Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

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


Recommended Posts

This thread wasn't as busy today.

 

Either more dirt comes out or we will have to wait for the investigation conclusion and what changes Dan makes and what the NFL does.

 

If the NFL was serious about sexual harassment  we would lose our first round draft pick, we would have a cap penalty, Dan would be fine and I am adding that Dan should be suspended from the Redskins for one entire year.

 

The NFL isn't that serious and when this concludes, unless more dirt comes out; Dan will get a slap on the wrist. A fine and loss of a lower round draft pick.  

 

Ron needs to ask for a raise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

Sure, he knows exactly what Snyder knows or doesn't know :rolleyes:  

 

His business (Kleese) is not an NFL franchise, therefore, it's irrelevant.  


Title VII of the Civil Rights act of 1964 applies across the board whether you manage a Dollar General or an NFL franchise.  Most business owners, managers, and supervisors are well aware of the laws against sexual harassment in the work place and train their staff on a regular basis.  
 

I guarantee you when this is all over the Washington to be named will have a robust sexual harassment policy in place which will describe very clearly how to complain and to whom.  There will be a designated EEOC in place as well.  (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Representative)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

Snyder having one Human Resources manager and no reporting process is damning. He's lucky he's in the NFL and not in a real world business. 

The only reason he has been able to get away with that is because up until now there wasn’t a problem.  Most businesses are reactive and not proactive when it comes to this kind of thing.  ADA is another example, and it often takes somebody formally complaining to get anything done.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Painkiller said:

The only reason he has been able to get away with that is because up until now there wasn’t a problem.  Most businesses are reactive and not proactive when it comes to this kind of thing.  ADA is another example, and it often takes somebody formally complaining to get anything done.

 

Clearly there were huge problems, they just mostly weren't revealed to the world until this article came out.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Clearly there were huge problems, they just mostly weren't revealed to the world until this article came out.


Revealed to the world and possibly just revealed to Dan Snyder.  The key to his surviving this as owner is what he did once he knew.  
 

If I have two subordinates and one is sexually harassing the other on a daily basis, but it never happens when I’m around, nobody tells me anything, and the victim never formally complains...I am in the clear.  You can’t address what you don’t know about.  Once it can be proved I have been told via formal complaint, and I take zero action to investigate or address the complaint...that’s when I get in trouble.   
 

The fact that their sexual harassment policy did not tell employees how to formally make a complaint, that is a big problem that will be fixed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Painkiller said:

The only reason he has been able to get away with that is because up until now there wasn’t a problem.  Most businesses are reactive and not proactive when it comes to this kind of thing.  ADA is another example, and it often takes somebody formally complaining to get anything done.

Yeah, hopefully that changes. It's always good to have a diverse HR department and a step by step reporting procedure. A restricted and unrestricted reporting procedure is the best way to go because it gives the victim a chance to stay anonymous if he or she chooses to do so.

 

If Dan had a process like this he could have easily fired Michaels, Mann, and Santos a long time ago without having it go the length of time that it did. This would have created a safe environment for his employees, made him look infinitely better, all because he had a proactive system in place. 

 

I honestly don't know if Dan would honor or take a process like that seriously, which is scary. 

Edited by Burgundy Yoda
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

 

I honestly don't know if Dan would honor or take a process like that seriously, which is scary. 


The lawyer (I forget her name off hand) will ensure the policy is corrected.  This kind of thing is exactly what she has been brought in to look at when you talk about analyzing an organizations operations.  He will do what she tells him.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kleese said:


Well, I guess we just disagree there. I think it’s entirely possible Snyder had no idea Alex Santos was sending inappropriate texts to

those women. I am also making an assumption based on all that we know about his comings and goings that Dan was rarely, if ever in the same place at the same time with these people. If anything I’d say Dan’s reputation as a terrible boss and all that we know about him make it even more probable this could go on without his knowledge. 
 

And if you agree that the Post article isn’t enough to take Dan down, then we agree here anyway. 

I don't understand how they can commonly be labeled as his inner circle if he's never around them. An inner circle consists of the people you trust and are close to. 

 

I think those private texts were not revealed to Dan. Santos would be an idiot to do that (as if he wasn't already). I do find it hard to believe that if Bruce Allen saw one of the girls crying multiple times (which was stated in the article) that he wouldn't bring it up to Dan. You're going to say something to your friend and the owner of franchise. 

 

I think this article is a piece of a puzzle that will eventually contribute to the removal of Snyder. 

Edited by Burgundy Yoda
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Painkiller said:


The lawyer (I forget her name off hand) will ensure the policy is corrected.  This kind of thing is exactly what she has been brought in to look at when you talk about analyzing an organizations operations.  He will do what she tells him.

