The Kevin Sheehan Show - 55,000 Strong!

Episode Date: June 1, 2022

Kevin with the news that the next Washington stadium will hold 55,000 fans....lowest capacity in the NFL. Michael Phillips/Richmond Times-Dispatch jumped on from Ashburn after another OTA day with some excitement about the offense. Howard Gutman was a guest to discuss the request by Congress for Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell to appear at a hearing on June 22nd.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

You don't want it. You don't need it. But you're going to get it anyway. The Kevin Cheehan Show. Here's Kevin. Two guests on the show today. Michael Phillips, our good friend from the Richmond Times Dispatch, who's been pretty prolific on reporting about a potential stadium in Virginia.

And yesterday broke the news that whenever and wherever the new stadium gets built, it will be at a capacity of 55,000, making it the lowest. in the NFL. Michael is at OTA day number two, session number two at Nashburn as we speak, and he will jump on afterwards. We'll talk a lot of football with him as well. More on the 55,000 capacity coming up here in a moment after Michael Howard Gutman, our good friend, will jump on the show to address the news of this morning that Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell have been requested by Congress to appear at a hearing on June 22nd. We'll see if that is likely to happen. Howard Gutman after Michael Phillips. I wanted to start the show here in this opening segment with an email that I got from Ted. Ted wrote, Sheehan, a criticism and a compliment for you. He actually started with the compliment. I'm going to start with his criticism. The criticism was,

Aren't you glad Chase Young's back at OTAs? Aren't you glad? Aren't you glad? You've been over the top with your criticism of his missing OTAs. They are sir voluntary. You don't have to call me sir. They are serve voluntary. Your criticism is directed at the wrong person.

It should be directed at the league and the Players Association for making these off-season activities voluntary, opening up the possibility that if they don't post, People like you will take them to task. Thank you, Ted, for that part of the email. I'll read the complimentary part of his email here in a moment. I don't think I've been overly critical of Chase Young so far. He missed last week's OTA days, and I pretty much said,

eh, at this point, they're resigned to the fact that he has his own way of getting himself ready. It didn't work last year, clearly. I'm not saying that the OTA day absences last year. had any impact. We've been through this. We've covered this ground before. I just don't think I've been that critical of Chase Young, or I wasn't last week. Now, yesterday, I think Tommy made a really good point. And I think it's probably the point to be made when Tommy said that Chase Young showing up yesterday at OTAs and this week at OTAs so far, two days of the three he's been there, that really it's a good thing for Ron Rivera, because if he had stiffed Rivera for a second straight year after Ron Rivera at the end

of March told people that, you know, Chase is going to be here at OTAs this year, he will make his presence felt not on the field, obviously, that he would have looked like a fool, that it would have been, you know, disrespectful to not post, and Ron would have looked bad if Chase Young hadn't posted. I think that's true. year Ron Rivera made it very clear to everybody that while voluntary, they're in the midst of a culture rebuild. This is important for people to be here. And they had nearly 100% attendance. 89 out of the 90 players under contract posted for much of those OTA sessions a year ago. There was one player that didn't. We all know who that was, Chase Young.

And then Chase Young went out and had a bad season prior to his injury. So there's no on-the-field work for him as he's recovering from an injury, but Ron Rivera expected his presence this year. So I'm glad he's there. Yeah, I am glad, Ted. I am glad. But I don't think this year I've been very critical, or not last week anyway, for the first session of OTA days.

They've got very good attendance. Once again, Terry McLaurin now is the only player under contract that hasn't been present. and we know the reason why. With Terry, it has to do, obviously, with the contract situation. Now to Ted's compliment. Ted complimented me for calling for the smaller stadium for years. He says, you've been calling for a small stadium for years.

Quote, he's quoting me. Create a sense of exclusivity. Make it Augusta National, closed quote. Yeah, I have kind of. have compared it to, if they were to build a small stadium to kind of how hard of a ticket it is to get to the Masters. Now, it won't ever be that. That's one of the hardest tickets in sports.

