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

[TheShredder]

31 minutes ago, Dissident2 said:

Here we go.

 

 

I don't want to see any of those ladies in less than full dress and masks. 

[Conn]

12 minutes ago, TheShredder said:

I don't want to see any of those ladies in less than full dress and masks. 

Do you even realize that comments like this are EXACTLY the type of thing bred by this kind of sexist culture we’re all allegedly outraged about in our football franchise? It’s everywhere. Look inward while you look around for a crowbar to pry your foot out of your mouth. 
 

Edit: I just can’t leave this as all I say. I’m ****ing flabbergasted that you posted this. Do you even comprehend the utter crassness of you seeing this and IMMEDIATELY reducing the women speaking out about their sexual harassment down to whether you find them attractive or not? It’s disgusting. And it’s exactly what this whole scandal is about. Not just obvious physical or verbal sexual harassment, but deep-seated, insidious misogyny that worms its way into all our experiences.

Edited September 4, 2020 by ConnSKINS26

[TheShredder]

1 minute ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Do you even realize that comments like this are EXACTLY the type of thing bred by this kind of sexist culture we’re all allegedly outraged about in our football franchise? It’s everywhere. Look inward while you look around for a crowbar to pry your foot out of your mouth. 

Geeez I was talking about Covid. Easy does it. 

[Conn]

1 minute ago, TheShredder said:

Geeez I was talking about Covid. Easy does it. 

No, you weren’t. Don’t insult my intelligence, just own it and be better. 

[bakedtater1]

[SonnySideUp]

A lot of people say that Snyder will only be fined after the investigation and not be forced to sell the team. They say this current team situation is different in the NFL's eyes from the Panthers situation with Jerry Richardson because Snyder has not been shown to be personally involved to this point (whereas Jerry Richardson apparently was). I don't think there necessarily has to be an apples to apples comparison between the two team situations. The Washington team's alleged offenses may not match those of the Panther's exactly but may very well exceed them when taken collectively. I think it's entirely possible that after the investigation and if the claims are true, Snyder may indeed be forced to sell the team and here's why I think that:

 

A - this team represents a different market than the Panthers do. It's the Nation's capitol, one of the most prestigious franchises in the NFL if not THE most prestigious franchise in the NFL. The team already has a poor enough reputation for it's embarrassingly bad on the field product, (not for just years but for decades) and now it's receiving an abundance of negative attention for apparent serious workplace culture problems.

 

B - As far as the Panthers situation goes, that was then and this is now. The NFL has a lot more (and bigger) problems to deal with on it's plate today (such as the pandemic) than when they had to deal with the Panthers. They don't want to have to now keep dealing with the Washington team's problems, which have been accumulating for decades and now appear to be almost entirely caused by workplace culture and personal behavior. Even the team's abominable on the field performance and injuries over the years have been shown to have been almost completely caused by poor management. Unlike the horrendous problem of say, trying to have a season with the pandemic in full force or dealing with racial injustice, the Washington team problem can be fixed relatively simply by jettisoning the owner.

 

C - I don't believe there were minority owners of the Panthers who so visibly and vocally wanted to abandon ship and sell out as there have been in Washington, but I could be wrong. They have also been very clear about their reasons for wanting out (i.e. tired of the way Snyder runs the team). This only makes Snyder look even worse than just the women's complaints taken alone do and I think tends to support their validity.

 

D - I disagree with those who say that the other owners will support Snyder and refuse to remove him, I suspect the situation may be just the opposite. As others have pointed out, the bad publicity has now become world wide with the ESPN show and not mostly just local. The longer this situation drags on and reflects more and more on the entire league, I think the other owners are becoming more and more tired of it and concerned about more scrutiny directed at their OWN operations. They're going to want that to stop at some point.

 

Taken collectively, I think the above points make a strong case for removing Snyder. I think there is just too much public attention now being paid to the cesspool that Washington has become (much more than I think there was on the Panthers). I think it is actually becoming a complete firestorm and too many people are not willing to settle for anything less than Snyder's complete removal.

 

Finally, if anyone is interested in comparing the Washington situation to that of the Panthers, here is a link to a Sports Illustrated article that lays out the Panther details pretty well.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/12/17/jerry-richardson-carolina-panthers-settlements-workplace-misconduct-sexual-harassment-racial-slur

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

While Washington Football Team owner Daniel Snyder has pledged to “fully cooperate” with the probe into allegations of widespread sexual harassment at his organization, contact by private investigators in recent weeks has rattled several former employees. And in a court hearing Friday, an attorney for one of those former employees said the NFL has told Snyder to “back off” in his use of private investigators.

 

The Washington Post has interviewed eight people who say they have been approached by private investigators, either at their homes or via phone calls, seeking information about Snyder’s former executive assistant, the team’s workplace or both.