Beth Wilkinson I believe. You can't say that in confidence. We didn't even know there wasn't a reporting process until this story came out. Id like to think Dan would do it because he's got eyeballs on him and a damaged rep, but you and I will never know. 

Edited by Burgundy Yoda
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kleese said:

One thing I want to chime in on in general: the theory that Dan HAD to know about this. That’s really not necessarily true at all. 
 

I am the owner of a business and also act as the GM. At every quarterly staff meeting I always at least review personal conduct policies. One thing we reiterate over and over is that any indiscretions need to be reported and we inform them of where they need to be reported. 


You do make some reasonable points. Personally, I think Snyder must have know in some capacity, but he does run a poorly structured organisation. Reality is that he has been at the mercy of Bruce Allen running the operation for a decade. Bruce as Team President, I don’t know, would that equate to a CEO type role?


Snyder as owner may be that step removed from the crap. I believe he will now escape the net because all those with dirty hands below him in the structure have been jettisoned.
 

He is guilty of failing to see the shortcomings in some of these individuals over a prolonged period of time. Did Allen last a decade because Snyder didn’t realise he was ****ing useless, or did Allen last a decade because he acted as that shield between the toxic practices and the owner, practices that the owner could then opt to turn a blind eye to?

 

At this stage, irrespective of his part in this, I struggle to see how we progress as an organisation with him as the figurehead owner. The complete destruction of reputation and loss of confidence from fans, stakeholders and potential investors is potentially irreconcilable. Time will tell I guess. The PR train is already cranking up.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tshile said:

Who you put around you in high level positions with a high level of trust is a little different than selectively being nice to star players that are ultimately what is selling the product you make. 
 

im not prepared to say snyder has an issue with block people, but just cause he courted stars doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem in there somewhere about it. 
 

 

I do agree, he would have courted a goat if this goat meant more $$$$$

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Rocky21 said:

The Snyder apologists in this thread make me sad.


 

Please show one person defending Snyder.   Just one.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Washington Post article gave us no indication that Dan Snyder could have possibly known that sexual harassment was happening in his building. If, as an owner, he was stepping back and letting Bruce Allen do the day to day stuff and run the team like we all wanted... then there's a good chance he didn't know. It doesn't absolve him of hiring these people who felt they were comfortable enough to constantly hit on their subordinates. It also doesn't absolve him of being and owner who is unapproachable and not available to entry level workers who were being harassed either. Being a bad owner isn't reason to be forced out, sadly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Scot.  But that article is wild and I just don't buy it.  If he left Bruce out of the mix maybe I'd believe it but he played the violin for him, too. 

 

Previously, Scot has complemented Dan by saying he's stayed out of his way and was nice to him.  so him doubling down on it was fine.  But now Bruce is a great guy, too?  While in the past he'd trash him.

 

I wonder if they gave him some kind of behind the scenes settlement or did him a big favor.  I'd believe Scot if Bruce was left out of this but doing a 180 on Bruce out of nowhere? 

 

Yeah there was a lawsuit, bitterness, shots taken.  But heck now Scot didn't mean it, and it was all for kicks and giggles.   The leaks to the WP are now embraced.  And it was all in fun by great people.  Very suspicious.  But the Dan stuff is consistent from him.  

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Previously, Scot has complemented Dan by saying he's stayed out of his way and was nice to him.  so him doubling down on it was fine.  But now Bruce is a great guy, too?  While in the past he'd trash him.


League wide, It’s all one big boys club with inner circles.
 

I mean, first thing Rivera has done is surround himself with his ‚Äėown‚Äô trusted circle. That‚Äôs the way it works.¬†

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:


League wide, It’s all one big boys club with inner circles.
 

I mean, first thing Rivera has done is surround himself with his ‚Äėown‚Äô trusted circle. That‚Äôs the way it works.¬†

 

Which lends itself to the reality that the Redskins front office is probably not much different than other NFL teams in regards to how they treat women. Perhaps that's why Scot felt that Snyder's organization wasn't much different than other teams'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, celticsalmon said:

Sadly, Daniel Snyder does not deserve the "benefit of doubt." 

 

Agree.

 

The one thing that seems to be established about him is at the minimum is he's a jerk, immature and is cheap with his hires and that has had consequences in more things than just this scandal.

 

We all know from other stories that he and Bruce would drink frequently at the Park (the WP had it and ditto an insider mentioned) to cap off the day and drinking was rampant over there.  It was actually leaked as part of Scot's  suit ironically which his behavior fit in versus being an anomaly. 

 

Hard for me to imagine that in these drinking sessions where Bruce and Dan were pouring down the drinks that they were just totally oblivious to the culture and everything else. Santos in particular headed pro personnel.  He wasn't just some random underling.  He's a dude that would demand some serious interaction with. 

