A New Start! (the Reboot) The Front Office, Ownership, & Coaching Staff Thread

[Gurgeh]

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

The cba is specific as to the split of revenue between the league and players, what revenue is counted against the total and how the calculation of the salary cap is determined based on all of these factors. It’s all laid out specifically in a legal document to an excruciating level of granularity. 

 

Each team is audited by an accredited Audit Firm, like Deloitte, KPMG, PWC, BDO or Grant Thornton.  It’s my understanding that each franchise can choose an audit firm of their choice. An audit partner has to sign to certify the results of the auditor.  The league also is audited, and again there is an external audit partner who has to certify the results. The reason CPA firms are partnerships is because if there is funny business with the audit, the actual audit partner can be charged, and doesn’t have the legal shield of a corporation.

 

So the chances the NFL could essential cook the books to lower the attributable revenue to the salary cap is extremely low.  It would amount to fraud, mis-representing financial information, and not only the league but the independent auditors all could go to jail.

Trying to scam a union is a REALLY bad idea and I rather doubt the NFL would even dare wander into that territory.  

 

Don't put too much faith into the big audit firms like KPMG and Ernst & Young. They are quite capable of turning a blind eye when there's more money to be made by doing so.

 

"Many of the recent accounting scandals are the result of a blurring between auditing and consultancy activities, as was evidenced clearly in the Silentnight case. The reason for this is the fact that auditing firms have expanded beyond their traditional areas of expertise to include active business consulting as well – the main factor behind conflicts of interests and a weakness that invites negligence."

 

https://intpolicydigest.org/can-kpmg-recover-from-its-recent-scandals/

 

 

[Captain Wiggles]

[Skinsinparadise]

LOS ANGELES — The NFL told the House Committee on Oversight and Reform in a letter that the Washington Commanders, not the league, are impeding the committee’s access to many documents related to the investigation of the team’s workplace, another sign of increasing tension between the team and league over the handling of the probe.

 

The letter — dated Wednesday and sent to Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.), the committee’s chairwoman, and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) — reiterates the league’s assertion that “[d]ecisions related to the findings of the investigation have been made by the NFL, not the team.” The NFL also defended its decision to have attorney Beth Wilkinson, who conducted the investigation, submit only oral findings to the league rather than a written report.

The NFL said that it entered into a “common interest agreement” with the team to avoid having to restart the investigation after taking over the probe from the team. And as the committee now seeks information related to Wilkinson’s investigation, the league wrote that the team is responsible for blocking access to more than 100,000 documents.

 

The NFL sought approximately 109,000 team documents related to the investigation that were previously shared with Wilkinson’s firm, Wilkinson Stekloff, and are in the possession of a third-party vendor, the league’s attorneys wrote in the letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post.

 

“That vendor refused to provide the NFL or even Wilkinson Stekloff with access to the documents unless the team consented because of its concern that it could be sued by the team or its owner," the attorneys wrote. "The NFL promptly directed the team to provide its consent to the vendor, but the team repeatedly has refused to do so.”

The team denied the allegation.

 

"The Commanders have never prevented the NFL from obtaining any non-privileged documents and will not do so in the future,” Jordan Siev, an attorney for team owner Daniel Snyder, said in a statement Thursday.

The NFL wrote in the letter that “the team has insisted that it will only authorize the vendor to release those documents to the team, so that the team’s counsel can review the documents for privilege first … before deciding unilaterally which documents it will provide to the NFL for production to the Committee.” The league told the committee that it viewed this proposed approach as “unacceptable” because it “it would prevent the NFL from ensuring that it can produce all responsive, non-privileged documents to the Committee and would delay our production decisions.”

 

...The increasing tensions between the league and the team are apparent in the NFL’s letter to the committee. The league writes that it is seeking to “correct certain factual claims” made in a previous letter by the committee “based in part on claims made to the Committee by the team.” The NFL says it did not withdraw from the common interest agreement, “[c]ontrary to statements made to the Committee by the team’s counsel.”

 

The NFL also defended to the committee the lack of a written report being submitted to the league by Wilkinson.

“It is simply not correct to suggest that submission of a written report is either necessary or the universal practice of other companies or the NFL,” the league wrote. “The NFL concluded that an oral report was appropriate, given the sensitivity of the subject matter and confidentiality promises to those who participated in the investigation.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/02/10/nfl-congress-commanders-documents/

Edited February 10, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[ananoman]

41 minutes ago, Mrshadow008 said:

This is a big deal. Leagues very very rarely throw their owners under the bus like this. And a statement like this doesn’t get sent out without approval from the owners either. This is a big deal. 

This is indeed a big deal.  It is possible the league is realizing that their tax exempt status could be in jeopardy if they don't begin to get issues dealt with

[CTskin]

“We’ve been fully cooperative… unfortunately, it just so happens that the 109k requested documents all fall into that privileged category.”

