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

[hot4u]

12 hours ago, TrancesWithWolves said:

 

 

 

Good news on that front!

 

Snyder is personally interviewing for the newly created position a professional with long time experience in the entertainment industry...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introducing the WFTs new Executive Vice President of Guest Experiences, Miss Jessica Rabbit.

 

 

 

 

That's funny

 

[Rocky21]

Yesterday the team announced it needs to hire a director of game-day operations, who will have a pivotal role in shaping the fan experience at FedEx Field. 

 

It only took them 22 ****ing years to realize that the game day experience has gone straight down the ****ing tubes?  Best ownership ever!

Edited February 11, 2021 by Rocky21

[Busch1724]

Is it possible, the league and its lawyers got what they needed from the cheerleaders prior to the settlement?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

52 minutes ago, Busch1724 said:

Is it possible, the league and its lawyers got what they needed from the cheerleaders prior to the settlement?

The cheerleaders settled for the semi-nude tapes that were created. Since even the cheerleaders never knew they existed until those former employees came forward this summer, I don't think there is much that the league would have gotten from their involvement. The investigation and maybe more interviews with former employees might have been more valuable in determining who created the tapes, if more exist, etc. 

 

If you think about it, all one of the victims could provide is "yep, that's me" or "I'm extremely disgusted by this" 

[ntotoro]

You never know what is on the mind of someone, male or female, who is on the receiving end of treatment like this.

 

I worked with a team lead 2-3 years ago who was my age, an attractive woman and regular crossfit junkie. Amazing physique and didn't smell like she ate 8,000 grams of protein on a daily basis. She showed me emails from our PM commenting on her looks, saying "You look hot today" and things like that. When I asked why she never took any action, because we regularly had (mostly female) interns from GMU who could fall prey to him, she said "I'm holding on to them in case I need anything."

 

While I admire her determination in a weird way, others half her age could suffer. Young girls who are more prone to falling influence to someone in a position of authority telling them "You work in a small community, so it's important to build bridges."

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 hour ago, ntotoro said:

You never know what is on the mind of someone, male or female, who is on the receiving end of treatment like this.

 

I worked with a team lead 2-3 years ago who was my age, an attractive woman and regular crossfit junkie. Amazing physique and didn't smell like she ate 8,000 grams of protein on a daily basis. She showed me emails from our PM commenting on her looks, saying "You look hot today" and things like that. When I asked why she never took any action, because we regularly had (mostly female) interns from GMU who could fall prey to him, she said "I'm holding on to them in case I need anything."

 

While I admire her determination in a weird way, others half her age could suffer. Young girls who are more prone to falling influence to someone in a position of authority telling them "You work in a small community, so it's important to build bridges."

Yep, every day most of us have to balance what's right for us vs. what's right for the greater good. 

 

Edit: And my larger point was just that I never thought this scandal would provide the smoking gun to oust Snyder. It's the most disturbing, but it's also difficult to tie to him AND the victims themselves can't really prove anything about him (they can confirm the tape exists, but how would one of them know who ordered it?)

Edited February 11, 2021 by TD_washingtonredskins

[Califan007 The Constipated]

On 2/10/2021 at 8:18 AM, TD_washingtonredskins said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/02/10/washington-football-team-cheerleaders-settlement/

 

 

Former Washington Football Team cheerleaders who appeared in lewd videos that team employees secretly produced from outtakes of 2008 and 2010 swimsuit calendar shoots have reached confidential settlements with the team.

 

“The matter has been resolved,” said Cindy Minniti, an attorney representing the team and owner Daniel Snyder, when asked about dozens of ex-cheerleaders represented separately by attorneys Lisa Banks and Gloria Allred. None of the lawyers would provide any details on the terms of the settlements.

 

 

That's step 1!

 

 

 

This isn't good...was expecting some sort of court case with a ton of evidence brought to light. Maybe the investigation will still bring it to the surface...

