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

[Conn]

There’s way more important things going on but I just have to comment that once again, I don’t understand why Keim is kind of a dickhead:

 

 

You can almost feel the resentment coming off of him sometimes when he responds to fans. Probably because he’s stuck covering this ****show of a team that he has to pretend to care about. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by ConnSKINS26

[NickyJ]

Or Keim is a little bit jealous that the NYT got the scoop of the decade and not him.

[profusion]

Keim is pretty open about his disdain for Snyder. He's normally my first go-to on stuff.

 

He's also at a disadvantage compared to the NYT or WSJ, in that his employer has a direct business relationship with the NFL. I'd love to know if the ESPN editorial leadership has killed stories over the years to protect that relationship. They can't be expected to be unbiased.

Edited October 13, 2021 by profusion

[drowland]

1 hour ago, RichmondRedskin88 said:

I mean Caps GM got the job by calling Ted essentially a POS owner didn’t he?  Not the first time a owner had taken heat from a coach/front office person.  Wouldn't be the last either. Ron probably calls Snyder a a psycho motha  ****ing lunatic or worse in his private messages with what he’s dealt with the last few years. 

 

Didn't Marty get hired after saying on ESPN he would never work for Dan Snyder?  

[XxSpearheadxX]

14 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

I dunno how I feel about this.  It's like they're getting ahead of any controversy before anyone can accuse them of supporting him.  

Its the world we live in now. These things move very quickly now, for better or worse.

[Hazel-Ra]

4 hours ago, drowland said:

 

Didn't Marty get hired after saying on ESPN he would never work for Dan Snyder?  

Yes.

 

[tshile]

6 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

You can almost feel the resentment coming off of him sometimes when he responds to fans. Probably because he’s stuck covering this ****show of a team that he has to pretend to care about. 

You sure somethings coming off him, and not you?

 

all he said is you need to ask the times what they have, not him. 
 

which is true. 
 

if he wanted to be a dick there was plenty of opportunity. Cause it was a really stupid question. 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

Lawyers representing the Washington Football Team offered a financial settlement earlier this year in exchange for the silence of female former team employees who allege they endured sexual harassment while working there, according to two former employees.

 

No specific figure was discussed, but the offer was expected to be “disrespectfully low,” said Emily Applegate, a former marketing coordinator who was the first to publicly speak out about her experiences while working with the team last year in a Washington Post report. The offer was conveyed by attorneys representing the team at ReedSmith law firm, through discussions with Lisa Banks, the lead attorney for former female team employees.

Banks, who represents nearly 40 former team employees, told Applegate and the others that, in exchange for the money, they would have to sign nondisclosure agreements and agree to stop doing news interviews and posting on social media about their experiences while working for the team.

 

Attorneys at ReedSmith law firm in DC representing the team and owner Daniel Snyder did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday, nor did a team spokeswoman.

 

“It was pretty easy for us to say no, that wasn’t the purpose for why we said anything,” Applegate said in a phone interview on Wednesday.

Banks, in an interview, declined to comment on the negotiations she had with the team’s attorneys. She did not dispute Applegate’s description of the offer, which was supported by Megan Imbert, a former producer in the team’s broadcast department.

“They were upset about our social media presence and press,” said Imbert, summarizing the message she said was conveyed by Banks. “We turned it down because we see the bigger picture, and we have always been after meaningful change, both within the organization and across the league.”

 

The settlement offer was made in February, Applegate and Imbert said, during a lull in activity in the NFL’s investigation of allegations of pervasive sexual harassment and mistreatment of female team employees during Snyder’s tenure as owner. Imbert and Applegate both viewed the offer as an attempt by the team to ensure their silence and minimize the fallout when the NFL’s investigation, overseen by attorney Beth Wilkinson, concluded and its findings were publicly announced. The offer would not have blocked them from speaking to investigators, the women said.

“It just felt like they wanted to bury this and shut us up,” said Imbert.

What the women didn’t know at the time is that no findings from Wilkinson’s investigation would be released publicly by her or the NFL, including what she concluded regarding Snyder’s role in the culture described by employees, or about allegations raised regarding his conduct, including an incident on his private plane in 2009 that resulted in a $1.6 million settlement with a former female team employee.

Edited October 13, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

I'd add Schefter was the main anamoly among the media about Bruce.  He liked to say how smart people thought Bruce was, etc.  No wonder since Bruce was clearly an important source to him.  I never really cared anyway about who Schefter liked or who he didn't.  He's good, actually really good, for NFL gossip but otherwise I don't care about his opinions. 

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[profusion]

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

"The settlement offer was made in February, Applegate and Imbert said, during a lull in activity in the NFL’s investigation of allegations of pervasive sexual harassment and mistreatment of female team employees during Snyder’s tenure as owner."

 

Remind me again, when did Tanya formally take over the decision-making? I wonder if Jason Wright knew about this or had anything to say if he did know. The offer would tend to go against the change in culture he's been touting.

