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

[Dissident2]

Sports Junkies doubling down on their report from last week this morning. They are 100 percent in on what they talked about with the Wilkinson report and it's number one recommendation to force lil' dan to sell. 

[86 Snyder]

Perhaps the other owners could be sold on the idea that Snyder is being booted for the cover up, NOT the actual allegations in the report.  If they could be convinced it's not some pandoras box that could bite them down the road it would go a long way toward ousting him.

 

Focus on the cover up aspect.  Set *that* precedent for the rest of the league.  Sounds good to me.

 

 

Edited March 8, 2021 by 86 Snyder

[Dissident2]

52 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

Perhaps the other owners could be sold on the idea that Snyder is being booted for the cover up, NOT the actual allegations in the report.  If they could be convinced it's not some pandoras box that could bite them down the road it would go a long way toward ousting him.

 

Focus on the cover up aspect.  Set *that* precedent for the rest of the league.  Sounds good to me.

 

 

 

Whatever works, I will take! 

 

Kevin Sheehan was sort of clarifying a point this morning I made earlier in the thread, that really the only way the NFL cannot make the main results of the report public at this point would be to work out a way for Snyder to sell. Anything short of that, they're going to need to 'splain. He did say that the cover-up aspects could be what end up causing this UNLESS there's some sort of smoking gun in the report that no one knows about and the league (and Snyder) would want to keep quiet, hence making a sale beneficial to all parties. 

 

I personally doubt there's any kind of huge smoking gun of that magnitude only because of the other option presented to suspend Snyder. If there was something truly illegal in that report, I don't believe that option would've been included. My hunch is that they uncovered so much in the way of a simply horrific, toxic culture created and perpetuated by Snyder that, combined with his efforts to cover it up, they feel it would be best for the league if he's gone. 

 

It will take 2/3 of the owners to vote for that to happen if it's the case. So that means you'll need 21 owners out of 31 who don't consider themselves in that "there but for the grace of God go I" category. Maybe I'm naive, but that doesn't sound completely out of the question to me.

 

We shall see.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

The cover up is almost worse than whatever could have taken place.  Someone who really wants to get to the bottom of the awful culture, that they 'didn't know existed' because they were 'too hands off', doesn't in any way try to impact the investigation.  

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I think the owners trembling in fear that all their secrets will come to light is being overblown a little. I don't doubt some guys have things they don't want out there...but I still am not convinced that protecting Snyder makes them any more likely to be protected. 

 

Given the current climate with social justice, MeToo, change.org, etc., I really think the owners invite MORE scrutiny if they help this go away than if they do the right thing. I think it would raise WAY TOO MANY questions if a league-hired investigator recommends forcing him to divest and they don't do it. My first question would be "what are they hiding" 

 

If they follow the recommendation, of course anyone could be next if they have similar offenses, but the public would get their blood and might be less inclined to start turning over each and every rock out there. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

23 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

I think the owners trembling in fear that all their secrets will come to light is being overblown a little.

Agreed, and I think much of that stems from folks wanting to believe that it's not just Snyder who is bad, but the other owners are bad too.  I see this 'but, but everyone else does it too' sort of argument come up a lot over the years regarding Snyder's problems.

 

If there was ever a time for blatant, rampant sexual harassment claims to be brought to light, it's been over the last year or two.  Yet the only guy currently managing these allegations is Dan Snyder.  I would think that if it was as bad elsewhere as it is/was here, we'd have heard more about it by now.  

 

 

Edited March 8, 2021 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[tshile]

I also think it’s a bit ridiculous (just because of how unfounded it is) to default to other owners being somehow on the same level as Snyder, and being scared it’ll mean their next to take their team away. 
 

snyder harassed and demeaned people within the organization. There’s numerous scandals around the cheerleaders, the worst of which is filming them while naked without their knowledge and then sharing it. 
 

and then we have how he’s treated non-employees or former employees. Legal threats, smear campaigns. Now we’ve got social media bots. 
 

it’s not that I don’t think other owners are incapable of being this ridiculously awful of a person - it’s just... this is a ridiculously bad level of actions. It’s an incredibly bad culture he’s created. 
 

and given what we’ve watched over the last 10 years about me too and racial issues, does anyone really believe that anything close to this level is going on elsewhere and those women/employees are watching this and have not said a word?

 

the Washington post got 40-50 women just from the organization to contact them to speak. Plus other former/current employees. 
 

not one for any of the other 31 teams, past or present?