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

This isn't good...was expecting some sort of court case with a ton of evidence brought to light. Maybe the investigation will still bring it to the surface...

Might be good for the girls involved...as much as I want Snyder gone, I can also understand that his removal wasn't everyone's top priority here

[Califan007 The Constipated]

4 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Might be good for the girls involved...as much as I want Snyder gone, I can also understand that his removal wasn't everyone's top priority here

 

yeah, that's why I'm hoping the investigation may bring pertinent facts about the videos to light (like maybe Snyder really did tell Larry to have the videos made)...since the investigators aren't covered by any confidentiality from the settlement I'm keeping my fingers crossed lol. Whether Snyder stays or is forced to sell, I want to know more solid facts of his involvement in things besides being ultimately responsible for a toxic workplace.

Edited February 11, 2021 by Califan007

[TD_washingtonredskins]

7 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

yeah, that's why I'm hoping the investigation may bring pertinent facts about the videos to light (like maybe Snyder really did tell Larry to have the videos made)...since the investigators aren't covered by any confidentiality from the settlement I'm keeping my fingers crossed lol. Whether Snyder stays or is forced to sell, I want to know more solid facts of his involvement in things besides being ultimately responsible for a toxic workplace.

I'd like to know too and would hope the investigation would have a lot of that. It should right? If Beth Wilkinson isn't interviewing former employees, looking through e-mails, etc. then what has she been doing over the past 6 months?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

I'd like to know too and would hope the investigation would have a lot of that. It should right? If Beth Wilkinson isn't interviewing former employees, looking through e-mails, etc. then what has she been doing over the past 6 months?

 

Yep, and this settlement with whatever level of confidentiality would have been after she finished the majority of her investigation...so they could have still talked to her without any issue.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

38 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Yep, and this settlement with whatever level of confidentiality would have been after she finished the majority of her investigation...so they could have still talked to her without any issue.

I suppose, but again, what would the cheerleaders know? They did a calendar shoot, then a decade later the Post contacts them to say that they were in a video, they retained representation, and settled out of court.

 

I think the true intel on the cheerleader video scandal comes more from the folks who worked with Larry Michael and that crew at the time, not the victims who had no idea it was happening at the time. 

[Dissident2]

2 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

I think the true intel on the cheerleader video scandal comes more from the folks who worked with Larry Michael and that crew at the time, not the victims who had no idea it was happening at the time. 

 

That's correct. And I doubt the NFL investigators could've forced Larry to be interviewed or anyone else who didn't want to be. That's why that court case was necessary in the grand scheme of wanting Snyder being held responsible. Lying to a Post reporter is one thing. Lying under oath in court is quite another. You had two separate people from different periods there saying Larry ordered these videos to be made, and one of them says he also told the crew it was ultimately "for the owner." Seems to me it wouldn't have been that hard to at the very least prove that Larry asked for the videos. Then it would've been up to Larry as to whether or not he'd tell the truth as to Snyder's involvement. Now these guys can just pretend it all never happened. Sickening. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

10 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

I suppose, but again, what would the cheerleaders know? They did a calendar shoot, then a decade later the Post contacts them to say that they were in a video, they retained representation, and settled out of court.

 

I think the true intel on the cheerleader video scandal comes more from the folks who worked with Larry Michael and that crew at the time, not the victims who had no idea it was happening at the time. 

 

If anything seemed "unprofessional" by the vidographer at the time--such as catching them at times seeming to aim the camera in ways that made them feel uncomfortable or comments made, if they heard anything through the grapevine about the videos even if it was rumor, if unseemly comments were made to them by anyone at the Park (especially if by Larry) that could be shown to be tied directly to the video mashup made for the "executives" that they wouldn't have connected the dots on at the time...stuff like that can start to fill in blanks.