The NFL recently told Snyder to curtail his use of private investigators, Debra Katz, attorney for former executive assistant Mary Ellen Blair, said in court Friday. Katz described the NFL’s directive to Snyder during a hearing in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, where Snyder’s attorneys are trying to compel Blair and a Virginia real estate company to produce records they say will show a conspiracy to defame him. Blair and the company have denied the claims, but a judge Friday granted Snyder’s motion for discovery in the case.

 

...One former employee, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, said she was confronted by a private investigator the day after The Post requested comment from the team’s public relations firm about a workplace incident involving her.

 

The first knock on the door of her home came around 8 a.m., the former employee said. She ignored it, and when another knock came at 9, her roommate opened the door to a woman in a mask asking to speak to the former employee cited in The Post’s email.

 

“She opened with: ‘I’m wondering if I could speak to you about your former employer. ... I was hired by your former employer to ask some questions,” the former employee said. The private investigator then attempted to ask a question about the incident that The Post had described in its email to Snyder’s publicist. The former employee cut her off.

The investigator’s visit left her fearful and outraged, the former employee said, because just days before she had told Wilkinson that she would participate in the NFL-sanctioned probe of the team’s workplace culture only if she could be assured that Snyder wouldn’t retaliate. After the investigator left, she said, she immediately contacted Wilkinson, who expressed concern and said her firm had nothing to do with the visit.

 

...“The fact that they did this behind [Wilkinson’s] back, that does not give me much confidence,” the former employee said.

 

Wilkinson declined to comment. Banks, the attorney for many former employees, said Wilkinson told her any private investigators contacting former employees were not hired by her firm.

 

...Blair confirmed that she knew him, and the men then asked her if she could call Schar if she wanted to. She said she told them she could but that it would “be odd” for her to do so.

 

“I felt intimidated and scared,” Blair said of the exchange, which she said ended with the men getting into a black Jeep with New York plates and driving away. “When I walked away, I realized I was shaking.”

Online records show the phone number that one of the men provided belongs to Michael Burdick, a former New York City police detective who currently works for CTS Research, a security firm. Burdick did not reply to messages seeking comment.

 

Six other former employees or friends of Blair’s also told The Post they have been contacted in recent weeks by private investigators, including her Pilates instructor, Sarah Mullen.

A woman who identified herself as a private investigator came to Mullen’s home in Reston on Aug. 28, a Friday afternoon, she said.

 

Mullen said she was out of town and her husband answered the door. The woman asked to speak to Mullen but did not give her name or explain why she was there, Mullen said. “That was suspicious to me,” Mullen said.

The next morning, an old friend of Blair’s said she got a call from a man who described himself as a private investigator reviewing Blair’s application for a new job, which he called a “common protocol.”

 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[FootballZombie]

1 hour ago, SonnySideUp said:

 

 

I see what you’re getting at, but I think many of those reasons would have the polar opposite effect.

 

A.)   The fact that Wash is a big market helps Snyder more than it hurts. Owner’s are not equal. The fact that Snyder is in charge of one of the NFLs most valuable franchises gives him more power and leverage. I would bet that it is far easier to subjugate the owner of a small market team, then a large one. While these team’s revenue share for the most part, I guarantee these owners know who is contributing what to the pot.

 

B.)    Sure it’s a new day and age, but all of those outside factors will mask this organizations plight. How much focus is this scandal going to pull going forward? The games will be first and foremost. Then you have the Pandemic. Then you have the racial justice initiatives. Then you have the election initiatives. What about that new team name? This scandal is already buried 5 stories deep and we haven’t even looked at Rivera’s cancer treatment, possible injuries and more. There is so much going on it will be difficult for this story to get any limelight.

 

 

C.)    I’d argue the existence of 50 cases gives the women all the credibility they need, but that is a mute point.

 

D.)   Unfortunately, the other owners don’t need to support Snyder in any way shape or form. The best thing they can do (for themselves) is sit back, stay quiet and do nothing. If this thing blows over, and Snyder keeps his team, there will be a new precedent set in the opposite direction on how to get rid of an owner. Snyder getting through this storm would make every other owner stronger, as it makes them even more invulnerable. That would be in their best interest. (Again, just them personally, not morally/legally) I’d bet dollars to donuts that the NFLs TV ratings will juggernaut this year. Nobodies owner is gonna care too much about bad press when the League is in the middle of a record year.

 

 

Since the owner’s have massive motivation to sit on their hands, the only real force that can break the ice and encourage change are the sponsors. As we are a week away from the season, I’m not sure how many companies want to miss out on what will likely be record viewership. From a business standpoint, this is a terrible time to leave.

[Riggo#44]

58 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

While Washington Football Team owner Daniel Snyder has pledged to “fully cooperate” with the probe into allegations of widespread sexual harassment at his organization, contact by private investigators in recent weeks has rattled several former employees.

