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

[Peregrine]

7 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Neil from Rockville is not the only attorney I've heard say the league won't vote him out due to his legal threats. I heard, or read, another lawyer who specializes in this, I believe he did work for the league, say the same thing.  Seems people with legal knowledge have one opinion, sports writers and message board posters have a different view.

 

I think that article about the MJW Report is accurate. And I firmly blame Goodell, who obviously did everything he could do to let Dan off the hook with regard to the Wilkerson Report, will have that report read exactly as he wishes.  Now has his opinion changed?.  Being forced to testify before Congress as Snyder hides out on his yacht in the Europe could do that I would think. But I've leaned long ago not to trust Roger Goodell to do the right thing. 

Jim Irsay disagrees.  As apparently do the other owners who are worried the MJW report will exonerate him.  And the NFL that put it on NFL.com.  And Amazon that paid for the Thursday night game.  And...and...and.  Also, I havent heard another lawyer say that.  

 

If the league has a legal way to remove him, what legal threat does he have outside of blackmail, that ends up with himself in jail and poor?

[Spaceman Spiff]

17 hours ago, SoCalSkins said:

I agree with most of that but he has not driven the value into the ground. The fact that he is so hated increases the value of the franchise because of all the positive good will the new owner will instantly get. This is like the Clippers with Ballmer buying out Sterling. It actually carries a premium. When Snyder is forced to sell it will be the biggest transaction ever for a sports team in history. It won’t be under 7 billion. 

 

This team isn't as valuable as it could be, but I see where you're coming from.  

 

But the price of sports teams go up over time.  Snyder selling will be the record for a sports team sale because it'll be the latest one to sell.  Whichever NFL (NFL teams are valued higher) sells next will then set the record.

[Darrell Green Fan]

8 hours ago, Peregrine said:

Jim Irsay disagrees.  As apparently do the other owners who are worried the MJW report will exonerate him.  And the NFL that put it on NFL.com.  And Amazon that paid for the Thursday night game.  And...and...and.  Also, I havent heard another lawyer say that.  

 

If the league has a legal way to remove him, what legal threat does he have outside of blackmail, that ends up with himself in jail and poor?

 

 

Jim Irsay said he hopes the league won't be covering for Snyder as they did in the past.  I think this is significant.  Your examples do show a change but the hurdle is still there.  And I have definitely heard other lawyers say the same thing Neil is saying.

 

@Connwas correct, Goodell answers to the owners. But he does have input and can voice his opinion.  Didn't I read that it all starts with the Commissioner bringing a vote to the table?

 

 

Edited October 27, 2022 by Darrell Green Fan

[TD_washingtonredskins]

8 hours ago, Peregrine said:

Jim Irsay disagrees.  As apparently do the other owners who are worried the MJW report will exonerate him.  And the NFL that put it on NFL.com.  And Amazon that paid for the Thursday night game.  And...and...and.  Also, I havent heard another lawyer say that.  

 

If the league has a legal way to remove him, what legal threat does he have outside of blackmail, that ends up with himself in jail and poor?

 

Yeah, this is where I get myself spun around a bit. I don't truly understand how all of this works of course, but does it really matter what a few (presumably extremely smart) lawyers are speculating about a non-courtroom situation? Isn't this somewhere between a fraternity kicking a member out and board voting to remove a CEO? Sure, there needs to be cause, but how airtight and "beyond reasonable doubt" does it require? This isn't a court of law that needs to stand up to the US Constitution.

 

These 32 people make their own rules. And, really, all they are fighting against is doing something so egregious that he could sue them or setting a precedent that they themselves don't want to be burnt by later on down the road. That doesn't seem like TOO high a bar to clear if they truly want to figure out how to do it. 

Edited October 27, 2022 by TD_washingtonredskins

[Wildbunny]

44 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Isn't this somewhere between a fraternity kicking a member out and board voting to remove a CEO? Sure, there needs to be cause, but how airtight and "beyond reasonable doubt" does it require?

According to Dan this is some Mafia gang

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

15 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

According to Dan this is some Mafia gang

 

Which is precisely why the other owners shouldn't take too kindly to his blackmail threats. If this were the real Mafia, Snyder would already have been fitted for cement shoes.

[Fan since a Fetus]

Couldn’t they just vote him out for running a very valuable team into the ground and refusing to fix issues within his current stadium? It’s all business and no one wants the person in back bringing earnings down. I just don’t know why they would need anything outside of that. If 24 say your time is up, then it’s up. That’s the cost of doing business. Sell the team, make major bank, then go home and molest your wife, with her permission of course and sail into the deep blue sea.
 

he cannot fight charges that he has driven this proud franchise into the ground. That’s cause enough in my opinion. The NFL needs to put on their big boy pants and get it done.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Fan since a Fetus

[Darrell Green Fan]

26 minutes ago, Fan since a Fetus said:

Couldn’t they just vote him out for running a very valuable team into the ground and refusing to fix issues within his current stadium? It’s all business and no one wants the person in back bringing earnings down. I just don’t know why they would need anything outside of that. If 24 say your time is up, then it’s up. That’s the cost of doing business. Sell the team, make major bank, then go home and molest your wife, with her permission of course and sail into the deep blue sea.
 

he cannot fight charges that he has driven this proud franchise into the ground. That’s cause enough in my opinion. The NFL needs to put on their big boy pants and get it done.