Edited February 12, 2021 by Califan007

[TD_washingtonredskins]

8 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

If anything seemed "unprofessional" by the vidographer at the time--such as catching them at times seeming to aim the camera in ways that made them feel uncomfortable or comments made, if they heard anything through the grapevine about the videos even if it was rumor, if unseemly comments were made to them by anyone at the Park (especially if by Larry) that could be shown to be tied directly to the video mashup made for the "executives" that they wouldn't have connected the dots on at the time...stuff like that can start to fill in blanks.

That's fair...but my understanding is that they had very little interaction with most of those Redskins execs. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

2 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

That's fair...but my understanding is that they had very little interaction with most of those Redskins execs. 

 

yeah, that's why it would have to be through the grapevine, not directly. At the very least they may have been able to steer investigators to people who could be more informative. I also wonder if that cheerleader from 2004 who Snyder suggested go to the hotel room with what's-his-ass is part of the settlement (I didn't read the write-up lol)...i'm just reaching for something that could be under any and every stone. Turn ALL them ****ers over.

 

Also, I tend to react slightly stronger to the video aspect in all this for all the reasons I mentioned earlier in the thread pages ago...I've had models tell me about their experience with professional photographers that didn't seem right (one I mentioned earlier thought she might have even had something slipped into her drink and had me look at her proofs to see if she looked different in the pics taken later in the shoot). I tend to be protective in that regard...

[TD_washingtonredskins]

32 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

yeah, that's why it would have to be through the grapevine, not directly. At the very least they may have been able to steer investigators to people who could be more informative. I also wonder if that cheerleader from 2004 who Snyder suggested go to the hotel room with what's-his-ass is part of the settlement (I didn't read the write-up lol)...i'm just reaching for something that could be under any and every stone. Turn ALL them ****ers over.

 

Also, I tend to react slightly stronger to the video aspect in all this for all the reasons I mentioned earlier in the thread pages ago...I've had models tell me about their experience with professional photographers that didn't seem right (one I mentioned earlier thought she might have even had something slipped into her drink and had me look at her proofs to see if she looked different in the pics taken later in the shoot). I tend to be protective in that regard...

Good post...I definitely think it's a damning development. To me, it's the most disturbing and the one that resulted in me tuning out this year. I had enough once these videos came to light. I just also believe it's the hardest to pin on Snyder without an audit trail (email or text). I think the 2004 incident is also disgusting and awful, but the statute of limitations is long gone on that one. 

[Skinsinparadise]

I know a couple people on this thread at a minimum intensely dislike Jay.  i wasn't sure about Jay the coach but I argued that he was given a bad hand like all coaches here.   but as a dude i like him, nice guy, fun and honest.  So for those who do care he took a deep drive into his tenure on Sheehan's podcast, a must listen IMO.  Some highlights:

 

 He goes into what did he have to promise Dan to get the job.  RG3 and what happened with him.  He got into the defensive woes and coordinators.  All the back and forth with Kirk. So many of us speculated at the time but we didn't know.  Jay really uncovers some funny stuff like he was concerned they'd lose Kirk for nothing and Dan reassures him saying when have I ever lost a player because of money? 

 

Jay said he knows for a fact they had multiple good deals that could be made for Kirk.  Felt Kirk wanted to go.   So between that and what Keim said on Standig's podcast, sounds like Bruce/Dan thought they can just win the negotiation. 

 

Pierre and D-Jax were high maintenance  Pierre refused to run a route right at the end of the half at that Eagles game because Jay called a fade and Pierre refused to run fades -- creating confusion at the snap of the ball and led to Kirk oddly taking a knee.  Pierre was really stubborn about what he wanted to do and when he wanted to do it.  Jay liked Desean.  But he describes him and Pierre as not the easiest dudes to deal with and they were competitive with each other. 

 

Jay recounting the playoff game and how they were prepped to not substitute so to to fall prey to Rodgers' snap counts and yet they did it anyway.  To me at least its funny/interesting stuff.