But, you know, going back now, I don't know, eight, nine years, whenever we started to talk about the prospect of a new stadium, D.C. and make it small has been my mantra. you know, reduce the number of premium seats in particular club seats, because they're the ones that are always, you know, kind of half-filled, half-not, because, you know, even if they're sold, you get a lot of those people that are there for, you know, business purposes, entertaining purposes. They end up spending a lot of their time in the club level. And the truth of the matter is they really haven't for years had many of those seats sold anyway.

And it shows up on TV. I mean, it sticks out like a sore thumb. So, you know, the reduction of premium seating, a much smaller capacity has been something that I've been talking about for years now. And, you know, when I started to talk about this, it wasn't necessarily because they were losing ground on fans and on season ticket holders. It had more to do, I think, really with just the idea that fewer people were going to be going to be going to. to games in the future, which has turned out to be true because it's less expensive and it's much more convenient and the home theater experience is pretty damn good. And we've seen that throughout sports in terms of LiveGate. But it also had to do at the time with just the stadium

being consistently overtaken by opponent's fans and the lack of a true home field environment. FedEx Field has not been a good home field environment for a long time. Now, there have been a couple of moments, you know, 2015, 2016, a couple of moments here and there. 2012 for sure. The RG3 year was really the best that stadium has been pretty much since it opened. I mean, I think 2005 was pretty great. The return of Gibbs was great. But 2012 in recent memory was the aberration.

You know, RG3 took this city by storm, took the league by storm in 2012. They had massive crowds. I think still, I think to this day, the best home crowd environment at FedEx Field was the playoff game against Seattle. The atmosphere for that game was incredible. I thought it was better than the atmosphere that had existed the week before in the season finale against the Cowboys, which was a win or go home game for both teams. That was an archer rival game, a Sunday night game.

I thought the Seattle game was as electric as any crowd they've ever had. The only other crowd that kind of compares to it was in 2005, late season December, as they were making their push. towards the postseason. They blew out the Cowboys, I think, 35 to 7 at FedEx. Kooley had a monster game, and that crowd was crazy. I thought that that crowd at that point was the loudest crowd that FedEx had ever had in December of 2005. But I think that was topped by the Seattle playoff game. Nothing has compared to Seattle since. You know, even that opening night 2013 against the Eagles on Monday night football with the all-in for week one with RG3 returning. It was an electric pregame atmosphere, but Philadelphia with Chip Kelly and the hurry up and everything, the pace, you know, they made that

an unbearable night, which was the beginning, of course, of an unbearable season. But the 55,000, yeah, I mean, I think that sounds awfully small. I mean, it's hard to ignore the number. The numbers says, whoa, they have now acknowledged that they really can't sell tickets. I mean, the 60,000 number that we had heard from last week without it being expandable, and we'll confirm that with Michael Phillips. I want to make sure that it is, you know, the plans are for a stadium that is not expandable. So they're giving up on things like a Super Bowl, which has always been a dream of Dan's. for what they acknowledge as maybe their peak capacity.

Now, maybe they're wrong about that. Maybe the popularity of the commanders if they start to win this year or next year becomes overwhelming and they eventually submit new plans for a 70,000 seat stadium. But 55,000 would make it the lowest capacity stadium in the league by 5,000 seats. Really incredible when you think about it, that essentially they'll be back to our RFK numbers, you know, 30 years after they moved from RFK, if they get a stadium built, you know, by 2028. That would be 31 years, to be exact. But I like the idea. I also like that there seems to be more realism in the organization than there's been previously. I think

Jason Wright has a lot to do with that. You know, I, I, I think that Brian Lafamina tried to hammer home the point that what they thought their organization was wasn't anymore, but they didn't want to hear it, especially with Bruce in the organization. But I think the last two years have taken their toll. I think there is more recognition about what they've become. And 55,000, crazy to think that maybe in six years that the team that plays football in Washington will have the lowest capacity of any stadium. in the league when, you know, 2028, when, you know, 15 years earlier, they had the highest capacity of any team in the league. All right.

