If Snyder Goes, Does it Change Your Perspective?

One of many experimental iterations ...

If Snyder sells, will the name change debacle have been worth it?

  • Yes. I can live with a name change if it means the Dan Snyder era is over forever.

    Votes: 9 42.9%
  • No. The damage is done and so am I.

    Votes: 4 19.0%
  • I'm not sure.

    Votes: 8 38.1%

  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,147
Reaction score
1,313
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

I am undecided... We might end up with someone worse. Imagine we get a new owner, and they want their own guys in and get rid of Rivera and throw out the good with the bad. There have been improvements since getting rid of Bruce Allen. It really depends on what news drops and where the team lands after everything has been decided. I feel Rivera is the best thing to happen to this franchise in a while.
I don't think that's a realistic concern. He's under contract.
 

SilentThreat

The Franchise Player
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,861
Reaction score
204
Points
93
Location
Ashburn, Va


I'm sorry but what Snyder has done with this franchise since he bought it... I can't fear 'what if the next guy is worse.'

If a new owner ultimately cleans house (which appears to have already been done), then so be it. Rivera appears to be good for this franchise, REALLY good, but just as easy a new owner could blow him out... Snyder could do what he has already done OVER and OVER and OVER again. Undermine the football guy who begins to stabilize the franchise, and try to take over. I want to believe Snyder has changed... I WANT to believe we can win with Snyder because he's the owner, but i have see NOTHING to lead me to believe that. At least a new owner would bring a new level of hope, but holding on to what sucks now because there's a chance the new guy sucks too is something i absolutely cannot get behind.
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


By whom? And to what end?
Figure it out. There's a huge amount of TV, gambling and other moneys at stake as the 2020 NFL season seems less and less probable. A power play is underway to jettison Snyder. The NFL is a bag of worms. We live in an environment where all our information is being filtered for political or financial benefit. Every day a story comes out reaffirming how untrustworthy the media is - not news given ESPN history well into the past. It wasn't just the Skins that the arch-angels of goodness went after. It's obvious the SJW/BLM/ANTIFA turmoil is being leveraged to accomplish ancillary objectives - poltical and financial (with a dash of power aggregation just to sweeten the pot).

Clean sweep eh? Well, we know Snyder wasn't on the planning end of his own termination. So who was, for how long and why? Why now?
 

SilentThreat

The Franchise Player
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,861
Reaction score
204
Points
93
Location
Ashburn, Va


Figure it out. There's a huge amount of TV, gambling and other moneys at stake as the 2020 NFL season seems less and less probable. A power play is underway to jettison Snyder. The NFL is a bag of worms. We live in an environment where all our information is being filtered for political or financial benefit. Every day a story comes out reaffirming how untrustworthy the media is - not news given ESPN history well into the past. It wasn't just the Skins that the arch-angels of goodness went after. It's obvious the SJW/BLM/ANTIFA turmoil is being leveraged to accomplish ancillary objectives - poltical and financial (with a dash of power aggregation just to sweeten the pot).

Clean sweep eh? Well, we know Snyder wasn't on the planning end of his own termination. So who was, for how long and why? Why now?



I don't think this is something that has just shifted toward legit change.. my conspiracy theory brain thinks that there is a lot more to this story, and I can connect some tangible dots that could easily mean Dan Snyder does not own this team much longer.

1. Nike pulls out. They're under contract as officially licensed apparel for the NFL. There is no way they can do that without the NFL signing off on it. If there's one thing the NFL likes, it's money.... The NFL has radio silence through this episode of change the name, and to allow a manufacturer to breach a contract and remove the ability to turn a profit on merchandise that have already been produced.... The NFL is smarter than that. They didn't just stop producing Redskins gear with a 'sold out' across their website. They pulled it off the shelf. There's a warehouse now that has boxes of tag on merchandise sitting somewhere.

2. Fedex pulls out. That means the current lease of 1600 Fedex way is not getting paid for by the corporate sponsor. I don't know the exact $$ amount but I can't imagine it's an inexpensive monthly cost.

3. 40% share of the minority owners are now wanting out, completely removing any doubt that Snyder is basically impossible to work with in the process. Thus making it very unlikely that anyone will have an actual interest in buying into the team in it's current state.

4. The name change. The cost of changing the name of a team is anyone's guess, but I can't figure that's cheap either. Renderings, re-branding, new merchandise, stadium and facility renovations... all of it. Meanwhile all the old stuff is now obsolete. Is nuclear to 95% of the US population. Chances are it won't move. There will be die hards, collectors, and purists that may still invest, but Redskins gear likely no longer moves off the shelves with any real momentum.


