Nah Nah Nah…Nah Nah Nah…Hey Hey Hey…GOODBYE CLOWNSHOES

[Skinsinparadise]

36 minutes ago, KDawg said:

It doesn’t matter if the sale happens. There will be a way too large segment of the fanbase that is mad at any of the choices.

 

There will be reasons to say why it will stink. Reasons for why it is going to be the best thing ever.

 

Same with quarterbacks. This fanbase has no idea what it wants and has zero open minds to basically anything.

 

By the way… this doubt in some candidates is exactly what Snyder would use if he nixes the sale. He’ll see people worried about specific new owners and think, “see?! They don’t want them over me!”

 

He’s that out of touch.

 

I spent too much time on twitter and see plenty of other fan bases reference their teams moves -- and I'll say on our behalf we aren't that unique, lots of negativity out there.  You name the coordinator, the player or whatever -- you'll find fans liking and hating said player-coach.  I know this because if I want to promote or trash any new coach or acquistion I can easily find either take on social media.  

 

I think pretty much 99% of the fan base want Dan gone.  So as for a rallying cry that unites the fan base, this is the issue for sure.

 

As for who the owner is. I am good with Harris.  I am good with Bezos.   I'd suck it up with Frettita, too even though he's my least fav preference.  Anyone but Dan. 

 

I think the only straggler group of fans that exist on the issue are some who are concerned we get someone as bad or worse than Dan.  But its a very small group of people from what I can tell.  I get their concerns because we are beaten down.  But for me, its borderline impossible to get an owner worse than Dan -- Dan isn't just a bad owner, he's epically bad -- people will be referencing him IMO for a long time -- where his name is and continues to be synonmous with the idea, that there are bad owners, but if you want the absolute lowest bar of bad -- that dude is Dan Snyder.  

 

I strongly believe that the sale happens.  But the lingering doubts that some have that he might not sell among those who are covering this which including the Sportico reporter I just listened to, the WP writers, Andrew Brandt who interacted with Dan back in the day, etc -- those lingering doubts are plenty enough for me to celebrate and big time so ANY new owner here and not take the idea that this happened for granted.

 

Heck just last summer, me, @BatteredFanSyndrome, @Conn among others were somewhat blasted on the owners-FO thread by some for being big time naive in thinking Dan's days might be numbered, and we were lectured about how we were naive again and again and again.  Multiple people on that thread wanted the WP articles to stop because all they did was anger fans even more at Dan, and that cause was hopeless so what is there to gain to fuel more anger?  Race forward to today, and now we got Dan on the brink of selling.  It's a really big deal obviously.

 

And its not that I didn't understand the other point of view on this in the summer.  The idea is Dan loved the team, it was his identity, he's a nobody without it.  He's said he's never selling.  He's leaked to others that he wants to give the team to his son.  On and on.  I am bringing this back up because I got the cyncism.  But my gut and some others were the house of cards could eventually fall, there were too many things working against Dan that eventually it might blow up.  But I still agreed it was somewhat of an optimistic take maybe hopeful take that might not bear out. 

 

But here we are on the brink of this.  And its something we should celebrate in a big way.    I got no doubt that Dan would never sell if all these things didn't pile on him.   It's a football miracle that we are on the brink of happening so we IMO should enjoy it regardless of who prevails.   

 

And I do not believe that this organization is just doomed because its just become the ride we are accustomed to.  I lived through the glory years, I was very young but not so young where I don't recall it.  This team's demise IMO is 100% about Dan.   I was an optimist about Dan's ultimate demise.  And I am even more optimistic that the karma of the team changes fast as soon as that douche is gone.  

 

 

Edited March 21, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I spent too much time on twitter and see plenty of other fan bases reference their teams moves -- and I'll say on our behalf we aren't that unique, lots of negativity out there.  You name the coordinator, the player or whatever -- you'll find fans liking and hating said player-coach.  I know this because if I want to promote or trash any new coach or acquistion I can easily find either take on social media.  

 

I think pretty much 99% of the fan base want Dan gone.  So as for a rallying cry that unites the fan base, this is the issue for sure.