Up next, Michael Phillips will join us. Don't forget to subscribe to the podcast. Rate us and review us, especially on Apple and Spotify. Joining us on the show right now is Michael Phillips. Our good friend from the Richmond Times Dispatch at Michael P.R.T.D on Twitter. He's been breaking news on the stadium front for a while now and wrote a really interesting story yesterday on the 55,000 seat capacity, which is being planned for whenever and wherever the stadium gets and is built. But he is also joining us right after OTA day number two, week number two. And so did they win the Super Bowl today?

How good did they look? I'll say this. Look, I know you've said this before, and it's been heard, but I don't want to overdo the talk. But we were out here last year. We've been out here a lot of years. You know, the offense and the defense are evenly matched. You know, last year kind of the defense won the day most times, and I kind of drove the storylines. Like, you know, we were excited about the defense.

Look, the offense is winning, and the offense is winning big in these drills. And the offense looks really good, and the offense looks like it as playmakers. And, I mean, we're all, you try to temper it as much as possible because this thing could still go wildly off the rails. We've seen it before. But dang, if they don't have some pieces. They do, Michael. I mean, I talked about last week because I had spoken to a few people that said inside that building, they are brimming with confidence about what they are going to be offensively.

In fact, there was a feeling that they had a 12 to 13 win. offense was the quote given to me. And I, you know, you look at it, they certainly have the skill position players. You know, the offensive line is probably along with Wentz, the two biggest mystery areas, but that offensive line's been coached up pretty well by Matscoe, and the quarterback's an upgrade over what they've had recently. So there's legitimate reason to be, you know, optimistic about the team offensively, right? File it under nobody knows anything.

Just go back five, six years, and let's have a conversation with past us. We're like, you know, when Bill Callahan, like the most revered offensive line coach of all time, when he leaves and they bring a new guy in with Ron, you're going to feel so much better about this unit, and things are going to get so much better. I mean, just what a crazy thing to say, but it's absolutely true. Mapskaos coach and not out of that group. You just put blind faith in the unit because of him and because of the chemistry they've got. You got guys who want to come back, obviously, Leno, you know, made it a point to come back here.

And, you know, look, I think Carson Went will be absolutely just fine. You know, I don't think Carson's going to disappoint on any kind of massive scale. And I think that's about all you need with this system around you. You know, I don't think you're looking for, you know, the Aaron Rogers, like, take everybody on his back kind of guy. I think you're just looking for good, steady production, and that's a thing they've been missing. So who specifically has really, again, I preface all of this like you do. It's like it's June 1st. These are OTA days and they're not playing anybody. But who has stood out from your perspective and then who are you hearing they are excited about?

Sure. So I've told this story a million times. Patriots do joint practices, you know, start of the Gruden era. enrichment. I was there. And they come down and just, over three days, we all just learned, hey, like, you know, this is what a professional team looks like, going through their professional drills. And this is what amateur hour looks like. And watching the offense today and last week, it looked like a professional, well-run

machine. It was sharp. It was crisp. Routes were run correctly. I think Johan Dotson, you know, for all of his perceived flaws, he is a smart kid who knows how to run around and be where he needs to be, and that's what this offense demands of him right now. Curtis Samuel is showing his versatility,

showing everything we thought they would get from him last year. You know Terry's going to fit in. Carson delivers a professional football in a timely manner, right where it needs to be. You know, and again, I can't say it enough. It's just May, but man, you watch this. You're like, oh, that's what it looks like at a high level. Like, you go to, like, the Warriors pregame shoot around, and it looks different, and it feels different.

You know, like, they're doing this at a professional, level right now. They are running their offensive drills at a professional level, and that's more than we've seen here for a few years. You have for a couple names. I'll go ahead and give you a couple of names. I'm getting out my roster. They threw a lot of passes to Alex Erickson today. The second team did it. He caught like nine passes today.

It's just a weird, you know, file that name for the future. Curtis Hodges took a lot of stamps at tight end. He's six foot eight. He's one of the new guys on the roster. I hear in a lot of buzz around him. So if you want a couple of roster guys. Maybe, you know, by low in your fantasy football preseason leagues. Preseason fantasy. You know, you said something, and for you, it's even more meaningful because you were in the Taylor Heineke camp and you thought there was a chance that he could be the answer.

