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

[TD_washingtonredskins]

The OTL segment paints such an ugly picture of this owner. He needs to go.

[Dissident2]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think Sheehan did a nice job ridiculing that comment from Dan because he segued from there by suggesting it really wasn't his fault and its a witch hunt.   It was the classic I will take the hit to sound cool but then let me tell you why I really shouldn't. 

 

Exactly. Snyder saying that doesn't "diminish" anything, it only exacerbates his problem. It was a horrible statement. The "I take responsibility line" meant nothing, as right after that came ZERO empathy for victims, BLAMING one of the victims and calling her a liar, ABSOLVING himself of responsibility by saying he's been "too hands-off." It's laughable to think that statement does anything to diminish the claims from those women. Everything I've read about it from other writers has absolutely brutalized that statement and mocked it. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I finally saw the excerpt...to be honest, I didn't think it was all that damning, mainly because it was all the same stuff from the articles (actually thought the articles were worse for the team and for Snyder). Maybe the full hour segment will be more potent. I also thought them constantly showing a close up of Dan's face was not a good choice...would have been more effective to spend the majority of the time only showing the women talking, with brief cutaways to Snyder--and not close ups with the cheesy graphics sliding over his face nonstop, but show him in more full body shots with him looking small in stature and a sturn look on his face...would have better underscored that he's the type of person who would/could have a toxic work environment. (that last part is the designer in me lol)

 

I'm thinking the investigation will be when things get hotter for Snyder. I don't see this leading to much more than the article has already lead to.

 

[FootballZombie]

Man, the timing on this was TV piece was absolutely terrible. On top of featuring old news, this whole thing is going to get buried as the football season approaches.

 

Once teams start cutting players wholesale, it will be hard for this to gain any real traction. We saw the countless articles Fornette’s releases spawned. It will be 10x worse when you add even more recognizable names to the cut pile. Then a week from now, games are starting. Good luck getting people’s attention then.

 

This could have really made an impact if it was put together in a shorter time frame, but the wait plus the league news points to signs that this is going to get blown over hard.

[CommanderInTheRye]

2 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

I'm thinking the investigation will be when things get hotter for Snyder. I don't see this leading to much more than the article has already lead to.

 

 

The key is all of those people who were paid off by Snyder to sign NDAs. This investigation will be the first time that anyone will have had access to them since the NDAs were executed.

 

We have no idea what their stories will reveal. No one does. They are the silent minority.

 

If enough of them reveal new and truly damaging information that can be directly linked to Snyder all bets are off. If it's more of the same and/or plausibly denied by Snyder we are **** out of luck.

 

<fingers crossed>

[Califan007 The Constipated]

6 hours ago, TrancesWithWolves said:

 

The key is all of those people who were paid off by Snyder to sign NDAs.

 

Do we know they were paid off?...Whenever I signed an NDA I signed it before starting work.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

7 hours ago, TrancesWithWolves said:

 

The key is all of those people who were paid off by Snyder to sign NDAs. This investigation will be the first time that anyone will have had access to them since the NDAs were executed.

 

We have no idea what their stories will reveal. No one does. They are the silent minority.

 

If enough of them reveal new and truly damaging information that can be directly linked to Snyder all bets are off. If it's more of the same and/or plausibly denied by Snyder we are **** out of luck.

 

<fingers crossed>

 

41 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Do we know they were paid off?...Whenever I signed an NDA I signed it before starting work.

 

I think the NDAs are getting far too much attention. They are very common in workplaces, but the intent of an NDA is to protect proprietary information, etc. It's not to protect an organization or people within it from being bad humans or breaking the law. 

 

If the CFO or former CFO went to The Post with Snyder's financial records, that's violating the NDA. If women speak out because they were sexually harassed, it's not violating the NDA. Any lawyer will be able to get around those pretty easily if things were happening that shouldn't have been. The video, the harassment, the pimping out...all of those things are unethical and/or criminal. No NDA gives the Redskins a pass on those things...

 

I have signed an NDA at every job I've had. That doesn't give my boss the right to come watch me take a piss or discriminate against me because of my skin color. 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 minute ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

 

I think the NDAs are getting far too much attention. They are very common in workplaces, but the intent of an NDA is to protect proprietary information, etc. It's not to protect an organization or people within it from being bad humans or breaking the law. 

 

If the CFO or former CFO went to The Post with Snyder's financial records, that's violating the NDA. If women speak out because they were sexually harassed, it's not violating the NDA. Any lawyer will be able to get around those pretty easily if things were happening that shouldn't have been. The video, the harassment, the pimping out...all of those things are unethical and/or criminal. No NDA gives the Redskins a pass on those things...

 

I have signed an NDA at every job I've had. That doesn't give my boss the right to come watch me take a piss or discriminate against me because of my skin color. 