 

As for Haskins.  He said it wasn't that the scouts disliked him but saw him as a 2nd-3rd rounder, not a first rounder.  Jay among others thought he'd fall to that range too in the draft. He knew he said 6 months before the draft they'd take Haskins because  Dan would comment repeatedly during the college season that he was the best college player. 

 

Jay knew they couldn't talk Dan out of it because of all the media talking heads that Dan would listen to would pump Haskins on TV.   He mentioned Dan liked that Haskins went to Dan's son's school.  And Dan would gloat every week during the college season and jokingly jab Jay saying he bets Jay doesn't like Haskins because he's so good. 

 

Jay put together a tape of Haskins throws from college showcases his weaknesses.  Touted that so much of his numbers were predicated by YAC -- sweeps from Parris Campbell.   He liked Stidham later in the draft.  He didn't like Rosen coming out of the draft and he and the FO wasn't interested in trading for him when he hit the trade market.  Jay said Haskins' issues are inconsistency and he doesn't prepare like he should. 

 

He admitted he and Callahan didn't really always get along there so he wasn't surprised he took jabs at him when he took over. 

 

As for why Dan has never won Jay's take is QB.   They made too many mistakes at QB.  You can't win if its unstable. He mentioned letting Kirk go.  Alex getting hurt.  Drafting RG3.  

 

Likes Alex albeit sees him as a game manager, favors checkdowns.  He cited that's likely why Alex's previous teams moved on from him.   But if the defenses plays well, you can win with Alex because he protects the football.  When they decided to go get Alex, Jay wasn't consulted about it or tipped off that they were doing it.  He was told about it once they traded for him.

 

He says if the coach can't control who is on the roster, specifically letting go players who spoil the culture, than you can't create a culture.  He thinks Ron having that power will help.  But he doesn't see them as future winner until they figure out the QB spot.   As for Heinicke, he said tough for him to tell from a small sample like that if he's the goods, so he'd need to see him in practice to judge his future.  

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I know a couple people on this thread at a minimum intensely dislike Jay.  i wasn't sure about Jay the coach but I argued that he was given a bad hand like all coaches here.   but as a dude i like him, nice guy, fun and honest.  So for those who do care he took a deep drive into his tenure on Sheehan's podcast, a must listen IMO.  Some highlights:

 

 He goes into what did he have to promise Dan to get the job.  RG3 and what happened with him.  He got into the defensive woes and coordinators.  All the back and forth with Kirk. So many of us speculated at the time but we didn't know.  Jay really uncovers some funny stuff like he was concerned they'd lose Kirk for nothing and Dan reassures him saying when have I ever lost a player because of money? 

 

Jay said he knows for a fact they had multiple good deals that could be made for Kirk.  Felt Kirk wanted to go.   So between that and what Keim said on Standig's podcast, sounds like Bruce/Dan thought they can just win the negotiation. 

 

Pierre and D-Jax were high maintenance  Pierre refused to run a route right at the end of the half at that Eagles game because Jay called a fade and Pierre refused to run fades -- creating confusion at the snap of the ball and led to Kirk oddly taking a knee.  Pierre was really stubborn about what he wanted to do and when he wanted to do it.  Jay liked Desean.  But he describes him and Pierre as not the easiest dudes to deal with and they were competitive with each other. 

 

Jay recounting the playoff game and how they were prepped to not substitute so to to fall prey to Rodgers' snap counts and yet they did it anyway.  To me at least its funny/interesting stuff.

 

As for Haskins.  He said it wasn't that the scouts disliked him but saw him as a 2nd-3rd rounder, not a first rounder.  Jay among others thought he'd fall to that range too in the draft. He knew he said 6 months before the draft they'd take Haskins because  Dan would comment repeatedly during the college season that he was the best college player. 