And you're saying that it just looks a lot more professional offensively than it's looked. Yeah, and more so than it looked in the Fitzpatrick era and more so than it looked in the Alex Smith era. You know, they've taken a step forward in terms of their crispness and their play. And I will forever love the stories we got from the Taylor Heineke era and I'll ever love watching him be a gunslinger. But if you want to be a credible contender in the National Football League, this is what you need and this is what they have right now. What do you think Logan Thomas's status will be when we get to the regular? season. I'm nervous about week one.

And, you know, certainly a lot of, you know, every player who's ever been interviewed during an injury is ahead of schedule and feels good about it. And, you know, he's right on the verge of a big comeback. But I think that's legitimate in the case of Logan Thomas. He is progressing well. We have seen him out here every day at OTAs. He's definitely making the effort to be a part of this and to go through the drills, you know, even though it is on the side field.

So, you know, I think there's every reason to be encouraged. encouraged by his progress, I think week one might be tough. It's a tough roster decision, as you know, Kevin, because if you put him on IR this year, that's a four-week minimum. And so if you start him out injured, you don't get him until week five potentially. And so I could see this being a tough gray area roster call where maybe the doctors say, we think we can clear him for week three. What do you want to do about that? And it's a little bit easier at the start of the season because he have healthy scratches a lot more at the start of the seasons you can handle that a little bit easier. But I could see this diving into tough decision

territory. One last one on the offense. Have you learned anything about what their plans are running back based on who's running with the first team and who's running with the second team? I'm not talking about McKissick as much as I'm talking about Gibson and Robinson. Yeah, Robinson is getting carries with the first team, not exclusively. They're mixing a lot of stuff around. Gibson's the unquestion, number one, but it's very clear that Gibson will not have 100% of the first team staff. Look, I think that's a smart decision, too, as you break that down. I just think that's a lot to ask of any running back in today's NFL, and especially, you know, the way they run these guys, I think having Robinson in there, the ability to bring him in, you know,

just on a rotational basis or on a hot hand basis or whatever you do, I think that's going to be a part of this offense. that's bad for fantasy football, you know, because Gibson was an unquestioned workhorse, you know, in that format. But I think in the actual trying to win NFL games format, that's a great way to go. All right. Let's flip it to the other side of the ball. Chase Young was there yesterday. He was there today. He spoke today. What did he say that was noteworthy? Yeah, you know, he talked about his rehab. He said he'd give him back to squatting. He said he didn't want to share how much he was lifting, but it's a substantial.

amount. So you could take that as you will. I think Chase is going to be another guy who really were watching on a week-to-week and then day-to-day basis as we get closer to the season. You know, what's interesting about Chase, and I haven't made up my mind if I like this or don't like this, but every time now, I chat with him for a bit of the Super Bowl, and he's done a couple other interviews. When the subject of last year being disappointing comes up, he's very quick to shrug it off. And he's very quick to, you know, I'm playing my game. I'm good.

And it kind of, it verges between my two thoughts are always, like, one, you know, that's how cornerbacks are, like, you know, that short memory thing, like, I'm going to get back. I'm going to dominate the next rep. But it's also like, did we learn anything? You know, were there lessons learned? And that kind of like fear in the pit of your stomach, like, ooh, I wonder if lessons got learned. That's potentially dangerous if they didn't.

But it's also his personality, his personality, his personal. personality is very upbeat, bubbly, buoyant. His personality is a very good one in a winning locker room, and I think they anticipate being a winning locker room this year. So, you know, it's tough to, he's never offered any level of introspection about his struggles or even acknowledge them as such. And I think that's always kind of the big thing I pull away from those interviews. Yeah, that's one of those where, especially with a gifted player, who, by the way, was the defensive rookie of the year in 2020. You know, it's easy, especially given the history with this organization and kind of the

overpromising under-delivering, the delusional aspect of so much of the organization over the years to say, oh, my God, I mean, this guy doesn't get it. He had a sack and a half last year in eight and a half games before he got hurt. He was a total non-factor the year after his rookie of the year. it would be easy to answer it that way, but for all we know, it is his personality to shrug it off, to not dwell on it, and to go out, and we won't know until we see him this year, you know, when he's healthy, and if last year really was the aberration, or too bad he should have learned from it

because he's repeating it again. We won't know until this year, until we see him play. All right. So the stadium, no vote today in Virginia on the 300 million or whatever the number is to the team. It's getting pushed off potentially. Is this an indication with no vote today that they didn't have the votes and that it is near dead in Virginia? It's dying in Virginia. I'm not willing to go so far as to say dead because I, you know, and I wrote this the other day,