 

The owners won't vote out an owner for having a poorly run franchise. They have enabled Detroit, Cleveland, etc to operate poorly for generations, I doubt the fact that  Washington was once a better franchise changes this.  Every league will always have poorly run teams.  

 

To be clear I never said these lawyers were claiming Snyder would have a case, just that they want to avoid litigation altogether as anyone would.  

[The Sisko]

1 hour ago, Wildbunny said:

According to Dan this is some Mafia gang

Then they should make him an offer he can’t refuse. 

[Wildbunny]

1 hour ago, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

 

Which is precisely why the other owners shouldn't take too kindly to his blackmail threats. If this were the real Mafia, Snyder would already have been fitted for cement shoes.

But wouldn't those blackmails threats allow them to pursue him legally. Like all of them individually. Then get him out with even more ease?

[Fan since a Fetus]

34 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

The owners won't vote out an owner for having a poorly run franchise. They have enabled Detroit, Cleveland, etc to operate poorly for generations, I doubt the fact that  Washington was once a better franchise changes this.  Every league will always have poorly run teams.  

 

To be clear I never said these lawyers were claiming Snyder would have a case, just that they want to avoid litigation altogether as anyone would.  

My point was really about they could if they wanted. There is cause for that reason alone. Also, Detroit and Cleveland did and does not have the status that Washington did. When you have a major market team that should be printing money easily and that owner falls way way behind, I would think they would make a business decision. The owners may not want to vote him out, but it seems like a sound business decision to me.  All this other stuff is just icing on the cake.

[London Kev]

They can't just vote Snyder out because he makes bad business decisions, but: 

 

Under Section 8.13 of the NFL’s constitution and bylaws, the commissioner can determine if an owner or any other official “has been or is guilty of conduct detrimental to the welfare of the League or professional football.” Based on that determination, the commissioner can issue fines or, in extreme cases, push for a vote on whether to force the owner to sell.

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/sports/can-nfl-force-washington-owner-dan-snyder-sell-team

[Est.1974]

10 minutes ago, London Kev said:

They can't just vote Snyder out because he makes bad business decisions, but: 

 

Under Section 8.13 of the NFL’s constitution and bylaws, the commissioner can determine if an owner or any other official “has been or is guilty of conduct detrimental to the welfare of the League or professional football.” Based on that determination, the commissioner can issue fines or, in extreme cases, push for a vote on whether to force the owner to sell.

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/sports/can-nfl-force-washington-owner-dan-snyder-sell-team

The wider issue is that I’m not convinced, personally, that the commissioner is that much better. 

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

16 minutes ago, London Kev said:

They can't just vote Snyder out because he makes bad business decisions, but: 

 

Under Section 8.13 of the NFL’s constitution and bylaws, the commissioner can determine if an owner or any other official “has been or is guilty of conduct detrimental to the welfare of the League or professional football.” Based on that determination, the commissioner can issue fines or, in extreme cases, push for a vote on whether to force the owner to sell.

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/sports/can-nfl-force-washington-owner-dan-snyder-sell-team

 

And if they fail to vote him out it will be an admission that the owners don't think rampant sexual harassment is detrimental to the welfare of the league. They'd better hope there aren't more sex pest victims of the OTHER 31 teams, because they would most certainly come out of the woodwork if the owners don't think this is a big deal.

[tshile]

12 hours ago, Peregrine said:

 

If the league has a legal way to remove him, what legal threat does he have outside of blackmail, that ends up with himself in jail and poor?

I’m not privy to the workings of an NFL ownership contract. 
 

But someone posted a supposed breakdown from an article in this thread weeks back. 
 

The gist of it was: it’s not a simple sit down and count the votes. It’s more akin to a legal proceeding. Charges are levied, Snyder has to defend himself against them, and there’s a whole process. 
 

Which I presume is where the idea of an intense legal battle comes into play. Basically he would fight that the charges “were proven” etc. 

[ntotoro]

3 hours ago, Wildbunny said:

According to Dan this is some Mafia gang

 

3 hours ago, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

 

Which is precisely why the other owners shouldn't take too kindly to his blackmail threats. If this were the real Mafia, Snyder would already have been fitted for cement shoes.

 

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

Then they should make him an offer he can’t refuse. 

 

I think it's time for a meeting of the 32 families for them to get him out. Che infamia... 🤣

Edited October 27, 2022 by ntotoro

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

5 minutes ago, ntotoro said:

 

 

 

I think it's time for a meeting of the 32 families for them to get him out. Che infamia... 🤣

 

Here ya go:

 

[The Rook]

3 hours ago, Wildbunny said:

According to Dan this is some Mafia gang

 

I picture the other owners are like:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rook

[Cooleyfan1993]

I’m confused on what exactly it is that’s happening with riveras mom….is it cancer? Whatever it is, this is good news to hear. 