 

Jay knew they couldn't talk Dan out of it because of all the media talking heads that Dan would listen to would pump Haskins on TV.   He mentioned Dan liked that Haskins went to Dan's son's school.  And Dan would gloat every week during the college season and jokingly jab Jay saying he bets Jay doesn't like Haskins because he's so good. 

 

Jay put together a tape of Haskins throws from college showcases his weaknesses.  Touted that so much of his numbers were predicated by YAC -- sweeps from Parris Campbell.   He liked Stidham later in the draft.  He didn't like Rosen coming out of the draft and he and the FO wasn't interested in trading for him when he hit the trade market.  Jay said Haskins' issues are inconsistency and he doesn't prepare like he should. 

 

He admitted he and Callahan didn't really always get along there so he wasn't surprised he took jabs at him when he took over. 

 

As for why Dan has never won Jay's take is QB.   They made too many mistakes at QB.  You can't win if its unstable. He mentioned letting Kirk go.  Alex getting hurt.  Drafting RG3.  

 

Likes Alex albeit sees him as a game manager, favors checkdowns.  He cited that's likely why Alex's previous teams moved on from him.   But if the defenses plays well, you can win with Alex because he protects the football.  When they decided to go get Alex, Jay wasn't consulted about it or tipped off that they were doing it.  He was told about it once they traded for him.

 

He says if the coach can't control who is on the roster, specifically letting go players who spoil the culture, than you can't create a culture.  He thinks Ron having that power will help.  But he doesn't see them as future winner until they figure out the QB spot.   As for Heinicke, he said tough for him to tell from a small sample like that if he's the goods, so he'd need to see him in practice to judge his future.  

 

 

That's interesting stuff, why did Jay call so many fades if a) Pierre refused to run them and b) none of our receivers were better contested catch guys

 

That said, Jay has always come across as an easy guy to get along.  But we also happen to know he's kind of a scumbag.  There's his handling of players, the stories with Bibbs, him chasing 21 year olds around at 2am during a week where he had a game that Sunday.  The culture at Ashburn.  He's scapegoating Bruce/Dan on the culture, but I also bet a fair amount is that Jay just didn't care.

[Tsailand]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Sheehan's podcast, a must listen IMO.

Agreed.

 

He wasn't consulted before the Alex Smith trade. 

[Skinsinparadise]

8 hours ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

That's interesting stuff, why did Jay call so many fades if a) Pierre refused to run them and b) none of our receivers were better contested catch guys

 

That said, Jay has always come across as an easy guy to get along.  But we also happen to know he's kind of a scumbag.  There's his handling of players, the stories with Bibbs, him chasing 21 year olds around at 2am during a week where he had a game that Sunday.  The culture at Ashburn.  He's scapegoating Bruce/Dan on the culture, but I also bet a fair amount is that Jay just didn't care.

 

He actually didn't call that many fades but when he did they got a lot of notice.  But that's not on Jay. Pierre can't tell the coach what he's willing or not willing to run to the extent of refusing to run certain plays. 

 

The Bibbs story is from Bibbs point on view in the Internet, we don't know if that's true.  Jay's been married for a long time if I recall so I gather he might not be womanizing like crazy but who knows.  I don't see how anyone can "scapegoat" Dan/Bruce on the cutlure issues -- especially Dan -- no scapegoating needed - Dan is the culture.  

 

Jay's point of view on the culture is he wasn't allowed to get rid of the bad culture guys on the team.   Jay for his faults doesn't come off like a bad dude, most seem to like him, including his players and not just because of his supposed lack of tough practices 😀 but also because almost every player said he was a really nice dude even Trent said it.  That wasn't the case with Bruce and Dan though some players like Dan.   But Dan is not described by everyone as a nicest guy to work for and his style (and Bruce's IMO) led to the nasty culture they've had.  Culture starts from the top -- the top is Dan. 