I think the Virginia legislature and governor and the government of Virginia as a whole is very excited about a giant, you know, land development centered around a football stadium as the showkey. I think that concept pulls very highly among legislators and even among voters and tracks with Virginia's, you know, record in the past of being very pro-business, very active and courting businesses to the state. I think Virginia is very negative right now on associating with Dan Snyder. And I think that's an interesting, it's two threads to pull here. You know, this looks like a shoe in as recently as March or April. And now it's stalling at the finish line as these politicians are worried about attaching their name to the Dan Snyder brand. And, you know, once Chap Peterson made his statement, I think he gave a lot of other people clearance to kind of come out of the woodwork and say, oh, yeah, hey. I have concerns, too, you know, where it was 32 to 8, the thing was just flying through committees.

It's kind of, you know, no one person with the face of this thing. But then Chap Pearson comes out, makes a statement. And I think a lot of people use that as cover to come out and say, yeah, what, you know, let's do. Let's pause. Why are we doing business with this guy? So it's a very interesting time. What I think it makes it a near certainty. Now, they could put it together in the next two weeks to get it across the finish line before they adjourn it.

July 1st is the start of the new year in Virginia. They could get it across the finish. I'm not ruling that out. But assuming that doesn't happen, I think it makes it very likely that we go into another year of discussions on this. And the landscape could look different in the year. The midterms are obviously going to be, you know, potentially flip the, you know, the House and Senate.

The investigations could come to an end against Dan. They could bring this back next year in the Virginia Assembly. Maryland has a lot of negotiating still to do. I know they have their $400 million on the table. and they'd like an answer, but I don't know that they'll get one right away. I think the interesting thing is the 55,000. You know, if you talk about, I think people's visions are like, you know, that RFK site, a showplay stadium, you know, in the nation's capital that hosts Super Bowls and Olympics and all that.

And I think it's time to get that out of your head because no matter which site, the land over site or the Virginia site, I think it's the correct move to build a smaller stadium that caters to the reality that that'll be the weekend, week-out attendance number for this team, and you want to build a solid experience on Sundays instead of a solid experience every 12th year for a Super Bowl. Yeah, I agree with that completely. I do have one question. Is the 55,000 expandable or not? I've been told that it's not, but I just wanted to confirm that.

No, no, it won't be expandable. It will have a roof. You know, I get that that's the question I get the most. Is that a retractable roof? Yeah, it's going to have a roof. No, it's not going to be retractable. It'll be a poland or stadium that lets sunlight in, you know, or what all the drawings are right now. But no, this thing won't be expandable. It'll be designed kind of in that 55,000 mold. You know, I think one other kind of 10,000 foot point I'd bring up is Virginia is the site,

I think the team wants because I think it's the easiest place to build a new fan base. And I know we've all talked about a million times. I think you may have been in the first to say it, they're in the fan acquisition mode, not the fan retention mode. I think Virginia, and particularly suburban Virginia, is probably the easiest place to acquire a fan base right now if you're talking about really starting to build something from the ground up and creating some new momentum. So I do think that's why the team is putting so much juice and muscle into this Virginia effort. I think they view it as the best place for them to be long term. Wow. See, I hear what you're saying, and I think that there's probably

some merit to they have come to the conclusion that they've got to develop a new fan base, that the significant percentage, the majority of their fans, if they're ever going to be there when a new stadium opens, haven't yet been acquired. And maybe the best chance for that is in Northern Virginia somewhere. But I don't think the league wants them in Woodbridge or Dumfries. I think the $200 million loan that goes to almost every NFL team, but is contingent on the league agreeing with the plan and the location, I don't think the league wants it there. I still think the team and Dan's vision on providing something back to this fan base is D.C. number one.

