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

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Dan Snyder seems to think he won’t be held accountable. Congress should prove him wrong.

@Skinsinparadise I'm not suggesting you are saying any of this, just reacting to the article.  

 

So here are the problems with this editorial:

 

1. What can Congress do to Dan to prove him wrong that he won't be held accountable?

2. Roger said over and over and over that there were consequences to the Beth Wilkinson investigation.  In the NFL's mind and in Dan's, that has been handled and he has been held accountable. You can argue the consequences were not adequate. I'll hear you out on that, but that's an NFL problem, not a Commander's problem.  

3. There is a MJW investigation ongoing.  When it is complete, the NFL will do whatever it is they are going to do.

 

The main point I just can't get over is what people expect Congress to do?  I get that everybody wants to see Congress bring him in for a sound scolding.  Ok, fine, but then what?  

 

They just don't have any authority to do anything more than they have already done. They subpoena him for a deposition.  To what end?  If he goes and gives a deposition, then what? Congress has already made it's legislative recommendations and submitted bills for consideration.  They can't vote him out, and they can't force the owners to vote him out.  So, again, then what?

 

This is an example of the sort of stuff that I'm just so tired of reading from the Post, or hearing about from the talking heads.  There is literally nothing new in it at all.  (Granted, this is an editorial, they aren't reporting news). It just regurgitates the facts we already knew, and says they want Dan held accountable.  Everybody gets it. 

 

It's exhausting. I wish there could just be a truce of non-new news stories at least until the MJW investigation comes out.  When that happens, we can react to whatever is new in that.

 

Kevin Sheehan couldn't even help himself getting into how awful Dan was for a 10 minute rant the day Terry was re-signed.  

 

Everything doesn't have to always be about Dan.  At least not to me.  I know others feel differently.  But everything doesn't have to be about Dan all the time.  

[ntotoro]

We all want Dan gone. Every single one of us. Any one who doesn’t… I defy you to defend him snd justify why he should stay. Be prepared for the clowning of your life.

 

He and Roger both know all they have to do is play chicken and not flinch. Congress can’t force an owner of a private business to sell his team or put him in jail. They are essentially powerless to do anything but create soundbytes and have have stories in the media tell us stuff we all know: that Dan’s a piece of ****.

 

Ultimately, they’re powerless to do anything about him, though. That has to come from the league and he has so much dirty laundry among the owners that they won’t dare. They know hundreds of gallons of Tetley will be spilled. Imagine the stuff we don’t know about Kraft, Irsay and others. That’s what they don’t want getting out.

[Voice_of_Reason]

29 minutes ago, ntotoro said:

Ultimately, they’re powerless to do anything about him, though. That has to come from the league and he has so much dirty laundry among the owners that they won’t dare. They know hundreds of gallons of Tetley will be spilled. Imagine the stuff we don’t know about Kraft, Irsay and others. That’s what they don’t want getting out.

I think this part is over-blown.  I doubt Dan knows a lot of individual dirt on other owners.  Maybe some, if something came up in league meetings, but why would it.

 

I think what they fear is countless law suits, which would include discovery, where Dan's lawyers could subpoena testimony and documents on just about anything, and get it.  And THAT is going to be a headache.  

 

I've said all along, they need to go to him with a deal:  "We'll help you get out with maximum value, you get to ride off into the sunset with $6billion dollars. Help us Help you."  And then they get Bezos to come in, pay cash for the team out of his petty cash account, and also fund a new stadium wherever the hell he wants it.  

 

That's the only way he leaves.  Voting him out is never going to happen.  Convincing him might.  

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

One has to wonder if any of these shenanigans by Goodell would be occurring if Paul Tagliabue were still the NFL commissioner. Neither he nor his predecessor Pete Rozelle shied away from confrontations with owners if it was in the best interests of the LEAGUE...note that I said LEAGUE and not the OWNERS.

 

Goodell is clearly a stoolie for the OWNERS, however. The NFL owners were tired of honest and forthright people such as Tags and Rozelle and wanted someone to do their bidding. They got what they wanted but they may well drive off the cliff with Goodell in the driver's seat.

