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

[zCommander]

So basically remove the man from the top who might have been part of the sexual harassments thing and put a female in charge instead. It is a good way to tell people about  the image and culture change and that the female employees can once again feel comfortable working for WFT. 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by zskins

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Let me start with this: absent a complete and total smoking gun, I never thought the NFL was going to force Snyder to sell.  And from everything reported, there wasn't a smoking gun which was uncovered.  

 

Personally, I think that if there was a smoking gun, the NFL would have been happy to be rid of Dan.  But they weren't going to take action unless there was absolutely clear evidence of direct criminal behavior on Dan's part. The reason is because I bet at least the vast majority of the other owners have had some type of inappropriate behavior of their own, and they wouldn't want to set precedence that unless there was something criminal involved, they could lose their teams.  

 

So, let's for a second assume there was nothing criminal going on.  The NFL levied what I believe is the largest fine to a team it ever has, and basically the team has to go through a proctology exam every quarter.  They didn't quite say it this way, but the team is basically on probation.  They have to implement the 10 recommendations given to them, they have to provide proof that they are doing it, and they are going to have HR consultants running around investigating them constantly.

 

In addition, Dan has been removed from representing the football team at league meetings.  He's basically been suspended as having anything to do with the running of the team and the league.  

 

And they have to pay a $10 million dollar fine. Which isn't a lot, but it also isn't entirely trivial. 

 

I completely understand that some of this feels inadequate.  However, I'd ask, what should the NFL have done?  A larger fine?  Ok, there probably isn't a large enough reasonable fine that they can levy which is going to effect the financial position of a billionaire.  Also, they don't want to bankrupt him or the team, as he's a 1/32 part owner of the NFL.  

 

Make the report public?  To what end? So we could read graphic details of the transgressions? That would serve to just further the embarrassment of the league, so I can understand why they wouldn't want it public.  I mean, we know it was bad already, what purpose would that actually serve, again, assuming the baseline the NFL wasn't going to force Snyder to sell.  

 

I was worried they would take the opportunity to take draft picks or cap space from the team. I was really worried that **** up in New York was going to pull some dirty stuff and tilt the competitive balance of the team.  They didn't do that.  And I'm glad they didn't, as a fan of the team. 

 

So, what else COULD they have practically done?

 

Dan put the NFL in an absolutely horrendous position.  It has to basically hold it's nose and support him, because the other owners don't want to set the precedence non-criminal behavior could cost them their team.  

 

So I sit here, somewhat unsatisfied with the results, but wondering what practical result would have left me satisfied, given that I knew he wouldn't be forced to sell.

1) release the investigation report. 
2) Suspend Snyder for a year.

 

it isn’t that hard. 

3 minutes ago, zskins said:

So basically remove the man from the top who might have been part of the sexual harassments thing and put a female in charge instead. It is a good way to tell people about  the image and culture change and that the female employees can once again feel comfortable working for WFT. 

 

 

 

Feels like a shallow PR Move to me....

[TK]

While no one here agrees the 10 mil fine is enough, here's where it ranks:

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/ranking-nfl-divisions-by-wide-receiver-talent-nfc-west-is-best-thanks-to-dynamic-duos-and-deandre-hopkins/

 

NFL hits Washington with record-setting $10 million fine: Here are the 10 biggest fines in league history

These are the 10 largest fines in NFL history

By John Breech

 

After a lengthy investigation into the workplace conduct of the Washington Football Team, the NFL dropped the hammer on Thursday, hitting them with a record-setting $10 million fine. 

 

The NFL had been investigating the team since Sept. 1 when the league decided to take a look at Washington's workplace issues following a bombshell story from the Washington Post where 15 women accused former team executives of sexual harassment. 

 

The hefty fine given to the Football Team is the largest handed out in NFL history. As a matter of fact, before Thursday no team had even been given a $2 million fine. 

 

Here's a look at the 10 biggest fines in NFL history

 

1. Washington: $10 million. After an investigation that included more than 150 interviews, the NFL ruled that the Football Team had created a hostile workplace culture that fostered an unprofessional workplace environment, especially for women. The team's record-setting fine money will be used for a good cause: The NFL has said that the $10 million will be used to support organizations committed to character education, anti-bullying and healthy relationships.