 

As for who the owner is. I am good with Harris.  I am good with Bezos.   I'd suck it up with Frettita, too even though he's my least fav preference.  Anyone but Dan. 

 

I think the only straggler group of fans that exist on the issue are some who are concerned we get someone as bad or worse than Dan.  But its a very small group of people from what I can tell.  I get their concerns because we are beaten down.  But for me, its borderline impossible to get an owner worse than Dan -- Dan isn't just a bad owner, he's epically bad -- people will be referencing him IMO for a long time -- where his name is and continues to be synonmous with the idea, that there are bad owners, but if you want the absolute lowest bar of bad -- that dude is Dan Snyder.  

 

I strongly believe that the sale happens.  But the lingering doubts that some have that he sales among those who are covering this which including the Sportico reporter I just listened to, the WP writers, Andrew Brandt who interacted with Dan back in the day, etc -- those lingering doubts are plenty enough for me to celebrate and big time so ANY new owner here.

 

Heck just last summer, me, @BatteredFanSyndrome, @Conn among others were somewhat blasted on the owners-FO thread by some for being big time naive in thinking Dan's days might be numbered, and we lectured about how we were naive again and again and again.  Multiple people on that thread wanted the WP articles to stop because all they did was anger fans even more at Dan, and that cause was hopeless so what is there to gain to fuel more anger?  Race forward to today, we got Dan on the brink of selling.  It's a really big deal.

 

And its not that I didn't understand the other point of view on this in the summer.  The idea is Dan loved the team, it was his identity, he's a nobody without it.  He's said he's never selling.  He's leaked to others that he wants to give the team to his son.  On and on.  I am bringing this back up because I got the cyncism.  But my gut and some others were the house of cards could eventually fall, there were too many things working against Dan that eventually it might blow up.  But I still agreed it was somewhat of an optimistic take maybe hopeful take that might not bear out. 

 

But here we are on the brink of this.  And its something we should celabrate in a big way.    I got no doubt that Dan would never sell if all these things didn't pile on him.   It's a football miracle that we are on the brink of happening so we IMO should enjoy it regardless of who prevails.   

 

And I do not believe that this organization is just doomed because its just become the ride we are accustomed to.  I lived through the glory years, I was very young but not so young where I don't recall it.  This team's demise IMO is 100% about Dan.   I was an optimist about Dan's ultimate demise.  And I am even more optimistic that the karma of the team changes fast as soon as that douche is gone.  

 

 

 

I agree.

 

I'm not as optimistic as any of you that the sale happens. In fact, I count myself among the most pessimistic about it.

 

I've just seen Dan do too much Lucy to Charlie Brown type stuff over the years to believe it until I actually see it. 

 

But I do believe the process is in play and it's close.

 

Fertitta is a guy who I'm not a fan of, personally. But again, he's not Dan Snyder. Works for me. 

[FootballZombie]

Presence of minority owners aint bad. Practically every bid has them as far as I know.

 

 

I can only see it as a potential problem if the distribution of ownership is nearly evenly divided between a bunch of people. Like if the lead guy only owns 30%, two guys own 25% and then two guys own 10%. Then you could have several cooks feeling like they have entitlement to direct the course of the soup. Or if the two 25% guys team up they could feel like they should have more pull than the 30% guy on anything and have the authority to over-rule.

 

Without knowing the ownership distribution it does not make a lot of sense to worry about that scenario tho.

[tomwvr]

44 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Just listened to the Sportico guy who broke the Magic Johnson story.

 

A. Heard some other investors likely part of this. He said even Walton who is the 11th richest person in the world brought on a few investors post sale including Condoleezza Rice.

 

B. Other investors are helpful for multiple reasons and he said in this case including dealing with the stadium 

 

C. Magic Johnson’s impact is unlikely about giving much money to this. It’s more about his expertise around sports and if he acts like he did with the Dodgers he presents a good public face for the franchise - likeable and charismatic 

 

D. His gut is if Bezos gave Dan a godfather offer he’d take it

 

E. Believes that the owners want some resolution by the owners meeting 

 

F. He’s among the doubters who while believe Dan likely sells does believe there is an off chance he doesn’t 

Yes but the waltons own far more than 50 percent - i dont think this group has a clear 50 plus percent owner. Which is a concern

[Skinsinparadise]

14 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I agree.