Now that those points are made... I ask you. How is Dan Snyder, who's only truly profitable entity is the Washington Redskins, going to pay for the lease of the stadium, buy out the 40% of ownership void left by the fact that minority owners want out and it's unlikely anyone else wants in, re-brand a team, supply new gear, build a new stadium, and own a franchise..... while not selling gear, no fans in the stands, and what would appear to be no help from the NFL.


Put your tin foil hats on boys, I'm gonna blow your mind.... theory alert..


Jeff Bezos has been in the ear of the NFL since his name was floated out there in November.... and even before that. I think the NFL is icing Snyder out because they want to open the door for Bezos to buy the team. They kill about 4 birds with 1 stone, and Bezos likely will not be open to being a minority owner.... he wants the whole thing, or at a minimum... 51%

1. Get rid of Snyder
2. Bring in a WEALTHY replacement with marketing and powerful pull
3. New Stadium deal which opens the door for Superbowl / Probowl, as well as World Cup hosting in 2026.
4. They don't have to listen to the anti-Redskin march any more.

I wonder how hard Snyder is willing to fight to keep the team if it's no longer the Washington Redskins... and how much easier he'd be willing to part ways.... He's always said he's a fan first.
 

Neophyte

GM
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
160
Points
218
Location
Dallas


Figure it out. There's a huge amount of TV, gambling and other moneys at stake as the 2020 NFL season seems less and less probable. A power play is underway to jettison Snyder. The NFL is a bag of worms. We live in an environment where all our information is being filtered for political or financial benefit. Every day a story comes out reaffirming how untrustworthy the media is - not news given ESPN history well into the past. It wasn't just the Skins that the arch-angels of goodness went after. It's obvious the SJW/BLM/ANTIFA turmoil is being leveraged to accomplish ancillary objectives - poltical and financial (with a dash of power aggregation just to sweeten the pot).

Clean sweep eh? Well, we know Snyder wasn't on the planning end of his own termination. So who was, for how long and why? Why now?
Al, you know Occam's Razor is a thing for a reason, right? I'm not saying there isn't some truth to what you are proposing but there are a hell of a lot of moving parts in there and a conspiracy this broad is as likely to fall apart under the weight of its own complexity as it would be to succeed.
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


Al, you know Occam's Razor is a thing for a reason, right? I'm not saying there isn't some truth to what you are proposing but there are a hell of a lot of moving parts in there and a conspiracy this broad is as likely to fall apart under the weight of its own complexity as it would be to succeed.
Neo: whether it succeeds or not is a different issue. My real anchor point for all of this is fol: I read an article yesterday vis the NCAA effort to clamp down on non-PC team names several years ago. 100s of indian colleges, high schools were directly or indirectly impacted. To this day only a small percentage have actually changed names from Redskins, Chiefs, Blackhawks, etc. From where I sit, this isn't even remotely similar to the oddly enforced N-word erasure (which makes mroe sense from a historical pov). This whole effort has been underway largely led by people with no connection to Indian history or racial identity. It's a pure power play, virtue signalling, feeling driven...call it what you want. I start from the premise that even small events (in the grand scheme of things) like changing a team name are pursued for ulterior motives given the overarching context. Now throw in everything else going on and it's hard to accept that the microcosm of Skins events is all ad hoc.

Folks are free to agree, disagree, wait for better info. I'm by no means a DS fan. The image is intended as humor given my posting history. One sighs and looks on current affairs with resignation. Everything is trending in a bad direction. Yes, the Skins might actually improve were Snyder transferred to the former owner roster. Or they might anyway if the Riverboat Pilot is as good as some here appear to believe. Or, the NFL might be on a long downward spiral and Snyder's fate won't make much difference.
 
Last edited:

SilentThreat

The Franchise Player
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,861
Reaction score
204
Points
93
Location
Ashburn, Va


Al, you know Occam's Razor is a thing for a reason, right? I'm not saying there isn't some truth to what you are proposing but there are a hell of a lot of moving parts in there and a conspiracy this broad is as likely to fall apart under the weight of its own complexity as it would be to succeed.

I don't think it is though. There are a lot of things that have happened that can't be truly explained.