 

I am a boss, too.  I run my own company.  I have a good feel for heck colleagues that don't even work for me as to their general behavior.  I hear crap all the time about them.  This dude cheats on his wife, chases women all the time, this one drinks.  If a dude is crude I ultimately get it in my conversations with them especially when it comes to women.  When it comes to my own employees, it goes double, I think I know them pretty darn well.  I know a ton of gossip about people in my business and heck I know my employees extremely well.   

 

Is it possible that Dan didn't know directly for example that Santos was doing all of this stuff?  Maybe.  Would Bruce be completely oblivious?  I really doubt it.  That dude works for him and works for him closely.  I've been to Redskins Park several times and that building isn't that spread out.  The offices are right next to each other.  It's not a big building.   

 

The top floor has a big room for player meetings close to the front door and the SB trophies.  You got the TV studio right near the now infamous staircase.  To the left of that you got a big meeting room that people share.  Then the offices sort of coverage back to back mostly on the right side of the studio.  Downstairs is mostly player related -- trainers, gym, locker room, cafeteria.   It's not that big of a building. 

 

This is the same team that had the Cheerleader Scandal.    Same team that has had major employee turnover with some of those employees being open about how Dan is a terrible dude to work for and the culture there is atrocious.  Same dude who sued old ladies.  Sued a newspaper.  The Nolan story.   Their medical staff.   And rumors of a ton of others.  I doubt his minority owners want to sell for no reason. 

 

Dan isn't painted as some great guy where a story like this just seems wildly out of place that you can't believe it could be true.  There have been plenty of stories about Dan over the years.  Some might even be untrue.  But I doubt it's an odd conspiracy that's attacking a good dude for no reason.  He's not painted as a dude who is all about class.  It's typically the opposite of that.  Heck even the stories about him wanting to be friends with his players and socializing with them seem at best odd and at worst a bit weird. 

 

And I do believe some of the good stories about him.  I know a few dudes like Dan who are often sleazy and major jerks but have a nice side to them, too.  Dan is charitable.  I do buy that he would take his shirt off his back for a player or friend in need.  It's actually something he had in common with George Steinbrenner who also fostered a bad culture based on fear and scapegoating but also on a personal level would go to bat for a friend or a cause in a heartbeat. 

 

At worst, Dan knew about this.  At best, I agree with the women in the story that he fostered that type of culture in the building -- a sophomoric, arrogant, berating style which seems to fit a series of stories about Dan not just this one. 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Springfield said:

The Washington Post article gave us no indication that Dan Snyder could have possibly known that sexual harassment was happening in his building. If, as an owner, he was stepping back and letting Bruce Allen do the day to day stuff and run the team like we all wanted... then there's a good chance he didn't know. It doesn't absolve him of hiring these people who felt they were comfortable enough to constantly hit on their subordinates. It also doesn't absolve him of being and owner who is unapproachable and not available to entry level workers who were being harassed either. Being a bad owner isn't reason to be forced out, sadly.

https://catchtheblitz.com/ctb-exclusive-a-look-inside-washingtons-nfl-organization/
 

Kapri Bibbs disagrees. Not saying he’s right, but he’s putting it out there

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ddub52 said:

https://catchtheblitz.com/ctb-exclusive-a-look-inside-washingtons-nfl-organization/
 

Kapri Bibbs disagrees. Not saying he’s right, but he’s putting it out there


I want to believe that but I’ve never even heard of Catch the Blitz before this. And all we have from that are allegations from Bibbs with no actual proof. At least with the Post article there is corroborated reports between multiple (even if unnamed) sources. The Post article is real, actual journalism. The CTB article is taking one man’s account and putting it out there.

 

Believe me, I hope there’s more but Bibbs can just be shrugged off as a disgruntled employee at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Springfield said:

The Washington Post article gave us no indication that Dan Snyder could have possibly known that sexual harassment was happening in his building.

 

I'm going to stop you right there. If this was the first report of this, I would have to agree with you. However, there was a report back in 2018 accusing some of the same people of the same issues. Dan did nothing to correct it then, and now this report comes out and it's deeper than the cheerleader issue. Yet, Dan still somehow didn't know this stuff was going on. Sorry, I dont buy it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

Snyder having one Human Resources manager and no reporting process is damning. He's lucky he's in the NFL and not in a real world business. 

It's not damning...understaffed if he has alot of employees yes...but not damning. 

 

And hate to tell you this..I work for a global company, around 100 employees and we only have 1 HR person...and that person was just hired about a year ago after we've been an independent company since 2012...theres a real world situation for you.

 

HR is almost always understaffed and undervalued in "the real world"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...