I'm not, and I think with respect. D.C. is a hard number one in any less. Yeah, okay. Absolutely. All right. But I also think that if it's Virginia, it would almost have to be that other location that you wrote about last week, late last week, which would be the Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Silverline location. Yeah, the best idea I heard was to build it at the bottom of the quarry. I think that stuck with me ever since. That would be amazing. I'll enter wild speculation mode for a second. You know, Prince William County provides a lot of,

voters to the Virginia State Senate, and the notion of having it in Woodbridge is very appealing to Fredericksburg and Richmond and kind of point east and west there. So I think in terms of, you know, this bill that's in front of the Virginia Senate gives them broad latitude to pick the site once the money's finalized. So I do think, and I'm just wildly speculating here, that the reason they're putting so much emphasis on that, on the Woodbridge site is because it's so appealing to so many of these potential votes. But I, I, I think if you were to ask them which site you prefer, I think Lowden's the answer, and I think Lowndes the better play.

Now, that said, you also need the leverage to make sure you can acquire that land, because that's going to be a very expensive piece of land that a lot of groups want. Right. And, you know, the problem, of course, is the reality right now is that it's probably, and you think this, it's probably not going to pass this go-around, which for the time being pretty much eliminate. Virginia, because I don't see Dan if he's got to spend a billion of his own dollars to build a stadium. I think at that point, D.C. is a weight game or that Maryland with the $400 million for

infrastructure becomes a better option? If he wants it done quickly, you need to do it on the FedEx field site. But I would echo your extremely good point from earlier that the NFL has wishes here, too. and we've done enough cycles of scheduling. A lot of the NFL has visited FedEx Field and experienced that location. You wonder if the NFL would be gung-ho about FedEx Field 2 as well. I don't know that that would excite a lot of people on Park Avenue. Yeah, it's just that the plans for Landover are far different than envisioning just this, you know, FedEx number two, you know, parked right next to it in the parking.

a lot next to the old one with the same roads in and roads out with no retail. It's going to be a lot different. There's a billion dollar project going on there for restaurants and bars and retail, you know, the same group that built one Loudon. It's inside the Beltway. It's valuable

and it's going to get built up whether the stadium's there or not. So they'd have to certainly pitch. I agree. Like just the perception is landover, no thank you. But I think the landover of 2028 in that area specifically is going to look a lot different. At least that's what Maryland is planning with or without the stadium. They'd like to have the stadium. But anyway,

it's a hard prediction right now. But I think the Virginia stuff really is, if they don't bring this back here in the next couple of weeks, I think Virginia is in deep trouble. You agree with that, right, even though you've suggested that they could come back to it a year later. I think they could come back to it a year later, but I agree with your assessment that they are ready to move. And if Virginia signals they are not ready to move, I think Maryland is going to get very antsy. And if Maryland starts their plans and you don't jump on board, that's potentially, you know, at a friction point there. Yeah, I would agree with the statement of Virginia is in trouble if they don't get it across the finish line this summer. I think waiting until next January, it potentially opens it.

door to a lot of other things. All right, this was great per usual. I appreciate it. You've got a column to write. You've got a trip back to Richmond to make. I appreciate the time, as always, Michael. Take care, Gavin. Up next, Howard Gutman, on the request that Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell

appear in front of Congress. We'll get to that right after these words from a few of our sponsors. Jumping on the podcast right now is our good friend Howard Gutman, longtime D.C. prominent attorney, ambassador to Belgium during the Obama administration. Of course, I called Howard on the news that the House Committee on Oversight and Reform requested today, Wednesday, June 1st, that Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell appear before the committee at a hearing on June 22nd. Simply put, what does this mean? So, Kevin, this is great theater and even better politics.