 

my worry has always been that the NFL is well aware of how bad those documents look for them and probably quite a few other franchises, which is why they aren’t pushing the issue. I have this bad feeling that all we’re going to get is a shouting match and then it’ll be back to business as usual.

Edited February 11, 2022 by CTskin

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Nothing says “we’ve got nothing to hide here” like constantly having your attorney cite privilege.

[Llevron]

3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Nothing says “we’ve got nothing to hide here” like constantly having your attorney cite privilege.

There is a commander in chief joke in there someplace I just can’t put my finger on it (legally, I mean) 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

Daniel Snyder is pushing his luck.

The NFL went easy on the owner of the Washington Commanders in July, and the league has gone to great lengths to keep any evidence regarding years of workplace misconduct within his football operation hidden. The scheme was working.

 

 

 

Then, after someone leaked a handful of emails sent by Jon Gruden to former Commanders executive Bruce Allen, cries for transparency sparked a Congressional investigation. Which prompted a former team employee who hadn’t cooperated with the NFL’s investigation to tell her story to Congress last week. Which has triggered a new investigation of Snyder. And which has caused the NFL to accuse Snyder’s team of impeding the Congressional probe.

Via the Washington Post, the NFL has sent a letter to the committee conducting the investigation accusing the team of keeping documents from being produced. The situation traces to a third-party vendor who has custody of the documents generated by attorney Beth Wilkinson’s 10-month investigation.

 

“That vendor refused to provide the NFL or even [the law firm of] Wilkinson Stekloff with access to the documents unless the team consented because of its concern that it could be sued by the team or its owner,” the league’s attorneys wrote in a letter obtained by the Post. “The NFL promptly directed the team to provide its consent to the vendor, but the team repeatedly has refused to do so.”

Read that last sentence again. The NFL has issued a directive to the Washington Commanders. And the Washington Commanders have refused to comply with it. Repeatedly.

 

According to the letter from the league, the Commanders have “insisted that [they] will only authorize the vendor to release those documents to the team, so that the team’s counsel can review the documents for privilege first . . . before deciding unilaterally which documents it will provide to the NFL for production to the Committee.” The league told the committee that this approaches “unacceptable” because it “it would prevent the NFL from ensuring that it can produce all responsive, non-privileged documents to the committee and would delay our production decisions.”

 

This entire problem traces to the fact that Wilkinson was hired not to investigate the situation with the goal of making any findings publicly known but with the express objective of helping the team (and later the league) limit liability to current or former employees. The legal privileges that are preventing the production of documents flow directly from the wagon-circling nature of Wilkinson’s investigation.

 

Now, the privileges become part of the shell game aimed at continuing to hide information from Congress and, in turn, from the public. The problem for the team is that the NFL no longer wants to play games, and that the NFL is willing to accuse the team of playing games.

At some point, Snyder needs to worry less about Congress and more about the league. At some point, the desire to help Snyder (which frankly comes from a desire by other owners to avoid landing in a similar jackpot) will be outweighed by the desire to be done with him. The way things are going, it seems like it’s just a matter of time before the league tells him to get lost.

Edited February 11, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[RWJ]

Things are getting ready to unravel for Dan and his wife.  Wow!  

[Conn]

Do we have any confirmation about whether the firms cited by Snyder as being hired by the team to investigate itself (before the NFL stepped in and said “lol no you aren’t”) are the same ones the NFL is actually using? Would seem strange to do that AGAIN after the Wilkinson conflict of interest that was uncovered. 

[Mrshadow008]

Snider isn’t one to make statements like that for clicks 

[RWJ]

1 minute ago, Mrshadow008 said:

Snider isn’t one to make statements like that for clicks 

Nope.  Dan and wifey are going down.  This is going to be a mess and just before Combine, Pro Day, most importantly Free Agency and NFL draft.  

[CobraCommander]

Like with all the people on this planet that I despise and want gone from my life forever, I'll believe it when I see it. 

I will say if he is ousted it will be a complete kick in the nuts that we ended up with this putrid team name. It will forever be his legacy that we all have to endure. 

[Luca Brasi]

This is the first time I remember actually feeling some level of hope that this tyrannical reign could be coming to an end.  For the love of God, please let this finally be it.

[justice98]

It's always going to be something with this team.  

[goskins10]

42 minutes ago, CTskin said:

“We’ve been fully cooperative… unfortunately, it just so happens that the 109k requested documents all fall into that privileged category.”

 

my worry has always been that the NFL is well aware of how bad those documents look for them and probably quite a few other franchises, which is why they aren’t pushing the issue. I have this bad feeling that all we’re going to get is a shouting match and then it’ll be back to business as usual.

 

 

And just when I think they cannot be any more tone deaf. I hope like hell it's not all for show but you could very well be right unfortunately. 

 

Unrelated but jumping off from here, I believed the NFL has been protecting Dan for much more than salary collusion. You can get around that pretty easy unless he has 100% proof they cooked the books, and even then it's jsut really hard to prove. I think he has promised mutual destruction of at least enough other owners they have held the dogs back. But it does seem they are starting to break ranks and go after this **** stain. 