 

I'm not as optimistic as any of you that the sale happens. In fact, I count myself among the most pessimistic about it.

 

I've just seen Dan do too much Lucy to Charlie Brown type stuff over the years to believe it until I actually see it. 

 

But I do believe the process is in play and it's close.

 

Fertitta is a guy who I'm not a fan of, personally. But again, he's not Dan Snyder. Works for me. 

 

I've become over the years almost cult like as for believing in John Keim.    Good dude, too.  I did a zoom with him years ago that he did with some fans.

 

He's rarely wrong.  It amazes me that he basically is the only one who covers this team that gets specific tidbits on a regular basis about what they are thinking about personnel.  And he shares it in the perfect way where its difficult for other teams to decode what this team is planning, because he doesn't talk in absolutes, and is just vague enough, etc.  But on that zoom he sort of gave a window into how to decode his material.  So i've gotten good at decoding him when he makes points when he's not overly blunt.

 

With that in mind, reading Keim on this he absolutely thinks the sale is happening.   Though he is less absolute than others as to who the buyer will be and I take that as a meaningful point too -- seems like he's communicating that it is still up in the air, or at least he felt that way on the weekend, will see if it changes.

 

To me the wildcard through the process is Dan himself.  Over the years, I've probably put up 100 articles or so that talked about Dan -- and a common theme in those articles was that Dan is VERY emotional and VERY impulsive.   So that dynamic is what is my lingering concern.  It's a very small concern but its enough to keep me a little on edge.  The main reason why I am confident and Keim alluded to this point in one of his podcast -- Dan's money situation and debt has boxed him in to this corner.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Conn]

1 minute ago, tomwvr said:

Yes but the waltons own far more than 50 percent - i dont think this group has a clear 50 plus percent owner. Which is a concern

I think I’d wait until we have any information on that to even type out words about it (as I ignore my own advice here). Seems unlikely the “majority owner” would have a plurality of shares rather than a true majority. Are there any teams in the league that have that? Is it even allowed? A lot of panic happening in here over nothing imo 

[woodpecker]

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I spent too much time on twitter and see plenty of other fan bases reference their teams moves -- and I'll say on our behalf we aren't that unique, lots of negativity out there.  You name the coordinator, the player or whatever -- you'll find fans liking and hating said player-coach.  I know this because if I want to promote or trash any new coach or acquistion I can easily find either take on social media.  

 

I think pretty much 99% of the fan base want Dan gone.  So as for a rallying cry that unites the fan base, this is the issue for sure.

 

As for who the owner is. I am good with Harris.  I am good with Bezos.   I'd suck it up with Frettita, too even though he's my least fav preference.  Anyone but Dan. 

 

I think the only straggler group of fans that exist on the issue are some who are concerned we get someone as bad or worse than Dan.  But its a very small group of people from what I can tell.  I get their concerns because we are beaten down.  But for me, its borderline impossible to get an owner worse than Dan -- Dan isn't just a bad owner, he's epically bad -- people will be referencing him IMO for a long time -- where his name is and continues to be synonmous with the idea, that there are bad owners, but if you want the absolute lowest bar of bad -- that dude is Dan Snyder.  

 

I strongly believe that the sale happens.  But the lingering doubts that some have that he might not sell among those who are covering this which including the Sportico reporter I just listened to, the WP writers, Andrew Brandt who interacted with Dan back in the day, etc -- those lingering doubts are plenty enough for me to celebrate and big time so ANY new owner here and not take the idea that this happened for granted.

 

Heck just last summer, me, @BatteredFanSyndrome, @Conn among others were somewhat blasted on the owners-FO thread by some for being big time naive in thinking Dan's days might be numbered, and we were lectured about how we were naive again and again and again.  Multiple people on that thread wanted the WP articles to stop because all they did was anger fans even more at Dan, and that cause was hopeless so what is there to gain to fuel more anger?  Race forward to today, and now we got Dan on the brink of selling.  It's a really big deal obviously.

