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

[Skinsinparadise]

Just listened to Jay on Standig's podcast.

 

Jay hated the Bryce Love pick at that time, hot argument he said in the draft room before he was taken.

 

He wasn't on board with the Sua pick. 

 

He also suggested he didn't have control always over who he's assistant coaches were

 

Still listening, Jay goes a little deeper than usual in this podcast, he basically says there were people in that FO who were backstabbers (seems to hint it being Bruce when Standig asks if those backstabbers are the same ones who thwarted him on some personnel moves and Jay said yes).  

Edited June 22, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Riggo#44]

Another one...

[Skinsinparadise]

According to a person with knowledge of the committee’s thinking, Snyder will not have the final word. The committee deems his testimony essential and is determined to secure it, ideally via compromise rather than subpoena, which Maloney has the authority to issue.

Wednesday’s hearing is not the first time a congressional committee has held a public hearing on matters of concern in sports.

 

In March 2005, the House Oversight Committee held a series of hearings on steroid use in Major League Baseball that included testimony from executives and players, including Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro.

 

In September 2021, the Senate Judiciary held a hearing on the FBI’s role in investigating the serial sexual abuse of hundreds of young gymnasts by former team doctor Larry Nassar, in which Simone Biles and several teammates offered wrenching testimony about being failed by the bureau, USA Gymnastics and the U.S. Olympic Committee.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/roger-goodell-house-oversight-committee-hearing/

[Spaceman Spiff]

I said it yesterday, I'll say it here.  ****ing subpoena him.  Stop being cute and ****ing around.

 

In regards to the Standig piece that just hit on The Athletic, I thought this was old news?  What am I missing?

[Captain Wiggles]

Now I'm not a  very smart fellow. I know one thing for sure tho. If I paid someone a $1.6 million dollar settlement you can rest assured I did exactly what they said I did. 😬

[Voice_of_Reason]

29 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

In regards to the Standig piece that just hit on The Athletic, I thought this was old news?  What am I missing?

There's very little new in either the Washington Post piece or the Athletic piece.  

 

We've known about the settlement for years, it seems.  Do we have a few more details?  I guess.  But not a whole heck of a lot.

 

This was retribution for not appearing at the hearing.  There is a puppet master here, who is controlling the narrative from Congress and the Post.  I think it's Lisa Banks. And I think what she's after is a $100m civil suit against the NFL.  But she doesn't have enough yet, so she needs Dan to testify and step on his wank to give her the ammo.  

[Riggo#44]

3 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

There's very little new in either the Washington Post piece or the Athletic piece.  

 

We've known about the settlement for years, it seems.  Do we have a few more details?  I guess.  But not a whole heck of a lot.

 

This was retribution for not appearing at the hearing.  There is a puppet master here, who is controlling the narrative from Congress and the Post.  I think it's Lisa Banks. And I think what she's after is a $100m civil suit against the NFL.  But she doesn't have enough yet, so she needs Dan to testify and step on his wank to give her the ammo.  

We knew about the settlement--but this sounds worse, doesn't it?

[FLSkinz83]

Is the hearing being televised somewhere?   C-Span?

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 minute ago, Riggo#44 said:

We knew about the settlement--but this sounds worse, doesn't it?

Not really.  We knew it was something on the plane, we knew it was $1.6m, we already knew the team was claiming nothing happened and they settled because of the insurance company.

 

There were a few flushed out details we hadn't heard. But I mean, I don't have to hear the details of sexual harassment or sexual assault to be repulsed by it, and have some understanding as to what might have occurred.  

 

It's sensationalistic journalism. Thom Lovero said this a few months ago.  When you have a story like this, you have to keep it in the public consciousness, so if that means you can advance the story even 2-3 inches with barely new information, that's fine as long as you keep the story going.

 

I mean, if it get's Dan out, as I said before, BBQ at my place and everybody is invited. I'll throw a party.  

 

I just don't think there was much too this story we didn't know.  Dude is a schmuck.  We've known that for 20 years.  This story didn't change my opinion of him at all.  He was a schmuck before, he's a schmuck after.  