 

Can anyone imagine all these legal problems facing the NFL is Tags or Rozelle were still in charge? The NFL gets more print on its legal troubles than anything on the field at this point, far more than the other three major sports combined. Maybe they should start an NFL Network - The People's Court channel and bring back Judge Wapner!

Edited July 1, 2022 by BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@Skinsinparadise I'm not suggesting you are saying any of this, just reacting to the article.  

 

So here are the problems with this editorial:

 

1. What can Congress do to Dan to prove him wrong that he won't be held accountable?

2. Roger said over and over and over that there were consequences to the Beth Wilkinson investigation.  In the NFL's mind and in Dan's, that has been handled and he has been held accountable. You can argue the consequences were not adequate. I'll hear you out on that, but that's an NFL problem, not a Commander's problem.  

3. There is a MJW investigation ongoing.  When it is complete, the NFL will do whatever it is they are going to do.

 

The main point I just can't get over is what people expect Congress to do?  I get that everybody wants to see Congress bring him in for a sound scolding.  Ok, fine, but then what?  

 

They just don't have any authority to do anything more than they have already done. They subpoena him for a deposition.  To what end?  If he goes and gives a deposition, then what? Congress has already made it's legislative recommendations and submitted bills for consideration.  They can't vote him out, and they can't force the owners to vote him out.  So, again, then what?

 

This is an example of the sort of stuff that I'm just so tired of reading from the Post, or hearing about from the talking heads.  There is literally nothing new in it at all.  (Granted, this is an editorial, they aren't reporting news). It just regurgitates the facts we already knew, and says they want Dan held accountable.  Everybody gets it. 

 

It's exhausting. I wish there could just be a truce of non-new news stories at least until the MJW investigation comes out.  When that happens, we can react to whatever is new in that.

 

Kevin Sheehan couldn't even help himself getting into how awful Dan was for a 10 minute rant the day Terry was re-signed.  

 

Everything doesn't have to always be about Dan.  At least not to me.  I know others feel differently.  But everything doesn't have to be about Dan all the time.  

 

 

Congress and or the state legislature can still bring attention to issues that they don't have teeth on.  They do it on other fronts too as much as some in that committee say otherwise.  I know because i've worked on resolutions among other things that don't do anything outside of bring attention to an issue.  And sometimes the attention isn't meaningless and sometimes it is.  As far as actual teeth, the angle is (whether its genuine or not) is to pass new laws based on testimony or bring to light issues to help the bodies with actual teeth do something about it.

 

Press is the same way obviously.  The press can't prosecute someone. But politicians fear them for multiple reasons because they can help set up the prosecution.  Long story short, I had an associate who was a friend at the time but no longer today who crossed some lines in a campaign.  Investigators poked around initially but did nothing about it.  A local newspaper poked around a lot into the case over the span of a couple of years and then did multiple reports on it -- the investigator now had plenty of material to chase down that person and had more impetus to do so and it ultimately led to his prosecution.  I was privvy to some of that because they questioned me as a witness.  And i talked to the reporter involved in writing the stories on it and it wasn't hard to see that there was a ton of cooperation behind the scenes as for trading information with the press and the investigators. 

 

Granted this isn't apples to apples to that.  But what Congress can do, just like the press, is continue to showcase documents and put Dan on the spot where it leads to some breaking point hopefully for the DOJ or whomever if they have any angle or the NFL if there is such a thing as a boiling point with them.

 

At a minimum, Congress is amping up to the rest of the owners that Dan's embarassing ways won't easily be swept under the rug or go away.  That itself IMO has value.  So count me as someone who doesn't want to see this go away.  But granted i am an optimist, I do think the dam can break over time.  

Edited July 1, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Conn]

1 hour ago, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

One has to wonder if any of these shenanigans by Goodell would be occurring if Paul Tagliabue were still the NFL commissioner. Neither he nor his predecessor Pete Rozelle shied away from confrontations with owners if it was in the best interests of the LEAGUE...note that I said LEAGUE and not the OWNERS.

 

Goodell is clearly a stoolie for the OWNERS, however. The NFL owners were tired of honest and forthright people such as Tags and Rozelle and wanted someone to do their bidding. They got what they wanted but they may well drive off the cliff with Goodell in the driver's seat.