 

 

2. Broncos: $1.918 million. This was actually two punishments, but they were both for the same thing. In 2001, Denver was fined $968,000 for trying to circumvent the salary cap in their contracts with John Elway and Terrell Davis between 1996 and 1998. The Broncos also got hit with a $950,000 fine in 2004 to bring the total to nearly $2 million. 

 

T-3. Patriots: $1 million. The Patriots were hit with a monstrous fine in May 2015 after the NFL completed its Deflategate investigation. Not only was the team docked $1 million, but it also had to forfeit a draft pick. 

T-3. Eddie DeBartolo Jr: $1 million. Back in 1999, the former 49ers owner was fined $1 million for committing conduct detrimental to the NFL. The fine came after DeBartolo pleaded guilty to one felony charge for the part he played in a Louisiana gambling scandal. 

 

5. Raiders: $800,000. The Raiders violated COVID protocols so often during the 2020 season that they ended up being fined a total of $800,000. 

 

6. Jamal Lewis: $760,000. Less than 12 months after leading the league in rushing in 2003 with a 2,000-yard season, Lewis was hit with a monstrous fine following a court case where he pleaded guilty to federal drug charges. 

 

7. Saints: $700,000. Like the Raiders, the Saints were hit with some major COVID fines in 2020 and those fines ended up totaling $700,000. 

 

T-8. Saints: $500,000. Following the Bountygate scandal in 2012, not only did Sean Payton get suspended for a year, but the Saints were also hit with a $500,000 fine. 

T-8. Bill Belichick: $500,000. After the NFL completed its Spygate investigation in 2007, the league ended up fining the Patriots coach a total of $500,000, which to this day still represents the largest fine ever given to a head coach (Payton didn't get paid while he was suspended in 2012, so he lost out on the most money even though that wasn't technically a fine). 

T-8. Jim Irsay: $500,000. Irsay was hit with a half-million fine after pleading guilty to a DWI in 2014. The Colts owner was  also suspended for six games. 

 

[Cooleyfan1993]

Wait, how is a $10M fine bigger than the (bogus) $36M fine we were given in 2012? Or do cap space penalties not count towards that?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1. Washington: $10 million.

2. Broncos: $1.918 million. 

 

 

Jeebus, just suspend him indefinitely.....

[Califan007 The Constipated]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Based on what Sheehan said he's heard.  Tanya is a really good communicator and a really nice person and that Dan has the opposite reputation on both fronts.  So yeah if she was truly in charge I'd welcome the change.  I think we can take some random person off the street with no background in football at all and they can do better than Dan's level of incompetence and lack of class.   So any change to me is likely positive.  The bar is incredibly low. 

 

But, for starters this looks at best to be temporary.  And heck it would be really simple for him to manage the team via his wife who I'd gather he sees every day.  Running this team in the shadows is what he does anyway to an art form. 

 

Opposite of Dan...good communicator....can only improve things, the bar is so incredibly low from what we had. Dan could still **** things up, though, because he'll find ways to insert himself in things.

 

Tanya sounds like the Ryan Fitzpatrick of the team's executives lol...

[dyst]

Those lesser fines were for gambling, DWI, and deflated footballs. The 10 million is for systemic sexual harassment over a multitude of years. Of course it will be more then those penalties. 

[redskinss]

I'm so ****in sick of this bull****!

All I want to do Is cheer for a football team that hopefully wins a lot of games.

God I wish this **** would just go away!

[Voice_of_Reason]

39 minutes ago, redskinss said:

I'm so ****in sick of this bull****!

All I want to do Is cheer for a football team that hopefully wins a lot of games.

God I wish this **** would just go away!

What you just saw was the NFL’s attempt to make it go away.

[Rufus T Firefly]

41 minutes ago, redskinss said:

I'm so ****in sick of this bull****!

All I want to do Is cheer for a football team that hopefully wins a lot of games.

God I wish this **** would just go away!

[zCommander]

5 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Based on what Sheehan said he's heard.  Tanya is a really good communicator and a really nice person and that Dan has the opposite reputation on both fronts.  So yeah if she was truly in charge I'd welcome the change.  I think we can take some random person off the street with no background in football at all and they can do better than Dan's level of incompetence and lack of class.   So any change to me is likely positive.  The bar is incredibly low. 

 

But, for starters this looks at best to be temporary.  And heck it would be really simple for him to manage the team via his wife who I'd gather he sees every day.  Running this team in the shadows is what he does anyway to an art form. 