 

Having said that I don't see Jay as a culture builder either.  I don't think that's in his personality.   Rivera IMO is the perfect dude to establish a culture if Dan lets him.   For that culture to change, Dan has to change.  Firsrt and foremost it has to be Dan.  Dan is the king of the kingdom, not whomever the head coach is or even for that matter the head of personnel. If Dan can't change and backoff, things will never change. 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

I'll add one more thing to the Sheehan/Jay interview.  It was funny how Jay joked about hey the media draft dudes gave them an A for the 2019 draft implying that Dan felt good about himself that he might the right move.  Jay basically echoed (he implied it instead of outright saying it) the same thing there that other personnel/coaches have joked about which is the media draft geeks are entertainment, but the FO's don't take them seriously.  Mel Kiper, Matt Miller or name that dude isn't a professional evaluator. 

 

On the Haskins thread back at the time, I recall muiltiple people arguing with some of us about Dan taking Haskins being justified and his draft status being justified because of where he landed in mock drafts.   Well, I'll just say, Dan thinks the same way you guys did.  If he has a man crush on a player and Bucky Brooks or Todd McShay or name that media talking head agrees with him, than that's enough to justify his pick regardless of what his scouts think.  Personally I thought that was wild then and even wilder now to hear Jay recount Dan's process on it. 

 

The way Jay recounts that story, I'd put money it wasn't the first time that Dan man crushed on a player in the draft and cited some dude on ESPN or whereever to justify it.  And for those who backed Dan on his reading of Haskins based on your own readings of mock drafts, you might think twice about that in the future after listening to that podcast. 

 

Clearly, that's not how to pick players.  If these mock drafters were football evaluator gods they'd been working now in the NFL.  I enjoy reading a mock as much as anyone here but its for entertainment purposes not gospel.  If those dudes were the be all and end all, why bother with a FO or scouting staff at all?  Just go through Kipers top 100, or Brugler, or name your favorite draft geek and pick out your board that way.   You'd save millions on scouting.  Just subscribe to ESPN Insider, watch Path to the Draft, and your set for the draft. 

 

Clearly Dan does do just that or something like that from time to time, sadly. 🙄

Edited February 14, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

It's not an either-or...it's possible for both Dan and Jay to suck.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

It's not an either-or...it's possible for both Dan and Jay to suck.

 

It's nothing about who sucks to me.  I think Dan is the culture.  He's the reason why every coach we've had has had a losing record.  Dan's been the #1 problem by a mile.  It's not some hybrid Dan/Jay issue.   It's Dan and Dan and Dan.   I've been after Bruce a ton.  But in fairness to Bruce, he's a symptom of the disease, he's not the actual disease. 

 

Even lets say its about the coaches and underlings.  Who hires these guys?   It's 100% on Dan IMO. 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

Here are some of the actual quotes

 

"I just knew (team owner) Dan (Snyder) loved Haskins. He went to the same school as (Snyder's) kid," Gruden said. "He talked about him all the time every time they were on TV and we happened to have a road game and he saw him on TV, 'Yeah you probably don't like him because he's a good player.' So, he would always throw a jab at me, but he loved Dwayne Haskins. I just knew it that if he was available, we were taking him. That was a given."

 

...The No. 15 pick, however, forced Gruden's hand. Inconsistencies in Haskins' game, particularly with the "wow" throws -- on both sides of the spectrum, the good and the bad -- ultimately made his time in Washington untenable. 

But could Gruden have started Haskins all 16 games that season to let him learn and improve on the job?

"Yeah, I would've not minded that at all," Gruden said. "Dwayne wasn't ready, and he never got himself to be ready," Gruden said. "You've got to get yourself ready. He just had a long way to go. I mean he showed talent in practice without a doubt, but he also showed he had a long, long way to go. And it was evident. I think all the players saw it, and they saw it after I left that he wasn't ready and he wasn't going to be ready for a while." 

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/football-team/jay-gruden-knew-washington-would-draft-dwayne-haskins-6-months-draft