 

Can anyone imagine all these legal problems facing the NFL is Tags or Rozelle were still in charge? The NFL gets more print on its legal troubles than anything on the field at this point, far more than the other three major sports combined. Maybe they should start an NFL Network - The People's Court channel and bring back Judge Wapner!

This is revisionist in the extreme. The Commissioner has always worked directly for the owners and most importantly, their financial interests. Under Goodell’s watch the league’s financial position has expanded drastically—regardless of how much that directly has to do with him, it doesn’t matter, the owners are THRILLED. They don’t care about all the other stuff and the only long-term danger to the league is, truly, CTE and less kids playing football. And that’s a very long term problem. Everything else is green arrows, pointing up up up. There’s nothing special about what previous, highly-regarded commissioners did for the league—in fact most of the players from those days who drove the league to what it is today are tragically poor and dying in relative anonymity. The league those guys ran built a strong foundation for the success we have now, but I can almost guarantee that most of the owners (and players) far prefer the enormous money they’ve come into under Goodell. Football is the most popular sport in America and IT IS NOT CLOSE. Not remotely close. As far as the owners are concerned, Goodell is destroying at his job. There’s reports that in their next contract negotiation with him, they want him to start training his hand-picked successor so the money train keeps rolling without a hitch, when the time comes.

 

Most of the drama and legal issues you’re talking about are just a result of 24/7 media entertainment and a fully connected internet that bridges all the gaps between news, players, fans, and everyone else to create a never-ending deluge of chatter about the sport, good and bad. Has really nothing to do with the direction Goodell has taken the league or anything like that. The more the media talks about their league the better for the owners, even if some of it is bad.
 

This is THE only sport that lives in the American consciousness year-round despite a pitifully short season compared to other sports. The league is doing better than ever, is more popular than ever, is making more money than ever—the owners are not at all concerned that Goodell (who is as much a figurehead as any other past commissioner, fans are just more aware and plugged in now) might drive them off a cliff lol. 

Edited July 1, 2022 by Conn

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

At a minimum, Congress is amping up to the rest of the owners that Dan's embarassing ways won't easily be swept under the rug or go away.  That itself IMO has value.  So count me as someone who doesn't want to see this go away.  But granted i am an optimist, I do think the dam can break over time.  

I guess that's where I believe we differ.  I don't believe it has any value with the other owners.  

 

Now, in a roundabout way, does it have some value if they can keep Dan in the spotlight absolutely nobody goes to games, and that has enough of a financial impact they feel like they need a change?  Sure, maybe.

 

But we're a million miles from that happening.  Which is why I don't think we'll ever see the end of that road.  These are Billionaires. If Robert Kraft wants to just ignore and not think about the mess in Washington, he can very, very easily do that.  Might he be frustrated with Dan because Dan is a schmuck?  Sure.  Do I think Robert Kraft is spending minutes every day reflecting on Dan?  I don't.  

 

I guess that makes me a pessimist. Or at least a realist. I see no real avenue for Dan being removed or choosing to sell, even if the Post released an article a week, and Congress Subpoenaed him every week until 2050.  Unless there are criminal charges, or the other owners feel like they are losing material (very important word) money, they can just ignore Dan and his circus and count their money.  And with the TV money, the Commander's share of the revenue being down even 60% is kindof a drop in the bucket.

I'm sure there are a handful of moral owners who would love to see him out, whatever the cost. But the rest?  I just don't think any of this is moving the needle in any way.  And if it keeps up, it still won't move the needle.

 

The MJW report could move the needle.  That's about it.  Otherwise, the NFL, through Roger, has made it perfectly clear they believe Dan has been punished enough for the workplace misconduct scandal. They're not going to go back now and say, "oh, it was a terrible workplace, we know that, we already issued our punishment, but now that Congress is yelling at us, we're going to force him out."  That just will never, ever happen.  We don't know about the Financial Scandal, my guess is we'll find out about that soon.  It won't overlap with training camp.  

 

So, the Post can write editorials, Congress can go crazy, and none of it matters a damn.  

 

It's different when you are trying to influence public opinion.  In that scenario, sure, public pressure from the media or congress shines a light and can help shape public opinion. And if you're trying to sway voters, or shine a light on an issue for whatever reason, that's appropriate.  