 

Shady as ****, but there is a lot of innuendo and leading the reader here. Still, it doesn't surprise me at all if Snyder (and Tanya) are pulling some background shady ****. Im getting less and less confident he survives.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Riggo#44

[heyholetsgogrant]

On 9/3/2020 at 12:19 PM, TrancesWithWolves said:

Not me.

 

I cancelled youtube tv last month because they raised their price to cable tv levels and I still couldn’t get NFL Network or RedZone tv.

 

On a side note I guess youtube tv really wants me back because they apparently are adding both NFL Channels and a plethora of sports channels just for me!

 

 

 

does it include local stations so you can watch the Washington games?

[Redwolves92]

Well the video exists and it seems from the washington post article that just came out they plan to sue the team. Someone is going down for it, its very much illegal.  Why wouldnt all fingers be pointed at dan snyder even if he somehow didnt know? Its his organization, he must take the fall. The fact that there isnt much press over this is shameful regardless of all else that is wrong in our country at the moment. If more news continues to come out and this doesnt get the attention it deserves well that shows you the problem with our society and why things like this continue to happen. Anyways this is an ongoing investigation, we have no idea what may come out that will screw him over even more. 

[CommanderInTheRye]

19 minutes ago, heyholetsgogrant said:

 

does it include local stations so you can watch the Washington games?

 

I believe it depends on where you live but in my area youtube tv  includes all local channels and an unlimited DVR which I used to record just about everything.

 

If interested you can check what's available by zipcode at youtubetv.com. They have either a 14 day or one month trial for new customers.

 

My only complaint was the cost to value ratio (which is subjective) but with their recent addition of NFL Network and RedZone I will likely be signing up again before the 13th.

Edited September 5, 2020 by TrancesWithWolves

[method man]

The good news, per that article, is that Snyder is going to continue to screw himself over. As Ryan Holiday says, “ego is the enemy”

[heyholetsgogrant]

40 minutes ago, TrancesWithWolves said:

 

I believe it depends on where you live but in my area youtube tv  includes all local channels and an unlimited DVR which I used to record just about everything.

 

If interested you can check what's available by zipcode at youtubetv.com. They have either a 14 day or one month trial for new customers.

 

My only complaint was the cost to value ratio (which is subjective) but with their recent addition of NFL Network and RedZone I will likely be signing up again before the 13th.

I’m pretty sure it doesn’t include MASN because baseball has weird streaming rights, which would lean me against getting it. 

[profusion]

It'd be hilarious if Snyder's idiotic defamation suit ends up being the thing that triggers his downfall.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

9 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Shady as ****, but there is a lot of innuendo and leading the reader here. Still, it doesn't surprise me at all if Snyder (and Tanya) are pulling some background shady ****. Im getting less and less confident he survives.

 

 

Ha! lol...Doing your part. 👍

 

Agree both that it sounds shady as hell and that the article is leading readers in how it's written. Still, the NFL told Snyder to back off his use of private investigators so this issue is apparently being taken seriously. The shady part imo would be Snyder saying 'Yes, of course, take over the investigation and have everyone speak freely, I'm all for it," then subtly intimidating those same people with private investigators into fearing being completely honest. The flip side would be that these types of interactions with private investigating firms is standard operating procedure and the current atmosphere surrounding the story is making ex-employees nervous to begin with.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Califan007

[Califan007 The Constipated]

11 hours ago, Redwolves92 said:

Well the video exists and it seems from the washington post article that just came out they plan to sue the team. Someone is going down for it, its very much illegal.  Why wouldnt all fingers be pointed at dan snyder even if he somehow didnt know? Its his organization, he must take the fall. The fact that there isnt much press over this is shameful regardless of all else that is wrong in our country at the moment. If more news continues to come out and this doesnt get the attention it deserves well that shows you the problem with our society and why things like this continue to happen. Anyways this is an ongoing investigation, we have no idea what may come out that will screw him over even more. 

 

(Stuff in the past like this) was just chalked up to "that's what guys say, just guy talk"...So things like having a player keep asking a woman out as she walks to her car or looking at nip slips on a video may, unfortunately, be given the same treatment by too large a segment of our society. However, I'm thinking it won't just blow over and could seriously damage Snyder in terms of his ownership. There's no real counter argument that can be made outside of "They're exaggerating". the video exists, so that can't be argued away, only whether or not Snyder knew about it.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Califan007
Line ---> | :-) <--- Me, apparently lol...

[LCA77]

8 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

.......However, I'm thinking it won't just blow over and could seriously damage Snyder in terms of his ownership. There's no real counter argument that can be made outside of "They're exaggerating". the video exists, so that can't be argued away, only whether or not Snyder knew about it.

Actually, it DOES sound like a political statement. No thanks!!