 

Also of note, ReedSmith is representing both the team and Snyder personally. That's not ethically problematic unless there's a conflict of interest, but it certainly makes it seem like there's no functional business distinction between Dan Snyder and the WFT. Whose interests are the lawyers serving?

[Wildbunny]

7 hours ago, NickyJ said:

Or Keim is a little bit jealous that the NYT got the scoop of the decade and not him.

Not he really his kind, as he said at times, he's more interested in keeping his reputation clean, than trying to go for a scoop.

 

To me, Keim is more interested on the football side of the team, than the off-the-field stuff. You can trust him for anything that is football related, he's often pinpoint. Like Schefter, those two are well regarded within players/agents/coaches. When they say something, there's a quite a bit of truth about it. That's because of this.

 

The Washington Posts guys and gals could be jealous about the NYT posting this story instead of them. They've been hard on the team and specifically Snyder since the beginning of the investigation and never miss an opportunity to jab him or kick him in the balls.

 

Back to Keim, guy is just a class act amongst reporters. We're lucky to have someone like him covering the team.

[profusion]

21 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

To me, Keim is more interested on the football side of the team, than the off-the-field stuff. You can trust him for anything that is football related, he's often pinpoint. Like Schefter, those two are well regarded within players/agents/coaches. When they say something, there's a quite a bit of truth about it. That's because of this.

 

ESPN not only has a vested interest in the success of the NFL and its teams, but they're honestly a little embarrassing when they do attempt to do "hard-hitting journalism." Documenting the sports themselves is their core competency.

 

The WashPost and NYT would have no problem bringing the league to its knees if it drove more traffic to their sites. And really, the type of investigative journalism this story needs is what they're supposed to be good at. 

 

The NFL is a very tightly run ship, but Snyder is a weak spot. People formerly in his orbit know things. Bad things, we can surmise. It's all going to come out eventually; the question is what the impact will be.

[SoCalSkins]

46 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

Remind me again, when did Tanya formally take over the decision-making? I wonder if Jason Wright knew about this or had anything to say if he did know. The offer would tend to go against the change in culture he's been touting.

 

Also of note, ReedSmith is representing both the team and Snyder personally. That's not ethically problematic unless there's a conflict of interest, but it certainly makes it seem like there's no functional business distinction between Dan Snyder and the WFT. Whose interests are the lawyers serving?

 

How so? The women hired lawyers and will be seeking damages. The team offered them a settlement which would not preclude any cooperation with Wilkinson at the time. According to the article they felt the offer was too low. End of the day they are after money at this point and they thought they could get more once the report came out. A poor calculation on their part. Settling pending litigation and including a standard NDA is how every business runs regardless of who is the acting CEO.

[clskinsfan]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I'd add Schefter was the main anamoly among the media about Bruce.  He liked to say how smart people thought Bruce was, etc.  No wonder since Bruce was clearly an important source to him.  I never really cared anyway about who Schefter liked or who he didn't.  He's good, actually really good, for NFL gossip but otherwise I don't care about his opinions. 

 

 

 

Unbelievable. Cant even keep fake news out of sports at this point. There isnt a real journalist left in this country anymore. 

[profusion]

17 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

 

How so? The women hired lawyers and will be seeking damages. The team offered them a settlement which would not preclude any cooperation with Wilkinson at the time. According to the article they felt the offer was too low. End of the day they are after money at this point and they thought they could get more once the report came out. A poor calculation on their part. Settling pending litigation and including a standard NDA is how every business runs regardless of who is the acting CEO.

 

There's been a huge wave of criticism of NDAs in settlement of sexual harassment lawsuits or complaints. Wright was supposed to be changing the culture away from silencing victims. I didn't say the WFT or Snyder lacked the power to offer such terms, merely that doing so is just part of the same-old same-old that the team is supposed to be getting away from. This is from February, not during the Bruce era, so it's on the current management's watch. I'm not accusing of Wright of misconduct--but pointing out the possibility that he's not really in charge of things like making decisions in the company's legal matters.

Edited October 13, 2021 by profusion

[profusion]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I'd add Schefter was the main anamoly among the media about Bruce.  He liked to say how smart people thought Bruce was, etc.  No wonder since Bruce was clearly an important source to him.  I never really cared anyway about who Schefter liked or who he didn't.  He's good, actually really good, for NFL gossip but otherwise I don't care about his opinions. 

 

Didn't include the tweet in my quote of your post for space reasons, but it's standard practice to run a pending story by the subject to get a reply or comment. In fact, journalistic ethics (and media legal departments) demand it. What isn't kosher would be giving the subject veto or edit power over the contents.

 

Schefter's email to Bruce is unclear on which of these things is going on. It's pretty certain he'd never burn a source, and I think he's open about being basically a conduit of information NFL people want to share rather than a traditional journalist attempting to "get to the truth."