I hope to be able to get a ticket to the event if it occurred, but it is a letter request. It is not a subpoena. So right now, no one is compelled to do anything. It is the next foray into the fencing that's been going on between the NFL and Snyder and the Democrats in the House turns up the heat a bunch. now the NFL will have to respond. I suspect Snyder will be told to just follow their lead. I suspect the NFL lawyers will put out some statement that they look forward to cooperating fully,

and I suspect Goodell will let them know he's not available then, and the conversation will continue with the NFL, I suspect, hoping to stretch this out until Carol Maloney is no longer the head of the committee. She's, first of all, a Democrat, and if the Democrats lose in November, she's gone. But she was also gerrymandered into a close congressional race against a long-time other Democratic incumbent. So the Democrats will probably play for time. By the way, when you said follow the lead, you're saying Dan will follow the NFL's lead, Goodell's lead on this. Correct. I suspect Jeff Pash, the general counsel of the NFL will talk to the community.

Manders General Counsel. There's a new general counsel. Their existing general counsel, who is a former Washington, D.C. litigator at the same firm I was at, is now with the Los Angeles Dodgers. But in any event, they will give similar responses, which will probably be they look forward to cooperating fully, but this timing doesn't quite work. So that's what they would be allowed to do right now, which is just kindly decline. you know, showing up on the 22nd and trying to play kind of the Dean Smith Four Corners game until November. But what are the chances that they could be subpoenaed? And then the question two, part two of that, would they then be required to appear before Congress?

So what took down Dean Smith is the imposition of a shot clock, and that is precisely what would happen if the Democrats decide to subpoenaed. the witnesses. Once they subpoena the witnesses, they are legally compelled to appear. And then the question is, do the witnesses go to court to challenge the subpoena? That really ramps it up a lot for the NFL and for the commanders. Are they saying that when asked by the U.S. Congress, when subpoenaed by the U.S. Congress, they would actually go to court and claim it's illegal or improper? That's a step they may not want to take, they, the NFL, and the commanders may not want to take. So if the NFL, if the House, Democrats decided to ramp it up to a subpoena, that would take it to a whole new level. Snyder and Goodell might decide to appear,

or they would try to negotiate something down from the subpoena that the House would be willing to take. But it would, in fact, put a shot clock and your four corners are limited. Do you think they'll subpoena them? You know, it's a big fight with the Republicans. It is a, the Republicans will hoot and holler that this is way beyond any valid interest, that it's grandstanding, that it's showboating. My sense is what they will do is see the reaction now to the letter, if they get a lot of good, favorable press, and depending on what the NFL does,

this is a game of chest, not checkers, so each move will depend on the move that follows. But I think there is a significant chance that they subpoena. Here's the ultimate problem. I don't think at the end of the day the house has what they need to raise a ruckus. I think at the end of the day, all that Goodell would say, and maybe that's why he would appear, is it's under investigation and I cannot prejudge it. And Snyder, if he were my witness, first of all, in 27 years, I never had a witness testified. I would always have him take the Fifth Amendment because testifying is usually a perjury trap.

And Deborah Katz will be ceding questions to the House to say, ask them this. But on the other hand, if you're Snyder, you could probably get away with the Sergeant Schultz or Colonel Schultz, whatever he was in Hogan's Hero's defense. I know nothing. I see nothing. So Snyder, too, could say, this is under investigation, and I eagerly await the results to take the appropriate action thereafter, and I'm familiar with none of this. What do you make of the request for Snyder and Goodell with respect to the reasons they claim they want the two of them to come and talk to Congress? They talk about, you know, they want them to come and appear in front of Congress to help Congress prevent employers. in the future from silencing victims of workplace misconduct to ensure that these things won't happen again. That it's more about, you know, helping them prevent this kind of thing from

happening in companies in the future. That's not really what they want. They want Snyder. At least the Democrats do, right? Right. So remember, the House Oversight Committee is way outside of its comfort zone right now. Already, yes. Already. Their function is supposed to be to investigate conditions for purposes of adopting general legislation. How are coal mines going to stay so we can pass safety rules, not so we can go after any particular owner of a particular coal mine. But they have been focusing on one owner of one coal mine and hoping to find a canary that dies.