1. Snyder said he would NEVER NEVER NEVER change the name and you can 'put it in all caps.'
2. The OFFICIAL MERCHANDISE supplier decides that they will pull ALL apparel for a single team
3. The minority owners that control a 40% stake in the team decide seemingly out of left field that they've finally had enough with Dan
4. Fedex threatens sponsorship issues - Namesake of the field and minority owner is CEO
5. Amazon pulls gear on July 8th - Bezos is owner of Amazon
6. Washington Post (who have been COMPLETELY silent the last 48 hours) reportedly has bombshell story - ALSO owned by Bezos
7. Rivera says him and Snyder have been talking about names for MONTHS.. Not since the sponsors threatened to pull, but for MONTHS.


That is A TON of stuff to happen, likely ALL of which has to be signed off on by 1 person / group. Goodell and the NFL. NONE of that stuff can truly happen without them being involved / aware.


oh... btw.... the beginning of the week the NFL called together an owners meeting to reportedly talk about the upcoming season and the policies surrounding making it work. I don't think that's a coincidence.
 

Bulldog

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
15,371
Reaction score
334
Points
363
Location
Bethesda Md


The Nike announcement was crap.

They have a contract for NFL gear and most probably a marketing agreement.

Refusal to merchandise any of the 32 teams equipment is likely breach of contract.

That’s IF the NFL wanted to enforce it.

But as Fan62 indicated there is a larger agenda at play here in 2020.

And in the end it comes down to $$$ and not doing the ‘right’ thing.
 

SkinsNumberOne

The Rookie
Joined
Dec 20, 2013
Messages
177
Reaction score
12
Points
18


I don't think it is though. There are a lot of things that have happened that can't be truly explained.

1. Snyder said he would NEVER NEVER NEVER change the name and you can 'put it in all caps.'
2. The OFFICIAL MERCHANDISE supplier decides that they will pull ALL apparel for a single team
3. The minority owners that control a 40% stake in the team decide seemingly out of left field that they've finally had enough with Dan
4. Fedex threatens sponsorship issues - Namesake of the field and minority owner is CEO
5. Amazon pulls gear on July 8th - Bezos is owner of Amazon
6. Washington Post (who have been COMPLETELY silent the last 48 hours) reportedly has bombshell story - ALSO owned by Bezos
7. Rivera says him and Snyder have been talking about names for MONTHS.. Not since the sponsors threatened to pull, but for MONTHS.


That is A TON of stuff to happen, likely ALL of which has to be signed off on by 1 person / group. Goodell and the NFL. NONE of that stuff can truly happen without them being involved / aware.


oh... btw.... the beginning of the week the NFL called together an owners meeting to reportedly talk about the upcoming season and the policies surrounding making it work. I don't think that's a coincidence.
If this is what you meant by conspiracy theory, I can understand your thinking (maybe). It seems to make sense in some ways too. You are basically saying that the NFL may have been complicit in:
a) wanting the Skins to change their name
b) trying to force more change from the Skins organization, potentially to include Dan Snyder leaving

Correct me if I'm wrong there.

#1 is easy to see, it was deemed "bad for business" and it became an easy call to make from their perspective. I understand that. Number 2, it sounds like you are proposing that as well. If the league wants to kick out an owner, they know they would have to look over their own shoulders a bit. Look at what happened to Cuban in the NBA when they had a big scandal involving harassment and mistreatment. He made big public amends and they eventually moved on (I don't remember other specifics, like penalties, but whatever the case, he has not come anywhere close to losing his team).

That is what I would expect to happen to Snyder in most scandal situations (and that is probably, in general, what owners PREFER to see happen without external interference). I can imagine that the NFL has a lot of owners who want Snyder gone, maybe not even as much for personal reasons as their number one motivation typically comes from pocketbooks, and Snyder is B-A-D for them there. I mean, you can spell that with CAPS. So, yeah, I'm sure they don't like him, but I also doubt they'd be eager to set precedents at a league level that they lose their independent authority. It's the same reason at the UN level, you always get certain countries who are saying "leave other countries totally alone" - not because they care about those other countries... but mainly because, they don't want anyone getting involved in THEIR national business.

When you examine the potential motivations and ramifications, I don't think it would totally add up. I can see them wanting Snyder gone, and not standing in the way of some bad rumblings that could force things to move (although again, if it hurts the brand, even there they may try to limit the exposure), but that falls well short of a big conspiracy. I don't see an extremely active hand being likely, because to me it would seem like it would run counter to their own selfish interests. Even on the grounds of being poorly run, you'd get other poorly run franchises worrying that the league would come for THEM next.
 