 

3 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

Is the hearing being televised somewhere?   C-Span?

I heard youtube.  (I'm being serious.  But I don't have the link.  I'm sure one is floating around somewhere.)

 

[Riggo#44]

22 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I mean, if it get's Dan out, as I said before, BBQ at my place and everybody is invited. I'll throw a party.  

I'll bring ribs, pulled pork, and/or brisket. And it'll be the sweetest **** you ever did taste!

[Peregrine]

3 hours ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

Ah. The story my old man was threatening to sue the Washington post over during the weekend if they wrote this story. Yeah, funny thing is, the Washington post doesn’t even know the true facts. They only publish half of the details of that investigation but fail to report that video evidence even confirmed no sexual assault even happened. 

they even fail to mention the woman even got a text from her husband saying he was close to bankruptcy and they needed some way to come up with the money. 

 

Washington Post isn’t going to enjoy this lawsuit 😁 

So, lets be clear here...They had video evidence showing no assault could have occurred, and Mr "Ill sue an old lady" Snyder agrees to pay her 1.6 million.

 

Absolute BS.  If you want to argue she made things up and there is some he-said she-said thats fine, and plausible if again super suspect because of the payout for a guy we know would only do that as a last resort.  But anyone suggesting theres actual video proof it doesnt happen, but they paid her anyway, is absolutely lying in my(and pretty much everyone elses) opinion.

[Voice_of_Reason]

22 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

I'll bring ribs, pulled pork, and/or brisket. And it'll be the sweetest **** you ever did taste!

You can do the brisket, I got the pulled pork.  

22 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

So, lets be clear here...They had video evidence showing no assault could have occurred, and Mr "Ill sue an old lady" Snyder agrees to pay her 1.6 million.

 

Absolute BS.  If you want to argue she made things up and there is some he-said she-said thats fine, and plausible if again super suspect because of the payout for a guy we know would only do that as a last resort.  But anyone suggesting theres actual video proof it doesnt happen, but they paid her anyway, is absolutely lying in my(and pretty much everyone elses) opinion.

#ReleaseTheVideoOrYouAreADirtyLiar

[Cooleyfan1993]

“Absolute BS”. Yeah. Whatever. I’ll sleep peacefully tonight knowing that my family knows the true facts which the Post doesn’t even BOTHER to report
 

goodnight everyone, and to the Washington Post: enjoy the lawsuit! Shouldn’t have tried to paint my old man in a negative light, because if anyone doesn’t deserve that ****, it’s him 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

[spjunkies]

Oh yeah, I'm sure the Post doesn’t have legal advisors that they consulted before running this story.

[method man]

41 minutes ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

“Absolute BS”. Yeah. Whatever. I’ll sleep peacefully tonight knowing that my family knows the true facts which the Post doesn’t even BOTHER to report
 

goodnight everyone, and to the Washington Post: enjoy the lawsuit! Shouldn’t have tried to paint my old man in a negative light, because if anyone doesn’t deserve that ****, it’s him 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

 

Not sure where your dad has grounds to sue if the Post has possession of this letter and experts are being cited. Seems like your dad is going to eat attorney's fees for the Post

[SoCalSkins]

1 hour ago, FLSkinz83 said:

Is the hearing being televised somewhere?   C-Span?

11 AM Eastern:

https://youtu.be/sXuNUbMrhU8

 

 

Edited June 22, 2022 by SoCalSkins

[Wildbunny]

4 hours ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

why did they settle for $1.6M?…I mean, video evidence proving her allegations are not true would seem to make that option unnecessary.

I think he's referring to the other case of sexual harassment.

[SoCalSkins]

1 hour ago, Peregrine said:

So, lets be clear here...They had video evidence showing no assault could have occurred, and Mr "Ill sue an old lady" Snyder agrees to pay her 1.6 million.

