Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

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

JSSkinz

By JSSkinz
in The Stadium

 Share
TK
Message added by TK,

Pay Attention Knuckleheads

 

 

Has your team support wained due to ownership or can you see past it?  

229 members have voted

  1. 1. Will you attend a game and support the team while Dan Snyder is the owner of the team, regardless of success?

    • Yes
      47
    • No
      106
    • I would start attending games if Dan was no longer the owner of the team.
      77

Recommended Posts

Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

@Skinsinparadise

 

If you honestly believe BMitch doesn't think Snyder is the core issue here, I can see why your view of his is so flawed.

 

  I've talked to him in person, so I have a very different take based on what he felt he could say in his capacity doing the post-game show at the stadium, so my advice would be go to a game and run downstairs right before it's over and post-game show starts and ask him that yourself.

 

The set is right at one of the end zones at the top of the stairs of the 100s (I forget which endzone, but he takes pictures and answers questions just like Santana, Julie's pretty busy even right before show starts)

 

I know, I've been to the set, my kids wanted to be on camera before so did it, think the last time was the SF game years back but not recently.  If you know Brian personally and he told you Snyder is the core issue here, cool I'll take your word for it.  On the air, he's not really harsh on Dan from my listens and I listen to him almost every day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
86 Snyder

86 Snyder

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

Where can one get an ES pin?   Is there ES merchandise?    ES mug with the state of Washington on it?  


They are automatically distributed by the staff after you post ONE true thing.  Probably why you don’t have one yet…

  • Haha 7
  • Thumb up 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
method man

method man

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

No doubt it hasn’t been good for Tepper, but they already appear to be trying an actual rebuild.  Something Snyder hasn’t allowed in 23 years.  

 

Tepper is a much more successful version of Snyder but shares a lot of the same douchey features 

  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted (edited)

The committee also could issue a final report on its investigation in the coming weeks.

But the owners could have an impromptu discussion about Snyder during their privileged session at the end of Tuesday’s meeting, when other team executives are not present. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is likely to be questioned about the situation during the news conference that he typically holds at the conclusion of any league meeting.

Tanya Snyder, Daniel’s wife and the franchise’s co-CEO, and team president Jason Wright are expected to represent the Commanders at the meeting.

 

Multiple NFL owners told The Post last month that they believe serious consideration may be given to attempting to oust Snyder from the league’s ownership ranks, either by convincing him to sell the franchise or by voting to remove him. “He needs to sell,” one of those owners said. “Some of us need to go to him and tell him that he needs to sell.”

If Snyder could not be persuaded to do so willingly, NFL rules would require a vote of at least 24 of the 32 owners to force him to sell.

“I think there will be a movement,” the same owner said last month. “We need to get 24 votes.”

 

Any move toward taking such a vote could be months off. In the meantime, it is unclear what Snyder’s ownership status is. His attorneys said last week that Snyder is “no longer under any NFL restriction” related to his involvement in the day-to-day operations of the franchise.

 

But Goodell and the league consistently have said Snyder’s status has not changed since the July 2021 announcement that the team was being fined $10 million, based on the findings of the previous investigation of its workplace conducted by attorney Beth Wilkinson, and that Tanya Snyder would oversee the franchise’s daily operations for an unspecified period. NFL officials have said Goodell will discuss Snyder’s status with him once White’s investigation is complete.

The owners could reach a resolution Tuesday on their dispute over how much each team must pay toward the NFL’s $790 million settlement reached last year with St. Louis stemming from the Rams’ relocation to Los Angeles in 2016.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/10/17/dan-snyder-dc-attorney-general-investigation/

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BatteredFanSyndrome

BatteredFanSyndrome

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, method man said:

 

Tepper is a much more successful version of Snyder but shares a lot of the same douchey features 

I’ve read a little bit about his time thus far in Charlotte and he’s not making any friends.  One of the top requirements for being a successful hedge fund manager is being a POS, so I can see why.

Edited by BatteredFanSyndrome
  • Thumb up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted

Here’s an interesting wrinkle in the idea that Snyder would fight the forced sale forever in court. 
 

He can’t get his money until the issue is resolved

 

and he won’t be able to use the team as collateral in the meantime 


in fact I wonder how much of the team he actual has in the clear. 
 

(I have no idea how such legal battles work so maybe I’m way wrong but I’d think at best he wouldn’t be able to take out new debt with the team as collateral)

 

((it would be awesome if this ends with him gone and we find out his finances were so awful he goes broke shortly after))

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conn

Conn

Posted
Posted

I don’t see how it can be taken to court in the first place. If it’s in the bylaws of the trade association his franchise is apart of that Goodell can force a sale with 24 (75%) owner votes, that’s it. There doesn’t need to be any sort of reason, it’s like at-will employment essentially. So what is there to fight in court? His asset (the team) was always owned conditionally under a larger umbrella. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Thumb up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Conn said:

I don’t see how it can be taken to court in the first place. If it’s in the bylaws of the trade association his franchise is apart of that Goodell can force a sale with 24 (75%) owner votes, that’s it. There doesn’t need to be any sort of reason, it’s like at-will employment essentially. So what is there to fight in court? His asset (the team) was always owned conditionally under a larger umbrella. 

Anything can be taken to court if you can at least put the right words together. 
 

What happens once you’re there, is different. 
 

But in general I am curious what his argument would be against conduct detrimental to the league. I’m more on your side

 

but I’ve read/heard comments about gun making it a long legal battle. Idk what that looks like though

Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...