 

In this case, public opinion doesn't matter a damn. It's already set.  Nobody needs convincing.  It's the opinion of 31 specific people who don't play by the same rules that everybody else does.  So, the normal rules just don't apply. They just can ignore all this.  

 

So yeah, I think we're stuck with the scumbag.  And being stuck with the scumbag, I don't really have any desire to continue to hear how much of a scumbag he is every single day.  

 

(Though I do find your posting his yacht tracking tweets funny. The "where in the world is carmen sandiego" aspect of that is pretty funny. )

[Skinsinparadise]

13 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

So, the Post can write editorials, Congress can go crazy, and none of it matters a damn.  

 

So yeah, I think we're stuck with the scumbag.  And being stuck with the scumbag, I don't really have any desire to continue to hear how much of a scumbag he is every single day.  

 

(Though I do find your posting his yacht tracking tweets funny. The "where in the world is carmen sandiego" aspect of that is pretty funny. )

 

The safe bet in life is almost always the status quo when it comes to something that seems too entrenched to be moved.  I don't know if that's driven by "realism" as you pointed out but just about playing the odds.  

 

Not that I cared about the name change but that seemed wild at one point to ever happen.  There was a lot of noise for years but nothing budged or so it seemed until bam one day it did.   Heck I even had people on the Bruce thread to say to suck it up, he's never going anywhere.  Some felt the same about Cerrato.  Granted Dan leaving or selling would be the bigger mountain to climb.

 

But things happen.  I've seen things happen in my line of work with public figures that I'd never thought would happen.  Things that would seem crazy previously.  So yeah I am optimstic if this run of crap keeps flying at Dan there is a decent chance at a breaking point.  At a minimum in my view, its the ONLY chance for it to happen so no way I am going to root for it to stop like you seem to be rooting for.   

Edited July 2, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[SkinsFTW]

18 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

At a minimum in my view, its the ONLY chance for it to happen so no way I am going to root for it to stop like you seem to be rooting for.   

 

I heard that Dan wrote this song back in the day:

 

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

20 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@Skinsinparadise I'm not suggesting you are saying any of this, just reacting to the article.  

 

So here are the problems with this editorial:

 

1. What can Congress do to Dan to prove him wrong that he won't be held accountable?

2. Roger said over and over and over that there were consequences to the Beth Wilkinson investigation.  In the NFL's mind and in Dan's, that has been handled and he has been held accountable. You can argue the consequences were not adequate. I'll hear you out on that, but that's an NFL problem, not a Commander's problem.  

3. There is a MJW investigation ongoing.  When it is complete, the NFL will do whatever it is they are going to do.

 

The main point I just can't get over is what people expect Congress to do?  I get that everybody wants to see Congress bring him in for a sound scolding.  Ok, fine, but then what?  

 

They just don't have any authority to do anything more than they have already done. They subpoena him for a deposition.  To what end?  If he goes and gives a deposition, then what? Congress has already made it's legislative recommendations and submitted bills for consideration.  They can't vote him out, and they can't force the owners to vote him out.  So, again, then what?

 

This is an example of the sort of stuff that I'm just so tired of reading from the Post, or hearing about from the talking heads.  There is literally nothing new in it at all.  (Granted, this is an editorial, they aren't reporting news). It just regurgitates the facts we already knew, and says they want Dan held accountable.  Everybody gets it. 

 

It's exhausting. I wish there could just be a truce of non-new news stories at least until the MJW investigation comes out.  When that happens, we can react to whatever is new in that.

 

Kevin Sheehan couldn't even help himself getting into how awful Dan was for a 10 minute rant the day Terry was re-signed.  

 

Everything doesn't have to always be about Dan.  At least not to me.  I know others feel differently.  But everything doesn't have to be about Dan all the time.  

 

Again Congress can not DO anything. But what they can do is create more smoke and keep the story alive.  We have already heard one owner say "it's not one thing, it's all the smoke and everyone is getting tired of it".  Well this is more smoke, Dan ignoring the subpoena can't be a good look for him, so these hearings are in fact very important.

 

As others have pointed out change of things that we never thought would change do in fact happen, if there is enough pressure. And it's not as if there is not precedent for an owner to be removed, we saw that with Jerry Richardson.  Now he bowed to the pressure and volunteered to sell, Snyder will not. But it still happened and can happen again.  