 

Would love to see him disgraced by being forced to sell the team. . 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

It’s really happening isn’t it? I’ll gladly take a chaotic 3 months if it means we get a new owner. I’d rather have Dan gone than trade for a QB. Get things right for the next 25+ years versus the next 5

[wunderhill]

37 minutes ago, CobraCommander said:

 

I will say if he is ousted it will be a complete kick in the nuts that we ended up with this putrid team name. It will forever be his legacy that we all have to endure. 

Couldn't the new owner change the name again?

[Luca Brasi]

14 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

It’s really happening isn’t it? I’ll gladly take a chaotic 3 months if it means we get a new owner. I’d rather have Dan gone than trade for a QB. Get things right for the next 25+ years versus the next 5

I wouldn’t care if we rolled with Tress Way at quarterback if Snyder is gone. 

[skinsfan4128]

The NFL is finally over Snyder’s bull****. They would not come out and literally throw Snyder under the bus to Congress if the good old boys club hadn't have said **** it, we've had enough of this seeping hemorrhoid of a human being. 

Rejoice, fellow Redskins fans, the end of Snyder’s reign of terror is coming.

HTTR!

[RWJ]

18 minutes ago, wunderhill said:

Couldn't the new owner change the name again?

I would think so. 

 

[Mrshadow008]

👆🏻 So nobody had access to those emails except the people holding the documents and the team 

Just now, RWJ said:

I would think so. 

 

Highly doubt league is going to allow that right now especially because commanders is super safe and gives the nfl that military vibe it wants. 

[actorguy1]

Put me down for a "I'll believe it when I see it" Right now it's some wisps of smoke and us "Sell The Team" folks are madly rubbing two stick together trying to get a fire. 

 

Edited February 11, 2022 by actorguy1

[Coopskin44]

    Let the process play out,and you know what’s going to happen?Nothing! We’re going to be stuck with that piece of crap.

[Skinsinparadise]

41 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

It’s really happening isn’t it? I’ll gladly take a chaotic 3 months if it means we get a new owner. I’d rather have Dan gone than trade for a QB. Get things right for the next 25+ years versus the next 5

 

I don't care who the collateral damage is to get rid of Dan.   Getting rid of Dan beats any off season conquest for me.  We can go 2-14, and they can have Heinicke lead the way, and I'd take that to get rid of that dude.

 

I know the smart take about Dan is to say that he will survive anything and the NFL will always have his back and anyone who believes otherwise is naive. 

 

But I'll take a stab and go rogue here.  I like how things are unfolding.  This feels MUCH different than the first run of this.   It's not easy to make the case of guilt by association which was the movie of round 1.  Dan's excuse was hey its the underlings.  The counter punch was hey this dude set the tone for an atmosphere like that to take place.  It's not that I don't think its true.   It's that its difficult to knock someone out for this reason. It's too peripheral, too much wiggle room for Dan to pass the buck of blame.  His ammo basically was he let Bruce run the roost and he trusted him and he let all of this happen.  While Dan's excuse is BS, its stlll not a bad defense if the NFL default position is to protect him. 

 

This round we got the evidence pointed to Dan on multiple angles.  Not the underlings.  It's pointed right at him. I'd add that Beth Wilkerson interviewed the lady who got the 1.6 million settlement from Dan -- and that narrative is likely in the Wilkerson report/documents.    And better yet we got the NFL duking it out publicly with Dan to some extent about who is opposed to letting these documents out.    

 

And there are other angles yet that can still play out.  I'd put money that the WP is pursuing some of the new stories which again are pointed at Dan.  Some say its he said she said stuff.  But not exactly, there is one corrobrating witness.  And going forward maybe we get more.  We got the Jon Gruden lawsuit cooking.    The way Dan has played things this week IMO give the impression even more that he was the leak about Jon Gruden.  I'd put money that the level of hostility with the owners and Dan right now is at a high.  Mark Davis casually agreed months back that the Wilkerson report be released. 

 

Yes I know that removing Dan puts the other owners own crap in the spotlight possibly in the future.   No doubt.  But if Dan ends up with am avalanche of this crap that spills into damaging the NFL reputation in the process, that's new territory.   For example Irsay's behavior on some counts years back was embarassing but it didn't spill the NFL right with him deep in that narrative.  It was specific to Irsay.    

 

We actually have a growing spitting match between Dan and the NFL right now.  Dan's garbage and how he handled it and likely will handle it down the road is dragging NFL down directly -- not via guilt by assoication but by direct association.   I don't know what they do but I am not thinking at the moment its slam dunk they will have Dan's back no matter how ugly it gets.  I think there might be a breaking point -- I don't think they hit a breaking point yet but it does feel that there are enough balls in the air to lead to something new that generates that breaking point.  Granted I can't help being an optimist.  Maybe I am deluding myself but I do have some hope here.  😀

 

Edited February 11, 2022 by Skinsinparadise