 

the other owners surely have “skeletons in their closet” as most people who make it into the later years do...

 

but on this level? 
 

I wouldn’t be surprised if the other owners are simply taking advantage of a chance to oust a piece of garbage and replace him with a high quality individual, by just letting this leaked report fester in public until they are “forced to do something” about it. 
 

I also wouldn’t be surprised if they just bury it and it works because ultimately we’ve fallen so far as an organization the rest of the country honestly doesn’t even care...

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Right, I’d imagine most people wealthy enough to buy a team have some skeletons in their closet.  I wouldn’t be surprised to find out they aren’t great human beings and are completely disconnected from the realities that the other 99% face.

 

But, I find it hard to believe many others run their businesses like Dan does.  That their culture is on the same level of what has been reported about Ashburn.

 

Sure, you’ve got owners that simply aren’t good owners, similar to Dan.  Sure, you’re likely to find some less than flattering information about some of them.

 

But if they were running their operations anywhere near what we’ve heard reported about Ashburn, the time for folks to spill the beans has come and thus far, nothing.  
 

 

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

On 3/6/2021 at 7:21 AM, profusion said:

 

He probably thinks that he'll get to the promised land if he just keeps digging.

 

He won't sell because no one will ever invite him to their parties again or pretend to be his friend. To narcissistic, cry-baby billionaires, an NFL team is just a toy they like to show off, like a balding 57-year old man buying a Lamborghini Countache.

[Skinsinparadise]

This is from Breer who is is pretty well connected in the league

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/03/08/mmqb-salary-cap-squeeze-free-agency-veteran-trade-candidates

Transparency is going to be key in the Washington Football Team report. The Junkies, a stalwart sports radio show on 106.7 The Fan in D.C., reported details Friday from what they said is a 130-page report by Beth Wilkinson, the noted lawyer hired to spearhead a probe into the franchise’s workplace culture launched in the wake of a series of Washington Post exposés last summer. In it, per the show, was a recommendation for either a lengthy suspension or sale by owner Dan Snyder. The NFL pushed back on the notion, denying that they’d received a report from Wilkinson (the implication I got over the weekend is that the report doesn’t yet exist, though it’s certainly possible there’s some sort of draft out there). So here’s the thing: The whole issue within that team, from the start, was about what was happening behind closed doors, or in settings where cameras and recorders weren’t rolling.

 

And in a case like that, a franchise (or any company) loses any benefit of being able to say trust us. That means it’s imperative that in this case, for the benefit of the people that worked there now, have worked there in the past and will work there in the future, all findings need to be public to a reasonable degree (protecting victims, of course, would be understandable). To me, it’s the only way the new people running that team, and there are a lot of good folks in those ranks (Jason Wright, Ron Rivera, Marty Hurney, Martin Mayhew) move past this. I’d also say it’d be advisable to follow whatever Wilkinson’s recommendations are, even if the idea of a forced sale makes the other 30 owners uncomfortable.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Right, I’d imagine most people wealthy enough to buy a team have some skeletons in their closet.  I wouldn’t be surprised to find out they aren’t great human beings and are completely disconnected from the realities that the other 99% face.

 

But, I find it hard to believe many others run their businesses like Dan does.  That their culture is on the same level of what has been reported about Ashburn.

 

Sure, you’ve got owners that simply aren’t good owners, similar to Dan.  Sure, you’re likely to find some less than flattering information about some of them.

 

But if they were running their operations anywhere near what we’ve heard reported about Ashburn, the time for folks to spill the beans has come and thus far, nothing.  
 

 

Great posts by you and @tshile 

 

I want to add one thing...I also think that even if we are only looking at self-preservation (not innocence/guilt) of the other owners, rolling on Snyder probably HELPS those who have things they don't want to come to light. So, there are two reasons it's being overblown in my book: 1) there are likely very few cases out there, if any and 2) protecting Snyder probably accelerates a deeper look into the other 31 teams. 

[kfrankie]

3 hours ago, tshile said:

I also think it’s a bit ridiculous (just because of how unfounded it is) to default to other owners being somehow on the same level as Snyder, and being scared it’ll mean their next to take their team away. 
 

snyder harassed and demeaned people within the organization. There’s numerous scandals around the cheerleaders, the worst of which is filming them while naked without their knowledge and then sharing it. 
 

and then we have how he’s treated non-employees or former employees. Legal threats, smear campaigns. Now we’ve got social media bots. 
 

it’s not that I don’t think other owners are incapable of being this ridiculously awful of a person - it’s just... this is a ridiculously bad level of actions. It’s an incredibly bad culture he’s created. 
 

and given what we’ve watched over the last 10 years about me too and racial issues, does anyone really believe that anything close to this level is going on elsewhere and those women/employees are watching this and have not said a word?