 

Why you want Snyder out but want this story to go away is perplexing.  

Edited July 2, 2022 by Darrell Green Fan

[ClaytoAli]

15 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

I heard that Dan wrote this song back in the day:

 

 

Don’t disgrace Joe Tex that way.

[Skinsinparadise]

14 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

  

 

(Though I do find your posting his yacht tracking tweets funny. The "where in the world is carmen sandiego" aspect of that is pretty funny. )

 

Love the graphic too from that tweeter

 

 

[Andre The Giant]

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

5 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:

 

 

Would it be possible for you to post the article text for those of us too cheap to buy a Post subscription? 

 

I'm glad to read this, what annoyed me of the questions I did hear was the committee not pushing back, with examples, when Goodell said he has removed himself from day to day operations when that is simply not true.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

Daniel Snyder was not ‘hands off’ as an NFL owner, witnesses told committee

By Nicki Jhabvala

, 

Liz Clarke

 and 

Mark Maske

 

July 2, 2022 at 6:33 a.m. EDT

 

When reports surfaced nearly two years ago that the Washington NFL team’s workplace was rife with sexual harassment, owner Daniel Snyder initially attacked the claims as “a hit job” and part of an orchestrated campaign to defame him. Later, amid scrutiny from the NFL, Snyder shouldered partial responsibility, saying that he had been “too hands off” in his stewardship of the team.

 

He ousted executives accused of wrongdoing, hired Jason Wright as the first Black team president in NFL history and installed a new management hierarchy that was markedly more diverse than his previous leadership regimes as part of what the team — and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell in recent testimony before Congress — called an organizational transformation.

Documents released June 22 by the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, however, tell a different story. According to sworn depositions of two former team executives whose tenures covered a 17-year span, and additional testimony from another, Snyder didn’t simply preside over an organization in which toxic behavior was rampant; rather, he was an active participant, modeling abusive behavior that his top deputies often mimicked, creating a workplace that was corrosive to male executives, some of whom later regretted their actions, as well as young women.

 

“Mr. Snyder himself fostered the Commanders’ toxic workplace,” Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.), the committee’s chairwoman, said at the outset of a June 22 hearing, summarizing the committee’s findings.

The evidence for Maloney’s assertion was laid out in 750 pages of sworn depositions and transcribed interviews with three former team executives and a former cheerleaders captain, which the committee released in conjunction with its public hearing to question Snyder and Goodell about its preliminary findings. The documents include accounts of being ridiculed and demeaned by Snyder, watching other executives do the same to lower-level employees, witnessing the harassment of female employees who “were treated like a piece of meat,” as one said, and being asked to lie and engage in unethical behavior as part of their jobs.

Snyder declined to take part in the hearing; Goodell participated remotely.

 

During his deposition June 7, which lasted more than six hours, Dave Pauken, the team’s chief operating officer from 2001 to 2006, likened the workplaces dynamic to “an abusive relationship” and placed Snyder at the heart of it.

“The culture was how Dan wanted the culture at the time,” said Pauken, who testified under oath after being subpoenaed by the panel. “ … I think that in the end, it all stems from the owner, Dan Snyder.”

Asked about Snyder’s assertion that he had simply been too “hands off,” Pauken described him rather as an owner steeped in every detail of the organization.

“My reaction was that that is not a true statement,” Pauken said. Asked to elaborate, he said: “I have no experience with him, nor do any of my colleagues, where he was hands off.”

 

Pauken worked as an executive for nearly a decade at two of Snyder’s companies, Snyder Communications (1996-2000) and the NFL team (2001-06). Asked to describe Snyder as a businessman based on that experience, Pauken praised his acumen while taking issue with his style.

“He is a visionary. He is very smart. He understands how to create value. And there’s a lot to be learned from him,” Pauken said. “On the other hand, I find him to be overly aggressive, abusive, and demeaning to those that are around him.”

On more than one occasion, Pauken said, Snyder summoned him to owner’s box overlooking FedEx Field before kickoff, where the owner and a friend would watch the cheerleaders’ pregame practice.