[Andre The Giant]

 

[Peregrine]

2 hours ago, tshile said:

I’m not privy to the workings of an NFL ownership contract. 
 

But someone posted a supposed breakdown from an article in this thread weeks back. 
 

The gist of it was: it’s not a simple sit down and count the votes. It’s more akin to a legal proceeding. Charges are levied, Snyder has to defend himself against them, and there’s a whole process. 
 

Which I presume is where the idea of an intense legal battle comes into play. Basically he would fight that the charges “were proven” etc. 

Is it not a simple sit down and count the votes?

 

There in is the fundamental problem with lawyers or anyone else proclaiming how this process would go.  Its a secret internal process that no one truly knows how it goes except the owners and those on NDAs.  Thats on purpose.  If I asked anyone right now to point to where in the rules it lays out the details for this process, they couldnt.  Its not some public document available to pull up and read/study/examine, and thats why reporters had to ask Goodell not that long ago whether that process even DID exist and could the owners vote out Dan.  Its been guessed at.  Its been supposed.  But its an internal process they keep secret for good reason.  

 

Its also very likely that 31 other owners can, at any time, vote to change their bylaws to serve themselves however they want.

[Redwards]

4 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

The owners won't vote out an owner for having a poorly run franchise. They have enabled Detroit, Cleveland, etc to operate poorly for generations, I doubt the fact that  Washington was once a better franchise changes this.  Every league will always have poorly run teams.  

 

To be clear I never said these lawyers were claiming Snyder would have a case, just that they want to avoid litigation altogether as anyone would.  

But remember: Detroit and Cleveland, and the vast majority of the other teams in the league pale in comparison to Washington's market.   The money lost due to a poorly run franchise in most other cities is nothing compared to Washington's.  It's just a totally different ballgame.  Not to mention, Washington is one of the teams that helped build the NFL.  It's a flagship franchise - or was, once upon a time.  Irsay lamented this in public, which means the NFL feels the same.  

[Darrell Green Fan]

4 hours ago, Fan since a Fetus said:

My point was really about they could if they wanted. There is cause for that reason alone. Also, Detroit and Cleveland did and does not have the status that Washington did. When you have a major market team that should be printing money easily and that owner falls way way behind, I would think they would make a business decision. The owners may not want to vote him out, but it seems like a sound business decision to me.  All this other stuff is just icing on the cake.

 

i know it's a different league but the Knicks would qualify.  They just don't throw out owners for running franchises, even good franchises, into the ground. 

5 minutes ago, Redwards said:

But remember: Detroit and Cleveland, and the vast majority of the other teams in the league pale in comparison to Washington's market.   The money lost due to a poorly run franchise in most other cities is nothing compared to Washington's.  It's just a totally different ballgame.  Not to mention, Washington is one of the teams that helped build the NFL.  It's a flagship franchise - or was, once upon a time.  Irsay lamented this in public, which means the NFL feels the same.  

 

See my post above. 

[CommanderInTheRye]

1 hour ago, Andre The Giant said:

 

 

 

Makes sense.

 

"Suspect #1" is always last in a well run investigation. 

 

You want to get as much damning evidence from as many sources and angles as you can before asking your primary suspect a single question. Then you know when  he's lieing, evading, misrepresenting, fearful, unconcerned etc.

 

A good interviewer instinctively knows when and how to make love to a suspect nice and gentle with a velvet condom and when to surround and raw dog him just before going in for the kill...

 

 

 

 

"So little Danny it's been real nice hearing you talk about how you been a good compliant non-threatening choir boy for the last two years but now we're gonna talk about all that nasty **** you done before that and about all the dirt you paid your private eyes to dig up on your business partners so's you could blackmail 'em into submission..."

 

Edited October 27, 2022 by CommanderInTheRye

[TD_washingtonredskins]

33 minutes ago, Redwards said:

But remember: Detroit and Cleveland, and the vast majority of the other teams in the league pale in comparison to Washington's market.   The money lost due to a poorly run franchise in most other cities is nothing compared to Washington's.  It's just a totally different ballgame.  Not to mention, Washington is one of the teams that helped build the NFL.  It's a flagship franchise - or was, once upon a time.  Irsay lamented this in public, which means the NFL feels the same.  

 

You have a point when it comes to the market, but I'm not sure what you're saying with the bolded part of your post. The Detroit Lions franchise is older than the Washington Commanders franchise and has been in Detroit longer. They had 4 NFL championships in the NFL's infancy (1930s - 1950s). The Cleveland Browns joined the NFL a decade after Washington, so they aren't exactly newcomers and also have 4 pre-Super Bowl era NFL titles during the 1950s - 1960s. I would make the argument that the Lions and Browns were a far bigger influence as the NFL was starting to gain more and more popularity in the 1950s and 1960s than the Redskins were...