Edited October 13, 2021 by profusion

[SoCalSkins]

32 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

Didn't include the tweet in my quote of your post for space reasons, but it's standard practice to run a pending story by the subject to get a reply or comment. In fact, journalistic ethics (and media legal departments) demand it. What isn't kosher would be giving the subject veto or edit power over the contents.

 

Schefter's email to Bruce is unclear on which of these things is going on. It's pretty certain he'd never burn a source, and I think he's open about being basically a conduit of information NFL people want to share rather than a traditional journalist attempting to "get to the truth."

Schefter calls Bruce “Mr. editor” in the email. Pretty obvious it’s a deviation from standard journalistic practices. 

49 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

There's been a huge wave of criticism of NDAs in settlement of sexual harassment lawsuits or complaints. Wright was supposed to be changing the culture away from silencing victims. I didn't say the WFT or Snyder lacked the power to offer such terms, merely that doing so is just part of the same-old same-old that the team is supposed to be getting away from. This is from February, not during the Bruce era, so it's on the current management's watch. I'm not accusing of Wright of misconduct--but pointing out the possibility that he's not really in charge of things like making decisions in the company's legal matters.

Part of the value of these settlements is the NDA. That’s baked into the price of the settlement. The victims are typically represented by attorneys and they go into these settlements eyes wide open. No one forces a settlement. It’s mutually agreed upon with almost always both sides being represented by counsel.  Complaining after the fact seems like sour grapes. 

[tshile]

Wait did people think schefter was a journalist?

 

why are you all surprised. 
 

he was literally just a “I know things cause people tell me things” dude. What did you think was happening here? 
 

It’s a 1000x more likely he was just a dude that was really fun to do blow with than he was some sort of amazing investigative journalist. 

[FootballZombie]

Schefty's whole job is dependent on people telling him things he is not supposed to know.

 

Either your paying people for that kind of intel, you have unsavory dirt on everybody or you are simply in good w/ a wide cast of characters.

 

Its ugly when you see how the sausage is made but this does not change my opinion of Schefty one iota.

Him doing this means the next time Bruce has some juicy info, Schefty will be the first guy in the loop.

 

I'd bet money that WSH is not the only org he acts this way with, and that he is not the only insider that operates in this manner.

 

 

I get that it is a bad look, but man is this a non-story to me

 

[tshile]

16 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

Either your paying people for that kind of intel, you have unsavory dirt on everybody or you are simply in good w/ a wide cast of characters.

And “paying” shouldn’t be taken literally as in a cash exchange. 
 

paying can mean letting you write the story you want written. 
 

To all the people that want to cite him asking allen how to edit the story:

lol what the hell did you think Adam shefter was 😂 

 

wow

[profusion]

1 hour ago, SoCalSkins said:

Part of the value of these settlements is the NDA. That’s baked into the price of the settlement. The victims are typically represented by attorneys and they go into these settlements eyes wide open. No one forces a settlement. It’s mutually agreed upon with almost always both sides being represented by counsel.  Complaining after the fact seems like sour grapes. 

 

I know all that, and in fact I've been on the management/employer side of severance agreements with NDAs. Doesn't change the fact that NDAs in the sexual harassment context have come under widespread criticism, to the point where New York State has banned them.

[clskinsfan]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

Wait did people think schefter was a journalist?

 

why are you all surprised. 
 

he was literally just a “I know things cause people tell me things” dude. What did you think was happening here? 
 

It’s a 1000x more likely he was just a dude that was really fun to do blow with than he was some sort of amazing investigative journalist. 

Thats all fine and dandy. But sending your articles in to your sources for editing is a bit much dont you think?

[SoCalSkins]

27 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

I know all that, and in fact I've been on the management/employer side of severance agreements with NDAs. Doesn't change the fact that NDAs in the sexual harassment context have come under widespread criticism, to the point where New York State has banned them.

The attorneys representing the 40 former female Redskins employees wrote an opinion piece in the Washington post against the ban on NDAs. They are in the business to make money at the end of the day and without it, the money is less.
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/banning-confidentiality-agreements-wont-solve-sexual-harassment/2019/12/10/13edbeba-1b74-11ea-8d58-5ac3600967a1_story.html?outputType=amp

[tshile]

9 hours ago, clskinsfan said:

Thats all fine and dandy. But sending your articles in to your sources for editing is a bit much dont you think?

So then, in your mind, how was it shefter was so well connected to know so much all the time?

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

It's interesting to learn of this stuff now, because I was always kind of perplexed when Schefter would come on local sports radio and discuss the team, he would never say anything bad about Bruce Allen.  He'd talk about how he's a smart guy and this and that.  I always thought he was just being professional, but should have known better.

 

I'm not sure why any of us ever thought of Schefter as a legit reporter to begin with, as it's pretty obvious he's the NFL's shill for information they want out.  But at the same time, it's an incredibly bad look to refer to Bruce as Mr. Editor and basically give him carte blanche to make the report say whatever it is he wants it to say.  That's not confirming with sources, that's letting your source tell the story they wish to be told.  Two entirely different things.