 

“He would say to his friend, hey, do you think Dave is gay?” Pauken testified. “And his friend would say, ‘Yeah, he must be gay.’ And Dan would say, ‘Yeah, he has to be gay, as ugly as these cheerleaders are. Pauken, are you gay? You must be gay. How could you have a cheerleading squad that looked like this?’”

Pauken recounted an instance when Snyder called him and a fellow executive into his office to inform them he had hired Mitch Gershman to take over their role overseeing premium-seat sales, stating that Gershman “had more sales and marketing knowledge in his left testicle than” the two of them had in their entire bodies.

“Those are Dan’s words,” Pauken testified. “Verbatim.”

Subpoena for Daniel Snyder, scrutiny for Roger Goodell at partisan hearing

Pauken said that when he took moral stands during front-office meetings — such as advocating for less risque outfits and choreography for the team’s cheerleaders — Snyder often mocked him in front of his peers.

 

“He would call me Mr. Goody Two Shoes,” Pauken testified. “Or he would say to another executive, or friend or somebody that I don’t like girls. I’m Mr. Goody Two Shoes. … That was just part of what it was like being in an abusive relationship.”

Pauken said he regretted many things he did at Snyder’s behest during his employment, such as not challenging the owner’s insistence on firing female employees for consensual, in-office sexual relationships but not sanctioning the male executives or players involved.

Chief among his regrets, he said, was complying with a directive from Snyder aimed at Mark Lerner, a real estate magnate who later became owner of the Washington Nationals. Snyder had purchased from Lerner a parcel of land near FedEx Field for additional parking and, according to Pauken’s testimony, subsequently decided he had paid too much. So, Pauken told the committee, Snyder instructed him to pour milk on the carpet under the seating in Mark Lerner’s suite at FedEx Field so it would smell rancid throughout the next game.

 

Jason Friedman, a marketing executive whose 24-year career with the team spanned the Cooke family ownership and that of Snyder, told the committee that when Snyder took over, “the focus changed from one of quality to one of quantity” and “the culture of the company sort of glorified drinking and womanizing.”

Friedman spoke to the committee voluntarily after first sending the panel a letter to buttress the allegation that former cheerleader and marketing executive Tiffani Johnston leveled against Snyder during a Feb. 3 public roundtable with committee members on Capitol Hill. Johnston told the committee she was seated beside Snyder during a business dinner and had to remove his hand from her thigh under the table. Afterward, she said, Snyder put his hand on her back and tried to steer her into his waiting limousine. Snyder publicly denounced Johnston’s allegations at the time as “outright lies.”

Friedman said team employees were afraid of getting fired “because they had seen so many others lose their jobs.”

According to Friedman, in one of his first days as owner, Snyder sent out a memo to the organization about a meeting at the stadium late in the day. Employee firings started that morning, and by the start of the meeting later in the day, 75 percent of the staff had been let go, Friedman testified. The ones that made the cut, made it to the meeting.

“So there was sort of a message sent to the rest of us that, you know, you’re deemed to be worthy of working for the new owner, march on,” Friedman said.

 

Like Pauken, Brian Lafemina, a former chief operating officer and president of business operations, was subpoenaed by the committee, and thus legally required to testify under oath.

During questioning on April 8, Lafemina related an anecdote that undercut Snyder’s claim that he had been unaware of workplace misconduct and took swift action once informed. Lafemina testified that, in a 2018 conversation, he informed Snyder about a female employee’s credible complaint about misconduct by play-by-play announcer Larry Michael.

Snyder “said that Larry was a sweetheart, and that Larry wouldn’t hurt anybody,” Lafemina testified. “ … it was obvious that he was fond of Larry and that he thought that Larry was well intentioned and that he didn’t want anything bad to happen to Larry.”

In July 2020, roughly two years after that conversation, Michael abruptly retired on the eve of a Washington Post report that included the former marketing executive’s account of his repeated unwelcome overtures. Michael declined to comment Friday.

Abigail Dymond Welch, an eight-year veteran and former captain of the team’s cheerleading squad, told the committee of events that took place in the months after the workplace allegations surfaced publicly and the team had undertaken its front-office overhaul. Welch said a private investigator who said he “worked on behalf of the Washington Redskins” appeared at her Texas home in April and May 2021 to ask about “interactions” with Bruce Allen and the sexual misconduct investigation into the team.