 

Dan made millions on communication business. Kinda ironic he doesn't know how to communicate. I think the FO felt it was time to have more of female touch instead.

 

Dan having lack of class , as you said, and a huge ego did him in instead. 

 

Bruce also had a huge ego....see what happened to him. 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by zskins

[Peregrine]

An absolute joke, the NFL thinks that fans are both stupid enough and self-centered enough to believe there isnt a report, that its about keeping things confidential, and that Dan Snyder would be willing to take a $10 million fine because someone made a phone call.

 

Legally they cant fine Snyder based on a phone call without a report, unless hes just willing to pay it voluntarily to wipe this under the rug, which should tell you just how damming any report would have been.  We all know he wouldnt hesitate to use brutal legal force in a heartbeat, much less for a made up fine based on an oral report from someone not doing an official investigation(according to the NFLs own words).

 

Sadly, when I say "the NFL thinks that fans are both stupid enough and self-centered enough", they are right.

[Cooleyfan1993]

@86 Snyder what was funny about my post....? It was a serious question......

[ILikeBilly]

8 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

The punishment for fostering a culture of sexual harassment should be treated the at least the same as on the field infractions and probably higher since it’s sexual harassment of your female employees. Since it isn’t; it shows you the nfl isn’t really serious about sexual harassment.

There are thousands of harassments happening every day. It isn't a small deal, but you don't make the owner of the company sell his business because if it.  Fines are given and you move on.  In this day and age, harassment can be as simple as telling a co-worker you think they are hot or asking them out more than once.  

 

Now, you have a business full of alpha males and millionaires, high testosterone levels and then add a few woman.  That is well know recipe for sexual overtones.  I don't want to make light of what happened, but I guarantee that I son degree it is happening at all 32 clubs, at all of the CFL teams, on the college teams...........

8 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Do you wear a bib when you open wide to swallow all this ****?

 

no idea why you seem eager to defend and approve of this behavior and the laughable punishment 

Who the F are you.  Mods - what do you have to say about what is written above.  Momma, it seems a bit like harassment.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

 

A few thoughts:

 

- Back when this was all first coming out, a know more than a few fans on here were saying that if Snyder were indeed forced to sell, they hoped that the new owners would keep Rivera and Wright on board because they were doing a really good job so far and had the team/franchise on the right track. I imagine that view of both men has only strengthened after last season and this off-season. So I'm not that surprised that it was mentioned as one of the factors considered in all this...that it added some faith among owners and the league that the team culture was genuinely being improved combined with the unspoken reality that a new owner doesn't guarantee the improvement will continue. If Larry, Bruce, and the rest of the Harassment Crew were still with the team, it may have come across as the only way to change the culture is to change the ownership. I doubt the league cares why Snyder made the changes, they are instead looking at the results and if they trust what they see. Rivera and Wright inspire a ****load of trust.

 

- Also back when this was all first coming out, I was skeptical Snyder would be forced to sell. Instead, I was thinking suspension and league-appointed oversight of the franchise for a year or two would be far more likely outcomes, and that if either (or both) of those two things occurred I'd be ok with it. It sounds like both of those things are pretty much what happened.

 

- Some of us mentioned Mark Cuban's situation and compared it to Snyder's situation. The league obviously compared the two as well and felt that set a precedent in the sports world to follow. Both Cuban and Snyder at first claimed they were unaware of what was going on due to somewhat-laughable reasons, with both men having at least one female employee claiming the men directly sexually harassed them. And both men claimed they were not involved in the operations of the team as much as they should have been. In Cuban's case, the investigation determined he really didn't know just how much **** was going on...it removed the aspect of a smoking gun and thus the aspect of heavy penalties specifically towards Cuban. This investigation may have found essentially the same things towards Snyder. We won't know, though, because the report is being hidd--er, it was an oral report and not a written one.

 

- I thought I read there was a written summary of the investigation?...If so, it will be leaked. I'm sure of it. And it will piss off everyone no matter what it says.

 

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Califan007

[SkinsGuy]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/07/01/report-daniel-snyder-cant-resume-control-of-wft-without-approval-from-roger-goodell/

 

The article above says Snyder can't return to day-to-day operations as CEO until Goodell says he can. Probably explains why how long Snyder will be out was so vague yesterday.