Edited September 5, 2020 by thesubmittedone
Removed political portion from quote

[FrFan]

Bruce Allen pursues, resolves claim against Washington Football Team for unpaid wages

Also, any NDAs will go out the window if/when Allen receives a subpoena to testify in any litigation filed by current or former employees seeking justice for whatever they experienced while working for the team. For example, Allen may have plenty of knowledge about the intended lawsuit over the outtakes created from the 2008 and 2010 videos documenting the making of the team’s cheerleader calendars.

[Est.1974]

I’m sure Allen’s paws are just as dirty as Dans.

[TSO]

8 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

....... However, I'm thinking it won't just blow over and could seriously damage Snyder in terms of his ownership. There's no real counter argument that can be made outside of "They're exaggerating". the video exists, so that can't be argued away, only whether or not Snyder knew about it.

I get why you thought this was harmless, but the disclaimer didn’t change the political undertones inherent within that statement here. We’ve already received complaints about it, as well, which pretty much verifies it as politically inflammatory and, therefore, something we’d rather avoid having in the Stadium. 
 

I know it’s a tough line to walk on this subject here so there’s no penalty or anything but I need you to edit it out, ASAP. Thanks. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

15 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

I get why you thought this was harmless, but the disclaimer didn’t change the political undertones inherent within that statement here. We’ve already received complaints about it, as well, which pretty much verifies it as politically inflammatory and, therefore, something we’d rather avoid having in the Stadium. 
 

I know it’s a tough line to walk on this subject here so there’s no penalty or anything but I need you to edit it out, ASAP. Thanks. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Listened to Lisa Banks interview just now from yesterday. 

 

Some take away points according to her perspective

 

A.  Money isn't the objective

B.  She is aware that owners protect their own -- objective here is to set a precedent for real consequences for egregious behavior 

C.  They have other prospects who supposedly have been sexually harassed and it sounds like who have talked to her but they are very fearful of retaliation from the team-Snyder so they need to be cajoled to speak out

D.  She is confident that more will talk and talk specifically to the NFL and specifically about Dan's role in this which extends beyond the WP story thus far

E. She said in all her years doing this, this might be the worst work situation she's ever heard about, thinks there are at least 100 women who have been harassed

Edited September 5, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[Califan007 The Constipated]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Listened to Lisa Banks interview just now from yesterday. 

 

Some take away points according to her perspective

 

A.  Money isn't the objective

B.  She is aware that owners protect their own -- objective here is to set a precedent for real consequences for egregious behavior 

C.  They have other prospects who supposedly have been sexually harassed and it sounds like who have talked to her but they are very fearful of retaliation from the team-Snyder so they need to be cajoled to speak out

D.  She is confident that more will talk and talk specifically to the NFL and specifically about Dan's role in this which extends beyond the WP story thus far

E. She said in all her years doing this, this might be the worst work situation she's ever heard about, thinks there are at least 100 women who have been harassed

 

I wonder what retaliation they are fearful of (that part in bold)...I'm assuming these people no longer work with the team but maybe I'm wrong. If so, I wonder if they fear Snyder could somehow cause trouble at their new jobs, especially if they are still working in the NFL or any sports-related field.

 

One of the women from the article (and maybe the video) responded to me and another guy on twitter, which was surreal lol...didn't say anything of importance other than hoping we watch the lengthier segment on Sunday and that it was the first time they had spoken on video.

[Skinsinparadise]

9 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

I wonder what retaliation they are fearful of (that part in bold)...I'm assuming these people no longer work with the team but maybe I'm wrong. If so, I wonder if they fear Snyder could somehow cause trouble at their new jobs, especially if they are still working in the NFL or any sports-related field.

 

One of the women from the article (and maybe the video) responded to me and another guy on twitter, which was surreal lol...didn't say anything of importance other than hoping we watch the lengthier segment on Sunday and that it was the first time they had spoken on video.

 

Just guessing as to that question.  But maybe its because Snyder is according to some very litigious.  According to some who cover the story and know some of the NFL owners, they think that the owners are likewise intimidated by how litigious Dan can be.  They suspect if the owners push him out they'd try to back door it for that reason -- whatever that means?

 

Being in a businesses where I've seen plenty of lawsuits especially from rich people and I was even a part of one of them -- one way wealthy people can wield power is to throw a lot of money into litigation.  When you got money, you can try to wear the other person down in litigation.  You basically bleed the other where they can no longer afford to pay legal fees so they back off. 

 

One common tactic (which I've seen first hand) is to have your attorney purposely drag a legal case slowly, to jack up legal fees to eventually wear the other one down financially.  As to how that would pertain here?  Not sure.  But one common tactic is to counter sue the person suing or lets say sue anyone making an accusation or threaten to sue them.  

Edited September 5, 2020 by Skinsinparadise