SilentThreat

The Franchise Player
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,861
Reaction score
204
Points
93
Location
Ashburn, Va


If this is what you meant by conspiracy theory, I can understand your thinking (maybe). It seems to make sense in some ways too. You are basically saying that the NFL may have been complicit in:
a) wanting the Skins to change their name
b) trying to force more change from the Skins organization, potentially to include Dan Snyder leaving

Correct me if I'm wrong there.

#1 is easy to see, it was deemed "bad for business" and it became an easy call to make from their perspective. I understand that. Number 2, it sounds like you are proposing that as well. If the league wants to kick out an owner, they know they would have to look over their own shoulders a bit. Look at what happened to Cuban in the NBA when they had a big scandal involving harassment and mistreatment. He made big public amends and they eventually moved on (I don't remember other specifics, like penalties, but whatever the case, he has not come anywhere close to losing his team).

That is what I would expect to happen to Snyder in most scandal situations (and that is probably, in general, what owners PREFER to see happen without external interference). I can imagine that the NFL has a lot of owners who want Snyder gone, maybe not even as much for personal reasons as their number one motivation typically comes from pocketbooks, and Snyder is B-A-D for them there. I mean, you can spell that with CAPS. So, yeah, I'm sure they don't like him, but I also doubt they'd be eager to set precedents at a league level that they lose their independent authority. It's the same reason at the UN level, you always get certain countries who are saying "leave other countries totally alone" - not because they care about those other countries... but mainly because, they don't want anyone getting involved in THEIR national business.

When you examine the potential motivations and ramifications, I don't think it would totally add up. I can see them wanting Snyder gone, and not standing in the way of some bad rumblings that could force things to move (although again, if it hurts the brand, even there they may try to limit the exposure), but that falls well short of a big conspiracy. I don't see an extremely active hand being likely, because to me it would seem like it would run counter to their own selfish interests. Even on the grounds of being poorly run, you'd get other poorly run franchises worrying that the league would come for THEM next.

Which is the conspiracy part. The post is killing him.. not the NFL. All the rats are jumping ship as it sinks.

I'm speculating all this, clearly... but there are too many things happening that the NFL needs to be aware of for them, and if they were worried about fall out, they likely could intervene and make it go away quickly.
 

Shi no Tenshi

2016 Blognostications Champ
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
3,438
Reaction score
37
Points
78
Location
Austin, TX


Al, you know Occam's Razor is a thing for a reason, right? I'm not saying there isn't some truth to what you are proposing but there are a hell of a lot of moving parts in there and a conspiracy this broad is as likely to fall apart under the weight of its own complexity as it would be to succeed.
And don't forget Hanlon's razor as well...they often go hand in hand with these things.
 

SilentThreat

The Franchise Player
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,861
Reaction score
204
Points
93
Location
Ashburn, Va



They've now lawyered up... I don't buy "reviewing organization protocols' either.
 

ntotoro

The Team Captain
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
2,998
Reaction score
117
Points
93
Location
NoVa


Meaning they’re upset they got popped.

All the while, Danny Boy is in France.
 

SkinsNumberOne

The Rookie
Joined
Dec 20, 2013
Messages
177
Reaction score
12
Points
18


And **** 'team officials' - YOU'RE upset? Most of you just got there. Try being a fan of this franchise MFers!!!
Anyone can handle PR when things are rosy. The question is, how do you handle the bad situations. Also, do you learn from past mistakes in PR? When a bad situation gets worse due to poor PR management, do you learn and when the next one comes along, learn how to avoid the same mistakes again?

Easy example: Bob Kraft with the Patriots. The PR fallout from some of the stuff that has happened with him, from the Aaron Hernandez mess to the massage parlor fiasco... but he has escaped with as little damage as I can imagine due to good PR management. Yes, of course, it helps to have a winning team, but I am pretty sure he would handle it similarly and escape in a similar way under different circumstances.

I mean, even that simple line makes them sound absurd. They are upset about speculation? What do you expect? A well run organization would be unsurprised, and furthermore would be prepared for this eventuality. Even if they are (which I doubt) and this is a smokescreen, it makes them look foolish. They just continue to have no basis in reality.
 

GSF

The Starter
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
1,046
Reaction score
12
Points
38


I think the bombshell is going to be about unethical practices by Snyder and some of his people. What if Snyder isn't selling the team? What if he's moving it to a new city? 1 lame duck season which might not even happen anyways in DC as the "no-names" and then bye bye. Easier for me to envision than him actually selling the team.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Chat 0
    Top