 

Also, that his stepping down wasn't really "voluntary". It was a 'step down on your own or we'll suspend you' type move.

Edited July 2, 2021 by SkinsGuy

[profusion]

So, does this mean that the NFL is going to install microphones throughout the Snyder household to ensure that Danny Boy isn't discussing team operations with his newly installed co-CEO while he's "away"?

 

What's funny is that the league thinks that grown adults will buy this stuff.

 

I never thought the NFL would overtly force Dan out, but I was hoping that he would be given an "offer he couldn't refuse" behind the scenes. The league is also a loser out of all this, because they're still stuck with this toxic schmuck who's bad for business. I assume the payoff to make him go away would be more than they could stomach.

Edited July 2, 2021 by profusion

[CobraCommander]

7 minutes ago, profusion said:

So, does this mean that the NFL is going to install microphones throughout the Snyder household to ensure that Danny Boy isn't discussing team operations with his newly installed co-CEO while he's "away"?

 

What's funny is that the league thinks that grown adults will buy this stuff.

 

I never thought the NFL would overtly force Dan out, but I was hoping that he would be given an "offer he couldn't refuse" behind the scenes. The league is also a loser out of all this, because they're still stuck with this toxic schmuck who's bad for business. I assume it the payoff to make him go away would be more than they could stomach.

 

What's stopping her from even calling Dan or texting him? It's a farce. This was a behind the scenes plea deal that doesn't punish anyone. Goodell is just a lackey for the owners. 

1 hour ago, SkinsGuy said:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/07/01/report-daniel-snyder-cant-resume-control-of-wft-without-approval-from-roger-goodell/

 

The article above says Snyder can't return to day-to-day operations as CEO until Goodell says he can. Probably explains why how long Snyder will be out was so vague yesterday.

 

Also, that his stepping down wasn't really "voluntary". It was a 'step down on your own or we'll suspend you' type move.

I might've been ok with that if they had forced him to hire a real CEO and not his Wife. It's a farce. 

 

"In the interim, Snyder may attend games,"

 

Would've been a bonus to not see his stupid mug at games anymore. He should be banned from gamedays.

Edited July 2, 2021 by Florgon79

[goskins10]

8 hours ago, ILikeBilly said:

There are thousands of harassments happening every day. It isn't a small deal, but you don't make the owner of the company sell his business because if it.  Fines are given and you move on.  In this day and age, harassment can be as simple as telling a co-worker you think they are hot or asking them out more than once.  

 

Now, you have a business full of alpha males and millionaires, high testosterone levels and then add a few woman.  That is well know recipe for sexual overtones.  I don't want to make light of what happened, but I guarantee that I son degree it is happening at all 32 clubs, at all of the CFL teams, on the college teams...........

 

 

This is a horrible argument. So since it is likely it happens at other clubs - which is likely true  - that means it's OK? "That is well know recipe for sexual overtones."??????  Oh well, what should we expect - move along, nothing to see here right???  Your comment boils down to boys will be boys.  What a crock of ****.

 

And you have seriously not been paying attention if you think this has been nothing more than a single comment taken wrong, not that that would be acceptable. But I do get there are degrees of separation. This was systematic sexual abuse throughout the organization. And yes that is exactly why you make the person who owns the culture sell the team if you cared at all about the people.

 

But well done combining gross over rationalization and false equivalents in one comment. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I had no delusions they would make him sell the team. Jim Irsay still owns the Colts and he is a known drug addict. Kraft still owns the Patriots with all the cheating his team has done and him participating in a sex ring in Fl. That doesn't make it acceptable. This is a total joke. Right down to Dan naming his wife CEO - becasue she deserves it. If she had any morals she would have told him no, get yourself another lackey. 

 

I will never stop rooting for this team to win on the field. But until Dan is gone I will do as little as I can to financially support the team. And I will never stop pointing out what totally despicable POS he is as a person. 

Edited July 2, 2021 by goskins10

[TD_washingtonredskins]

15 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

We know penalties, as a the result of investigation. Dan got off light. Just a 10 million fine and a sort forced removal from day to day operations, for an unknown period of time.

 

So, for those who were hoping this would’ve lead to either Dan’s selling or getting significant more punishment; what will you do? End your fandom and move on? Remain a fan but not give a dime to Dan? Something else?

 

Dan will be the owner for the rest of our lives. Many of us are similar in age to Dan.