 

 

 

 

[MisterPinstripe]

45 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Do we know they were paid off?...Whenever I signed an NDA I signed it before starting work.

Yeahhhh.... Companies have zero leverage to get someone to sign an NDA when they are quitting or being fired. I would think every NFL team has employees sign NDAs before employment. The only situations I can think of would be an executive leaving and signing an NDA so they get a good severance package.

 

And I could definitely be wrong as I am no expert, but I didn't think that NDAs applied to illegal activity.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 minute ago, MisterPinstripe said:

Yeahhhh.... Companies have zero leverage to get someone to sign an NDA when they are quitting or being fired. I would think every NFL team has employees sign NDAs before employment. The only situations I can think of would be an executive leaving and signing an NDA so they get a good severance package.

 

And I could definitely be wrong as I am no expert, but I didn't think that NDAs applied to illegal activity.

 

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

Yeahhhh.... Companies have zero leverage to get someone to sign an NDA when they are quitting or being fired. I would think every NFL team has employees sign NDAs before employment. The only situations I can think of would be an executive leaving and signing an NDA so they get a good severance package.

 

And I could definitely be wrong as I am no expert, but I didn't think that NDAs applied to illegal activity.

 

And, I do think that if the Redskins settle with any of these individuals, then they'd have to agree to shut their mouths. So, if that former intern who was on SportsCenter gets $500K in a settlement, I think part of THAT agreement is to shut her mouth and not do anymore interviews, etc. 

[MisterPinstripe]

2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

broken

d

I really wish I could see the gif, I feel like I'm missing out.

[ntotoro]

People at work normally sign NDA's when they're laid-off (to prevent from suing for damages, usually) or when you're cleared and briefed/debriefed. I can't imagine what's going on in Ashburn.

[The Batman]

10 hours ago, Califan007 said:

I finally saw the excerpt...to be honest, I didn't think it was all that damning, mainly because it was all the same stuff from the articles (actually thought the articles were worse for the team and for Snyder). Maybe the full hour segment will be more potent. I also thought them constantly showing a close up of Dan's face was not a good choice...would have been more effective to spend the majority of the time only showing the women talking, with brief cutaways to Snyder--and not close ups with the cheesy graphics sliding over his face nonstop, but show him in more full body shots with him looking small in stature and a sturn look on his face...would have better underscored that he's the type of person who would/could have a toxic work environment. (that last part is the designer in me lol)

 

I'm thinking the investigation will be when things get hotter for Snyder. I don't see this leading to much more than the article has already lead to.

 

It’s not so much about the content of the story relative to the Post article, it’s about the reach. We knew about the Post articles because we follow the team. Lots of people didn’t, particularly given the news that immediately broke afterwards (like the NBA protest later that day). MILLIONS more people watch SportsCenter than read the Post, and they got to see some of the women themselves, hear it in their own voices. It’s more powerful than words on a page. The content we already have is enough to oust Dan if public sentiment is strong enough and lasts long enough. This does more to give the story legs than any newspaper article ever could. The tin foil hat enthusiast in me also sees ESPN perennially carry water for the NFL and makes me wonder if someone at the league office gave a wink nod to them running this piece to begin to lay groundwork for public sentiment growing against Dan for his eventual ouster, but that’s just a little flight of fancy. Either way, this being on ESPN is imo one of the biggest developments yet. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Also, just think about the optics...take a step back from this being our team and think about how this looks. 

 

The worldwide leader in sports is running a five-part series on the dysfunctional and potentially criminal culture that has been created by the owner of a professional team. If you were watching this about the Houston Rockets, Minnesota Twins, or San Jose Sharks (no horse in the game), you would be disgusted and probably just say to yourself "That owner is ****ed"

 

This is a much bigger deal than we are giving it credit for because we're used to all the nickel and dime criticisms of Snyder the football owner. This is potentially his last stand because it's just as much about him being a bad dude and possibly breaking the law. 

[Dissident2]

1 hour ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

And, I do think that if the Redskins settle with any of these individuals, then they'd have to agree to shut their mouths. So, if that former intern who was on SportsCenter gets $500K in a settlement, I think part of THAT agreement is to shut her mouth and not do anymore interviews, etc. 

 

There's nothing to currently "settle" for, as there are no lawsuits. These women have mostly come forward to share their stories. They aren't currently suing the team, Dan Snyder or anyone else. The suits are going to start once the video situation gets going. Besides, the NFL will be basing its decision not on how many times this story has been on television, but on the investigation currently taking place. 

 

All this, "it's going to blow over, look how it's not in the news anymore" stuff is ridiculous. It's silly for anyone to think this situation is going to "rival" the current race issues, COVID issues, etc. Even the current legit football issues. Fans throughout the league think Snyder is a piece of garbage and would be fine to see him kicked to the curb, but they're not obsessing over it like we are. They're ready for football. And I wish I was one of them. Do you remember a huge, ongoing outcry for the removal of the Panthers former owner? I don't remember anything about that at all, in fact, other than it just happening one day. Then I looked at the reasons why and said, "OK, that makes sense." (Yes, I realize he wasn't actually removed, but chose to sell due in large part to pressure from the league.)