 

the Washington post got 40-50 women just from the organization to contact them to speak. Plus other former/current employees. 
 

not one for any of the other 31 teams, past or present?

 

the other owners surely have “skeletons in their closet” as most people who make it into the later years do...

 

but on this level? 
 

I wouldn’t be surprised if the other owners are simply taking advantage of a chance to oust a piece of garbage and replace him with a high quality individual, by just letting this leaked report fester in public until they are “forced to do something” about it. 
 

I also wouldn’t be surprised if they just bury it and it works because ultimately we’ve fallen so far as an organization the rest of the country honestly doesn’t even care...

 

This is precisely why i cannot see 21 of the 32 owners voting to force a sale of the team.  Every single one of these ownership groups has to be thinking either (1) what happens when a [insert prior incident that was settled/resolved] is brought back to the surface by a bitter [intern, employee, coach, player], or (2) what did we potentially miss in the past?  Forcing a sale would not be in their interest.

 

Also, Donald Sterling's forced sale was a much different scenario.  Caught on tape by his trophy girlfriend using racially inflammatory language.  He left the other owners no choice but to schedule a vote (which never happened, but certainly expedited things), he was suffering from dementia when things came to a head, and he had ultimately lost control whe the decision to sell was made.

[Dissident2]

21 minutes ago, kfrankie said:

 

This is precisely why i cannot see 21 of the 32 owners voting to force a sale of the team.  Every single one of these ownership groups has to be thinking either (1) what happens when a [insert prior incident that was settled/resolved] is brought back to the surface by a bitter [intern, employee, coach, player], or (2) what did we potentially miss in the past?  Forcing a sale would not be in their interest.

 

It really all depends on what's in the investigation report. If it's stuff that 21 other owners can look at and say, "Holy lord, I'm nowhere near that bad, this is disgusting," then there's hope for what we all want. My hunch is that will be the case, because again, we're not talking about one instance of wrongdoing here, we're talking about stuff that stretches out over decades with many, many people affected, AND a potential effort to cover that up. We also have to factor in the fact that he's devalued the team since he's been the owner to the point of it being an utter embarrassment to the league as a whole. I'm also of the opinion that the whole "they are all scared to set a precedent" thing is a bit overblown. He's a terrible owner who does damage to the brand that keeps everyone rich. He's nearly destroyed what was once one of the premier teams and fan bases in the entire league, representing the nation's capital. He's liked by virtually no one among that group, from what I can gather. Here's there chance to basically take Fredo out for a boat ride. I hope they take it. 

 

ALL THAT SAID, I still think the odds favor a suspension and not forcing the little despot to sell. I hope I'm wrong, and I wish the law firm never offered that second option. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

I still think while the contents of the report are significant, if it's true that Dan tried to interfere with it - that's even worse.  It clears up the façade that he's learned and that this sea of change when it comes to diversity was really just a ploy all along to get out in front of things.  I don't know if that's going to get 21 owners to vote him out, but I'd have to imagine that the league will have to do something, most likely a suspension.  Which to me is basically the equivalent of nothing.  Sure it would be embarrassing to Dan, but the last 2 decades have been embarrassing, so what's new?

[slinky]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/03/08/d-c-radio-station-issues-correction-to-report-regarding-wft-investigation/
D.C. radio station issues correction to report regarding WFT investigation

[Burgundy Yoda]

106.7 The Fan right now:

[86 Snyder]

If you actually read the article, they are standing by their reporting on the issue.  Just saying that it's possible the NFL has not received the report yet.  

 

[Burgundy Yoda]

10 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

If you actually read the article, they are standing by their reporting on the issue.  Just saying that it's possible the NFL has not received the report yet.  

 

They aren't even sure if the report is a final draft or not. I can already see the goal posts moving on this one. 

[Mr. Sinister]

[Dissident2]

28 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

They aren't even sure if the report is a final draft or not. I can already see the goal posts moving on this one. 