 

Absolute BS.  If you want to argue she made things up and there is some he-said she-said thats fine, and plausible if again super suspect because of the payout for a guy we know would only do that as a last resort.  But anyone suggesting theres actual video proof it doesnt happen, but they paid her anyway, is absolutely lying in my(and pretty much everyone elses) opinion.

They are saying the seat configuration on the plane would have made it impossible to have it not witnessed by others on the plane and the engines were too quiet. However, they also state in the document produced by Dan’s lawyer that the employee was flirting with other men on the trip and wore revealing clothing. Basically the old school defense of she was asking for it the way she dressed and behaved. This is not going to go over well at all. 

[RWJ]

Wouldn't Snyder's wife become Owner and CEO of the team if Dan is rooted out!   Just a guess on my part.  She has the same title as him right now.  Co-Owner and CEO.  

[SoCalSkins]

1 minute ago, RWJ said:

Wouldn't Snyder's wife become Owner and CEO of the team if Dan is rooted out!   Just a guess on my part.  She has the same title as him right now.  Co-Owner and CEO.  

Not if the other owners vote to force a sale which they can with 24 votes. 

[SkinsFTW]

3 hours ago, SoCalSkins said:

Not if the other owners vote to force a sale which they can with 24 votes. 

 

Which they've never done. 

 

Hell they have one team already where the owner died and his kids have been fighting over the team for years, they basically became homeless because San Diego evicted them from the old stadium and they don't even have a stadium at all. Now they are renting another teams stadium to stay in the NFL but the league does nothing.

 

Former redskins fans are stuck with the clown show unless something really crazy comes out.

[Gurgeh]

4 hours ago, SoCalSkins said:

Not if the other owners vote to force a sale which they can with 24 votes. 

 

It would be great if Roger had primed by the other owners to throw Dan under a bus with his testimony, as a prelude to forcing him to sell the team. Something to dream about

 

[Wildbunny]

1 hour ago, Gurgeh said:

 

It would be great if Roger had primed by the other owners to throw Dan under a bus with his testimony, as a prelude to forcing him to sell the team. Something to dream about

 

I would say that's doubtful to happen, but the probability of it happening is not null.

[Skinsinparadise]

The idea that the details of the story are irrelevant and those details are a nonevent -- to each their own but I think far from so.

 

At least for me the details brings life into the whole thing versus it being some vague nonspecific occurance. 

 

If Dan also thought the details are a nonstory, "meh", he wouldn't have tried to stop that story from coming out -- though granted his team denies that.  But Dan's current team's default position seems to be to deny everything. 

 

Do I think this does him in?  Nope.  But I do think what might do Dan in ultimately could be a constant stream of garbage that continues to prop up and embarass the NFL.   Is Dan guilty of all of this?  You got me I got no idea.  I'd bet some yes, some no and some bad stories exist that haven't been shared yet. 

 

But its well established that the dude is a total douche.  So any story that centers on him being a douche has some level of believability. 

 

As to this story specifically, I am most interested in the idea if they did offer to pay her more to not talk to the NFL.  If so, that flows with other stories relating to other women as to the team culture investigation including PIs showing up on their doorstep where they found the exchange intimidating.  Dan wants to lead the investigation himself (lol) multiple times until the NFL interferred.  

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/dan-snyder-sexual-assault-allegation/

D.C. attorney Beth Wilkinson, who led the NFL’s investigation of Washington’s workplace, interviewed Snyder’s 2009 accuser in 2020, The Post previously reported. But she did so amid what she later described as efforts by Snyder’s lawyers to “silence” the woman, including by offering her more money to not speak with the NFL investigator. 

Edited June 22, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[ntotoro]

We've known for literally decades that Dan is a piece of ****. These stories aren't new. None of this stuff is news to anyone who has followed this team. It has all been reported as it has happened and, even now, years later. That doesn't even go into him suing the City Paper, suing season ticket holders and other petty nonsense. 

 

Anyone expected the NFL to oust him is getting his or her hopes up. We've seen this story play out way too many times. Congress can't interfere with a business and force out an owner, then NFL won't do it in this case.