 

Snyder's demise will be "death by a million paper cuts," and it's a long, long, LONG time coming. He will continue to be in the news periodically for all the wrong reasons over the coming months. The Post says they have more people coming forward, lawyers say they have more people coming forward, so who knows what stories are out there that we haven't seen/heard yet. 

 

And I totally disagree that the ESPN excerpts "added nothing." Seeing the women, hearing their emotions, seeing how confident and believable they were made a big difference for me. I believed their stories before, but now I feel a level of emotion about them that I didn't necessarily feel before. I still say the most interesting developments over the coming months will be related to those videos. Quite frankly, I'm surprised the stories didn't focus even more on those. Hopefully that's different in the full show on Sunday. 

 

 

[Coolio47]

1 hour ago, MisterPinstripe said:

I really wish I could see the gif, I feel like I'm missing out.

Barbossa from Pirates of the Caribbean movies getting his face uncomfortably close to the camera before saying "Agreed."  😆

 

Edit: video form https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAdLE-QqcBY&ab_channel=raniyako

Edited September 4, 2020 by Coolio47

[CommanderInTheRye]

3 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

Do we know they were paid off?...Whenever I signed an NDA I signed it before starting work.

 

 

I stand corrected (actually I’m sitting).

 

In my prior post, I mistakenly referenced employees with signed NDAs, I actually meant those former employees who reached settlements with the team and agreed not to discuss the facts of those settlements with anyone in return for a financial consideration. 

 

That is the group that I believe is in the best position to offer evidence that might lead to Snyder’s ouster.

 

I assume that they received the same release, for the limited purpose of cooperating with the NFL investigation, that employees with pre-hire NDAs did.

 

Am I mistaken?

[tshile]

21 hours ago, ntotoro said:

The longer this goes, it's just proof that this human piece of fecal matter is going nowhere.

Disagree. 
 

I think our best hope at this point is that this becomes an ongoing story. Different media outlets doing interviews and digging around. 
 

make it a problem that doesn’t go away for the NFL. Make it something that doesn’t disappear week 1 when games are played. 

3 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

have signed an NDA at every job I've had. That doesn't give my boss the right to come watch me take a piss or discriminate against me because of my skin color. 

Right but you’re talking about a general nda for employment. The team supposedly has additional NDA’s with the women that were part of whatever settlement they came to with the team over it. And that’s what keeps them quiet. 
 

although the lawyer explaining all that on the radio show I was listening to when the stories first broke said that even those NDA’s can be shot down, but it requires the woman to want to fight it. And it sounds like none of them do, they’d prefer to ask the media/nfl to put pressure on snyder to release them. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

8 minutes ago, tshile said:

Right but you’re talking about a general nda for employment. The team supposedly has additional NDA’s with the women that were part of whatever settlement they came to with the team over it. And that’s what keeps them quiet. 
 

although the lawyer explaining all that on the radio show I was listening to when the stories first broke said that even those NDA’s can be shot down, but it requires the woman to want to fight it. And it sounds like none of them do, they’d prefer to ask the media/nfl to put pressure on snyder to release them. 

 

No, I don't think there's been any settlement yet. I do agree that if they settle out of court and then sign a gag-order, that's different. The NDAs that are being discussed are the ones that were signed as part of employment. 

[tshile]

8 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

No, I don't think there's been any settlement yet. I do agree that if they settle out of court and then sign a gag-order, that's different. The NDAs that are being discussed are the ones that were signed as part of employment. 

ah. I misunderstood then. The lawyer seemed to be suggesting there was a second NDA involved (because like you said, the first wouldn’t cover any of this at all)

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

6 minutes ago, tshile said:

ah. I misunderstood then. The lawyer seemed to be suggesting there was a second NDA involved (because like you said, the first wouldn’t cover any of this at all)

 

 

Maybe I did...but I know for a fact that the cheerleader video issue isn't even close to a settlement so the NDAs pertaining to those women are only the ones they may have signed upon employment. And, as we said, don't protect Snyder in this case. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, TrancesWithWolves said:

 

I actually meant those former employees who reached settlements with the team and agreed not to discuss the facts of those settlements with anyone in return for a financial consideration. 

 

 

This is the first I heard of ex-employees getting confidentiality settlements...

[CommanderInTheRye]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

 

This is the first I heard of ex-employees getting confidentiality settlements...

 

Oy vey! I thought that was mentioned in the original Post article but I may have got it confused with NDAs. 🙃

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by TrancesWithWolves

[Dissident2]

Here we go.