Time will tell. From what I can see, this is hardly a huge "revelation" or anything that wasn't talked about on Friday. The last line of the article says: 

 

"However the unfinished report made its way to 106.7 The Fan, there’s now reason to believe that the initial report was accurate but premature. Time will tell whether that’s the case. Regardless, this specific development makes full transparency as to the investigation, the findings, and the consequences even more important."

 

So the only question is whether or not the report they looked at was "finished" and actually sent to the league. Looks the answer to the latter question is "no." The answer to the former question is still unclear. Even if it wasn't finished, does anyone really believe the conclusion to force Dan to sell would be added to a draft and then removed? Come on, man. This changes virtually nothing. 

 

[Commander PK]

I think the most likely scenario is that the report was leaked purposely prior to it be sent to the NFL.  The reason is somebody had concerns they would cover up or downplay the findings.  
 

Another theory I have is the report the junks have is an early draft, and the recommendations could have changed somewhat...perhaps used as leverage to gain more cooperation.  Not as likely. 

[Skinsinparadise]

On 3/8/2021 at 10:26 AM, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Agreed, and I think much of that stems from folks wanting to believe that it's not just Snyder who is bad, but the other owners are bad too.  I see this 'but, but everyone else does it too' sort of argument come up a lot over the years regarding Snyder's problems.

 

 

I've said this from the outset (not that it was anything of a revelation) which is the other owners have to take some heat here for covering up for Dan if that's their agenda.  Otherwise Dan will be exonerated. 

 

The others owners naturally would want to come off as some sort of passive observers who will go along with whatever the punishment is from the commissioner and then move on.

 

But as a national media observer of this has said the interesting note about the leak to the Junkies isn't just the information but the fact that the leak actually happened.  Someone went out of their way specifically to put the league's feet to the fire by revealing the recommendation that otherwise likely would have never came out from the league.

 

So the league (other owners) blowing off said recommendation would make them look bad and in a way complicit with all of this.  Otherwise, I'd guess the commissioner would just cherry pick parts of the plan and incorporate that into the punishment and no one would have ever thought there was more to it than that.  For that matter, I've heard sometimes no recommendations are made at all in league investigations like this -- often they just gather the facts and let the league decide the punishment.

 

I've thought for a long time the only shot we got for other owners to vote out Dan is for them to actually feel some of that heat.  As Loverro pointed out in a recent Sheehan podcast, while other owners don't want to set the precedent of removing one of their own -- Dan's cover up might give them a unique opportunity to do it because even though they might have their own skeletons in the closet, they can tell themselves yeah but we won't engage in a cover up where we hire PI's to intimidate witnesses and tell our people not to cooperate with the investigation.

 

Still feels too good to be true for it to go down but ironically Dan's behavior in the investigation (which is so on brand for him) might be the fighting chance for him to be ousted. 

13 hours ago, Painkiller said:

I think the most likely scenario is that the report was leaked purposely prior to it be sent to the NFL.  The reason is somebody had concerns they would cover up or downplay the findings.  
 

Another theory I have is the report the junks have is an early draft, and the recommendations could have changed somewhat...perhaps used as leverage to gain more cooperation.  Not as likely. 

 

I'd guess its the fear would be the downplaying.  Hard for me to believe they initially felt harsh about Dan's alleged cover up and then warmed up and felt softer about it.  

Edited March 9, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[SkinsFTW]

On 3/6/2021 at 5:07 PM, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

 

What I can’t wrap my head around is any level of defense for Dan.  I just cannot understand how or why anyone in 2021 would still be going to bat for this dude in any capacity. 

 

 

This is what I haven't been able to understand, but I haven't understood it for over a decade.

 

This is not a new experience with Doofus Dan!

 

https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/221900/the-cranky-redskins-fans-guide-to-dan-snyder/

Edited March 9, 2021 by SkinsFTW

[tshile]

On 3/7/2021 at 12:58 PM, tshile said:

I agree with everything but this. 
 

the junkies are not, individually or collectively, all that smart.... I think it is absolutely plausible they got duped. I’m leaning towards it being (more or less) accurate, I just don’t have any faith the junkies   
 

it’s not like they’re journalists either...

yeah.
 

About that. 
 

 

[Simmsy]

Am i the only one that is ok with Snyder as an owner? I mean, yeah, dude sucks...but will Bezos be any better? We all know that Bezos is a terrible human being, a penis that wished to be a real boy. Who knows what Bezos or any of the other new owners would do once they got a hold of the reins. I'd rather stick with the evil we already know. Plus, it looks like he's finally backed off from making any football decisions...for now...