 

And its not that I didn't understand the other point of view on this in the summer.  The idea is Dan loved the team, it was his identity, he's a nobody without it.  He's said he's never selling.  He's leaked to others that he wants to give the team to his son.  On and on.  I am bringing this back up because I got the cyncism.  But my gut and some others were the house of cards could eventually fall, there were too many things working against Dan that eventually it might blow up.  But I still agreed it was somewhat of an optimistic take maybe hopeful take that might not bear out. 

 

But here we are on the brink of this.  And its something we should celebrate in a big way.    I got no doubt that Dan would never sell if all these things didn't pile on him.   It's a football miracle that we are on the brink of happening so we IMO should enjoy it regardless of who prevails.   

 

And I do not believe that this organization is just doomed because its just become the ride we are accustomed to.  I lived through the glory years, I was very young but not so young where I don't recall it.  This team's demise IMO is 100% about Dan.   I was an optimist about Dan's ultimate demise.  And I am even more optimistic that the karma of the team changes fast as soon as that douche is gone.  

 

 

I was always with you in holding out hope. Not necessarily because I believed it, but because I knew that we could never be a respectable franchise again with him here. That FO thread that started with the 2020 shenanigans and this one have been my very existence on this site. Before that my previous posts were from like 12 years prior lol. I had completely given up hope with Snyder a long time ago. That said, I totally get the people who were being negative. I’m sure they felt they were just being realistic, and honestly they were. It looked pretty hopeless at times including this past summer. But now we are on the brink of mutual celebration, so we should embrace the moment and fully enjoy his demise. Then we can all go back to bickering over every single detail, which to me will finally matter again. I’m really looking forward to having our team back!

[FootballZombie]

9 minutes ago, Conn said:

Is it even allowed? A lot of panic happening in here over nothing imo 

 

I'm pretty sure new "lead" owners are only required to hold a minimum of 30%

[Warhead36]

Most teams have multiple owners and lots of little mini investors. I remember the Dolphins had a huge contingent when Stephen Ross bought the team. 

 

 

[Redwards]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The Dan Snyder trauma on this fanbase has no bounds.  One feeling we all shared was one day being able to rid ourselves of Dan.  A feeling that never felt real, that many of us had come to accept that he’d both never sell and outlive us.

 

Then like magic, or the power of karma, or both…the news comes out that the team is up for sale.  And here we are, eating each other over who the next billionaire(s) to own this team is going to be, already muddying the waters for whomever it is.

 

Meanwhile, I’m over here just thankful that his reign of terror is almost over and appreciative of the fact that no matter who it is - they will be light years better than Dan.  There’s never been a safer bet.  Wash away the trauma, folks.  Live in the moment and appreciate this time for what it is.

[RVAskins]

The Packers have lots of investors. 😀

[Skinsinparadise]

As to the stadium issue.  IMO having multiple owners with clout likely would be a major help.  As I've mentioned, I've worked in government and politics for eons.  And I've seen some how the sausage is made as to a stadium quest from both sides of it -- the government side that was lobbyied when I worked for the legislature and years later I did some minor work for a friend who was pushing for one.   And really if you are pushing anything through government that's not easy -- a strong network is very helpful.

 

While I agree that Bezos would have the money to build a Taj Mahl type stadium if he choose to do so.  I wonder about Congress relinquishing the land to DC with him as the one benefititing in part.  While he has political connections for certain, he also is polarizing politically which I don't believe is the case with the other groups.  So for me there is some wildcard to Bezos on that front.  But certainly if DC gets the land, Bezos in theory would be the best to build a stadium.  But I do like the fact that Rales in particular already has real estate and brings jobs in Foggy Bottom and has built a nice looking art museum in the DMV

 

I've heard multiple times Rales is well connected with the right people to help with the stadium.   I'd gather someone like Magic Johnson might also have some connections, too or for that matter bring some coolness factor to the process to increase the popularity of the move if the stadium is pushed in DC.

 

One of the hurdles for DC obviously is to not only successfully network your way behind the scenes to the land but also make it palatable to the constituents of the council members so they don't take it on the chin politically for voting in favor of this.  Dan obviously has big hurdles on both fronts -- he didn't have the network to push it strongly enough and also brought major political bagagge -- doing anything to help him was an unpopular move with constituents.