Those visits occurred seven months after Debra Katz, an attorney for a former team employee, said in a court hearing that the NFL had told Snyder to “back off” in his use of private investigators.

Welch told the committee that she knew of “maybe five” other former cheerleaders who had also been visited at home by private investigators seeking similar information.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/07/02/dan-snyder-house-oversight-transcripts/

[Andre The Giant]

 

[CobraCommander]

3 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:

 

Dan Snyder thinks it's the medias job to put the **** (him) on a pedestal. Journalists are supposed to report on what is happening. If what's happening is you are a huge douchebag of an owner, then no, they are not going out of their way. Maybe if they didn't report on sports or area businesses, maybe if it was a newspaper from Washington state instead of a local rag I could see his gripe. BUT he is a public figure, owning a sports franchise in the Washington area. If you don't want people assailing your character maybe you need to work on yourself. ****ing **** Nozzle. 

[SkinsGuy]

14 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:

 

 

 

Why should the Post bother?

 

Snyder does enough on his own to assail his character.

[Skinsinparadise]

The other thing about Dan that I'll keep sticking with is that he's never about explaining himself.  These days he's petrified of even doing fluff interviews.  Why?  Deathly fear of public speaking?  Afraid of even soft questions about his "alleged" trangressions or losing tenure?  If he is afraid to talk then don't own an organization that is so public.  He has to be the most in the shadows owner of a sports team of all time. 

 

Yet, his go to tactic is to simply attack the accusers.  It's like having a kid who is always in trouble.  He never defends himself but blames every person who accuses him for having ill-motives.  Then wonders why people aren't swayed. 

 

So for Dan over his tenure -- his coaches were the bad guys, or Vinny or Bruce or the WP writers or all the other media or any employee who accuses him of something -- the whole world is out to get the poor dude, all with bad motives except for the paragon of virtue Dan Snyder.  He has one heck of a warped view of the world.   But even if I played in that wacky world -- if Dan is so great and all his employees are so bad than Dan has to be at a minimum the worst manager on the planet.

 

One of Dan's biggest defenders for years who hasn't been on here forever loved to make the case that it wasn't Dan but just some bad hires.  Not that i buy that theory.  But even if I did and its that Dan is just hiring the worst of the worst in sports again and again -- doesn't even that say a lot about the dude?  

Edited July 2, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[88Comrade2000]

If you all think Dan is going anywhere ; you’re dreaming. He isn’t going anywhere and I expect him to be more involved. Frankly, I expect to see a return to the early Dan; once the Rivera era ends.

 

The nfl may decide to remove him but he will fight them tooth and nail.

[Csup]

It's just too much.  20 years of this BS with little chance the league will do anything.  When The midget turned over control to Mrs Midget he was mocking the NFL.  
 

i hope this team goes 0-17.  I can no longer distinguish the on field product from the owner.    

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, Andre The Giant said:

 

So much for the theory that Dan does not care about the criticism.  

53 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

If you all think Dan is going anywhere ; you’re dreaming. He isn’t going anywhere and I expect him to be more involved. Frankly, I expect to see a return to the early Dan; once the Rivera era ends.

 

The nfl may decide to remove him but he will fight them tooth and nail.

 

You post this as if Daniel Snyder will win a battle against the NFL should they decide to remove him,

 

He won't,  

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Wildbunny]

1 hour ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

If you all think Dan is going anywhere ; you’re dreaming. He isn’t going anywhere and I expect him to be more involved. Frankly, I expect to see a return to the early Dan; once the Rivera era ends.

 

The nfl may decide to remove him but he will fight them tooth and nail.

Maybe.

 

But Dan being aggressive means he's getting close to his breaking point. Which is good.

 

I'm quite sure he's not the only one right now. And as much as Congress or Post can do anything official against him, all they can do is annoying him and others with that noise so they reach their breaking point and they do something about it to make it stop.

 

Dan can do whatever he wants, the Post will ends up getting Dan's head as he's not gonna turn into a saint anytime soon, so they can go on with the noise as long as they want. They'll always find something to put on the public place and annoy Dan and the NFL.

[spjunkies]

dan has some strange fetish of using dairy products in his vindictive attacks. 

Edited July 2, 2022 by spjunkies