 

I knew they would never remove him as owner but their light punishment shows you how nfl views sexual harassment/ misconduct in an organization. I would’ve fine Dan 100 million dollars. With 50% going to the victims of harassment under the team and the other to woman’s organizations that deal with harassment. I would’ve completely suspend him for one year. Nothing to do with team and not allowed to be go anywhere near the Team for a year. I also would’ve taken our 22 first round draft pick.

 

I was out last year while all this was coming to light. I'm out again. What that actually means isn't so easy to define. I won't stop reading about the organization because I am interested in them and they've been a large piece of my life for nearly 40 years. But, I found myself last year wanting them to do poorly. I want them to lose so that Snyder doesn't see success. Yes, I realize there is a lot of collateral damage there and that 95% of the people representing the team now are probably good people. But I can't help it...that's how I feel. 

 

So I won't leave this board. I won't stop checking their scores. But I have stopped rooting for them. I am now rooting against Dan Snyder as I follow the NFL. If there is a time when he's not involved with the team, I'll be back hoping they go undefeated each and every year. 

 

At least I have my pre-1999 memories of a Cooke ownership and an organization considered the class of the league during my childhood. 

10 hours ago, redskinss said:

I'm so ****in sick of this bull****!

All I want to do Is cheer for a football team that hopefully wins a lot of games.

God I wish this **** would just go away!

That's what the NFL is banking on. Some of us will try to prevent it from fading away, but we will fail. Too many fans and sponsors want what you want...for this to disappear and for the discussion to turn to who the team might keep as their #2 TE. To me it's sad, but I've felt that way before so I understand. 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

5 hours ago, ILikeBilly said:

Who the F are you

someone genuinely offended by your approval of this and your general acceptance of harassment which certainly comes across as victim blaming and the feeling that men are just having it too rough, I mean can’t even tell female coworkers they’re hot, right.  Someone appalled at the notion of happily and quickly putting this horrific **** behind us so we can proceed with the sole focus on a dumb football game rather than holding an organization you support and pump money and time into to meet the very low bar of having basic human decency. 

[KillBill26]

I'm out of the loop right now, have they announced ALL the penalties (all I've heard is 10 mil fine and Dan changing roles)?  Can we put to bed the possibility of losing draft picks?

[CobraCommander]

4 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

I'm out of the loop right now, have they announced ALL the penalties (all I've heard is 10 mil fine and Dan changing roles)?  Can we put to bed the possibility of losing draft picks?

Nothing else coming down. Just a slap on the wrist. A "suspension" that amounts to his wife "running" the team.

[88Comrade2000]

1 hour ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I was out last year while all this was coming to light. I'm out again. What that actually means isn't so easy to define. I won't stop reading about the organization because I am interested in them and they've been a large piece of my life for nearly 40 years. But, I found myself last year wanting them to do poorly. I want them to lose so that Snyder doesn't see success. Yes, I realize there is a lot of collateral damage there and that 95% of the people representing the team now are probably good people. But I can't help it...that's how I feel. 

 

So I won't leave this board. I won't stop checking their scores. But I have stopped rooting for them. I am now rooting against Dan Snyder as I follow the NFL. If there is a time when he's not involved with the team, I'll be back hoping they go undefeated each and every year. 

 

At least I have my pre-1999 memories of a Cooke ownership and an organization considered the class of the league during my childhood. 

That's what the NFL is banking on. Some of us will try to prevent it from fading away, but we will fail. Too many fans and sponsors want what you want...for this to disappear and for the discussion to turn to who the team might keep as their #2 TE. To me it's sad, but I've felt that way before so I understand. 

You are wasting your time and energy. You will be actively rooting for the team to loose and yet you will still see how they are doing; hoping they have lost big. You will still post on a message board; the team owns.

 

I get those who just can’t root for this team because of what happened. Yet; you can’t completely divorce yourself from anything related to the team. If you really are upset about this as you claim to be; you would have nothing to do with the team anymore and move on. 
 

Snyder isn’t going anywhere. The owners just gave him a pass.

 

I’d put antifan somewhere either in your name or a tag line.

Edited July 2, 2021 by Rdskns2000

[Califan007 The Constipated]

49 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

I'm out of the loop right now, have they announced ALL the penalties (all I've heard is 10 mil fine and Dan changing roles)?  Can we put to bed the possibility of losing draft picks?