[Skinsinparadise]

23 minutes ago, woodpecker said:

I was always with you in holding out hope. Not necessarily because I believed it, but because I knew that we could never be a respectable franchise again with him here. That FO thread that started with the 2020 shenanigans and this one have been my very existence on this site. Before that my previous posts were from like 12 years prior lol. I had completely given up hope with Snyder a long time ago. That said, I totally get the people who were being negative. I’m sure they felt they were just being realistic, and honestly they were. It looked pretty hopeless at times including this past summer. But now we are on the brink of mutual celebration, so we should embrace the moment and fully enjoy his demise. Then we can all go back to bickering over every single detail, which to me will finally matter again. I’m really looking forward to having our team back!

 

Yeah don't get me wrong, I got those who were pessimistic.  I among others did get annoyed at times about how intense they were at pushing back at the optimists on that thread so I did push back sometimes as did others. . 

 

But as I said then, cynicism is mostly about protecting yourself from disappointment so believing it can go down means you are potentially setting yourself up for a let down. So I certainly got the instinct.  We were all wanting the same thing.   So its all good. 

 

I am only bringing it up now because we are so close to the finish line and i was backing @KDawg point about how we shouldn't feel let down by this owner versus that owner.  

 

And as a fan base we've suffered way more than we should.  I do strongly believe the law of averages will kick in and good times are ahead.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[tomwvr]

35 minutes ago, Conn said:

I think I’d wait until we have any information on that to even type out words about it (as I ignore my own advice here). Seems unlikely the “majority owner” would have a plurality of shares rather than a true majority. Are there any teams in the league that have that? Is it even allowed? A lot of panic happening in here over nothing imo 

League rules say majority owner only has to own 30 percent of the team. That person would

represent the team at league functions. But what is to stop those owning the other 70 percent from stopping the actual team from doing what the majority owner does. That is what scares me here. Hell Rales personal wealth is more than Harris. I could see a real issue down the line with these two fighting for control. I would like to see the majority owner have atleast 51 percent of the team and Harris doesnt have the money to do that without selling some of his other sports teams

Edited March 21, 2023 by tomwvr

[NewCliche21]

2 hours ago, tomwvr said:

I hope he is wrong. Group ownership is not good. Too many people to keep happy. And with the need to get so many other people it shows they are over leveraged and wont be able

to focus on team operations, will be focused on not spending too much

 

People don't become billionaires and 100-millionaires by not knowing when to let things be and who to recruit to be in that group. I think you're justified to feel anxious, but this isn't a really good reason.

Edited March 21, 2023 by NewCliche21

[Conn]

The 30% rule is interesting, are there any current teams with that setup where the controlling owner has the minimum 30%? I feel like I’ve never heard it come up as an issue. No “two 20% owners overruled the 30% majority owner” or “the 20% owner sold to the other 20% owner and performed a hostile takeover, becoming the new majority owner”. Never, right? Which leads me to believe that even if the controlling owner “only” has 30% of the team, then there must be some sort of protections in the deal that they are perpetually the controlling owner and must approve of any % changing hands, right? Otherwise minority share partners would be eventually overtaking their controlling owners sometimes, rather than never.

[Skinsinparadise]

Just now, Conn said:

The 30% rule is interesting, are there any current teams with that setup where the controlling owner has the minimum 30%? I feel like I’ve never heard it come up as an issue. No “two 20% owners overruled the 30% majority owner” or “the 20% owner sold to the other 20% owner and performed a hostile takeover, becoming the new majority owner”. Never, right? Which leads me to believe that even if the controlling owner “only” has 30% of the team, then there must be some sort of protections in the deal that they are perpetually the controlling owner and must approve of any % changing hands, right? Otherwise minority share partners would be eventually overtaking their controlling owners sometimes, rather than never.

 

Not sure about the rules but I've understood that there is one controlling partner of any sale and that person has decision making authority. 

