valuable to the table that this one singular issue didn't detract from. But like I said earlier, I don't know...but I'm fine admitting that I don't know nearly enough to start stomping my feet over Edwards being chosen by the Skins for this position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkeyBoy Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 Well it looks like Stephen Colbert's satire of the foundation has taken much of the national media heat off of Dan and Mr. Edwards which is pretty nice I guess. In a few days hopefully everyone will forget about it and we start seeing what this charity can really do for people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 Well it looks like Stephen Colbert's satire of the foundation has taken much of the national media heat off of Dan and Mr. Edwards which is pretty nice I guess. In a few days hopefully everyone will forget about it and we start seeing what this charity can really do for people. ??...What did he say? According to the tweet I got it said "Stephen Colbert ripped Dan Snyder". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkeyBoy Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 ??...What did he say? According to the tweet I got it said "Stephen Colbert ripped Dan Snyder". The whole story is so long/ridiculous it's hard to know where to start but. I think this post piece sums it up fairly well and without bias. http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2014/03/28/stephen-colbert-controversy-illustrates-extreme-difference-between-tv-and-twitter-audiences/ He's got a ton of "progressives" to shift their dialogue over to him because of something that could be interpreted without context as a jab at Asians, meanwhile Deadspin has two Korean American writers creating a decent article in his defense that I probably can't type the title of here without a ban. Either way much of the blogosphere and outrage machine has forgotten about Snyder for the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 The whole story is so long/ridiculous it's hard to know where to start but. I think this post piece sums it up fairly well and without bias. http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2014/03/28/stephen-colbert-controversy-illustrates-extreme-difference-between-tv-and-twitter-audiences/ He's got a ton of "progressives" to shift their dialogue over to him because of something that could be interpreted without context as a jab at Asians, meanwhile Deadspin has two Korean American writers creating a decent article in his defense that I probably can't type the title of here without a ban. Either way much of the blogosphere and outrage machine has forgotten about Snyder for the moment. *Shakin' my damn head* lol... The first 7 or so comments were pretty good, though (as of the time of this post, that is)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.