[MisterPinstripe]

17 minutes ago, Conn said:

The 30% rule is interesting, are there any current teams with that setup where the controlling owner has the minimum 30%? I feel like I’ve never heard it come up as an issue. No “two 20% owners overruled the 30% majority owner” or “the 20% owner sold to the other 20% owner and performed a hostile takeover, becoming the new majority owner”. Never, right? Which leads me to believe that even if the controlling owner “only” has 30% of the team, then there must be some sort of protections in the deal that they are perpetually the controlling owner and must approve of any % changing hands, right? Otherwise minority share partners would be eventually overtaking their controlling owners sometimes, rather than never.

NFL has to approve all ownership sales so minority owners buying a larger stake to do a hostile takeover wouldn't be allowed by the NFL. It's not like a normal business. 

[bearrock]

We don't know the proposed make up of any ownership group in terms of people involved or percentages.  Those concerned should chill until we find out more details.  

[Skinsfan1311]

3 hours ago, tomwvr said:

I hope he is wrong. Group ownership is not good. Too many people to keep happy. And with the need to get so many other people it shows they are over leveraged and wont be able

to focus on team operations, will be focused on not spending too much

Works for the Packers

 

[SoCalSkins]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As to the stadium issue.  IMO having multiple owners with clout likely would be a major help.  As I've mentioned, I've worked in government and politics for eons.  And I've seen some how the sausage is made as to a stadium quest from both sides of it -- the government side that was lobbyied when I worked for the legislature and years later I did some minor work for a friend who was pushing for one.   And really if you are pushing anything through government that's not easy -- a strong network is very helpful.

 

While I agree that Bezos would have the money to build a Taj Mahl type stadium if he choose to do so.  I wonder about Congress relinquishing the land to DC with him as the one benefititing in part.  While he has political connections for certain, he also is polarizing politically which I don't believe is the case with the other groups.  So for me there is some wildcard to Bezos on that front.  But certainly if DC gets the land, Bezos in theory would be the best to build a stadium.  But I do like the fact that Rales in particular already has real estate and brings jobs in Foggy Bottom and has built a nice looking art museum in the DMV

 

I've heard multiple times Rales is well connected with the right people to help with the stadium.   I'd gather someone like Magic Johnson might also have some connections, too or for that matter bring some coolness factor to the process to increase the popularity of the move if the stadium is pushed in DC.

 

One of the hurdles for DC obviously is to not only successfully network your way behind the scenes to the land but also make it palatable to the constituents of the council members so they don't take it on the chin politically for voting in favor of this.  Dan obviously has big hurdles on both fronts -- he didn't have the network to push it strongly enough and also brought major political bagagge -- doing anything to help him was an unpopular move with constituents.

The primary owner will control less than half the team. It’s a joke. You are delusional if you think that’s appealing to a municipality to enter into a long term agreement. It’s not a a large corporation. It’s a small group of investors with the principal owner having around 30% of the shares. That’s a recipe for uncertainty.
 

Fred Smith and Schar didn’t buy into the Redskins thinking they would end up in arbitration with Dan. Business relationships often can and do sour. The Apollo founder was not inclined to think he would sue Josh Harris for defaming him and paying off women to talk about their sexual histories against his enemies, but it happened. 
 

We will see the final allocations once it’s leaked but in a small partnership where no one controls a majority stake, disagreements can quickly unravel the whole thing. That uncertainty is priced into every deal that is made with the partnership. Depending how the operating agreement is negotiated, Harris can be out as early as day 2 if the other 70% votes him out. 
 

Maybe someone else will slowly start buying stakes and end up with most of it.. That’s how JKC did it. Regardless it’s pretty pathetic that Josh Harris is so leveraged and lacks assets that he can only purchase a measly 30% stake. We need a baller to own this team to invest in it properly. Instead we are getting a glorified house flipper who never created anything just traded on assets and who is over leveraged and can’t afford playing at the big boy level.
 

Kinda sad we are trading in one Dan for another. Maybe that was Dan’s attraction to Harris as a buyer?

 

 

Edited March 21, 2023 by SoCalSkins

[RVAskins]

Maybe bringing Magic onboard will convince Snyder to sell to the Harris group. Snyder always liked celebrities.

[Spaceman Spiff]

3 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

 

Kinda sad we are trading in one Dan for another. Maybe that was Dan’s attraction to Harris as a buyer?

 

 

 

[Die Hard]

[KDawg]

It continues.