And that's Dan Snyder. and so they are trying to make a political inquiry. I'm a Democrat, but it's an obvious political inquiry into Dan Snyder and this culture look like a general fact-finding within their jurisdiction to pass legislation generically controlled at harassment at the workplace or in the sports enterprise. And you and I have talked in the past that if they were true to their mission, then they would be doing things like what's happening with security departments, across all sports.

And what's happening with harassment across all sports in soccer, in the WNBA, not with one club, with one owner who's an easy whipping boy in this city. There's this quote in the letter in the request from this representative, Raja Krishna-Morthy, which we've certainly read his name over the last several months, the Democrat from Illinois. The quote reads, quote, for seven months, the committee has been stonewalled by NDAs and other tools to evade accountability. Mr. Snyder and Mr. Goodell need to appear before the committee to address these issues and answer our questions about the pervasive workplace misconduct at the Washington commanders and how the NFL address these issues, closed quote. No, they don't. They don't have to appear before this group at all unless they're subpoenaed to do so, right?

Well, yes, he wasn't talking legally that they have to. He was saying as a representative standing for re-election and hoping to run for the Senate one day from the House, I think they should be here and answer they always said. But this is the next step. You were correct that they don't have to. But when the House gives a letter, they expect that a good American citizens will want to serve their duty. The last time I've seen that happen, I can't tell you. but that's at least the pretense that is used in this ballet,

and this is the next step in the ballet. And then the question is, will they move to the subpoena step? Percent chance we see Dan Snyder and or Roger Goodell at any point in the future appearing and answering questions in front of Congress. I don't think it's as low as the question would expect because right now, they have the best out. If I were ever going to let a witness testify, it might be now where the easiest answer consistently is,

I'm as interested in the answer as you are. That's why there's an ongoing investigation, and I can't prejudge it. That out makes it possible. You know, if I was talking to Jeff Pash, I'd say, maybe snap it quickly. You know, you're on the one yard line. Don't let him set up, snap it quickly, into a quarterback sneak and go right in.

Right now, you have a very simple answer. They asked you too early. They asked you while investigations are pending. Why don't you actually run with the ball and say, sorry, we're here, we've showed up, we're good Americans, we support the Congress. But these are under investigation. You know, like we know we can prejudge any of that. Now, what do they do when they ask?

Well, what about the Beth Wilkinson report? and then, you know, you never go into a hearing because you can answer the first question. The issue is, can you answer the last question? Yeah, I was just going to ask you. That's assuming, you know, it may be a great hurry-up opportunity because the Mary Joe White investigation is ongoing, but that's assuming that you know all of the questions that are going to be asked. So the queer question, that's the difficult one, is what about the investigation so far? And Roger Goodell would have to, and it's easy for Dan Snyder.

We cooperated fully. The report was given to the lead. The league concluded that we owed a fine. We paid the fine. I fired the perpetrators, and we're moving on. That's all I know about the Beth Wilkinson report. And that's, that's, you have to ask Mr. Goodell. Mr. Gidell would have to have the answer that at the time we followed our rules and our protocol

and did what's best, which is we got a report from Beth Wilkinson, and we don't have anything in writing, and what it reflected we took action on. I probably, if I were Jeff Pash, who's the general counsel of the NFL, I probably would do all I could to avoid Goodell going in on that basis because the story begins to unwind. For Dan Snyder, he doesn't have it as hard as it seems because he can say, all of this was investigated by others, ask them.

I know nothing more than whatever they found out. I cooperated fully. Yeah, the only thing with that, correct me if I'm wrong, is if you let Snyder go in by himself and Pash holds Goodell out, and Snyder ends up answering the questions, as you just suggested, and essentially there's no harm during his testimony, then all of the pressure is put back on Goodell. All of the expectation for the answers is put back on Goodell.

I didn't mean to suggest they would let Dan go in without. Goodell, I was suggesting if I were the lawyers thinking before we sat down and figured out, I think if I were passed, I would say to Roger, we've got to do everything to put this off. Let's try to play until November. avoid the shot clock and play till November when this changes our way to the house goes out. And Dan will follow that lead. I'm just saying that at this point, you know, you'd hold your breath if Dan were going in.

And if he were a confident witness, if he could handle a press conference, if he were Jason Wright and where the words come off in paragraphs off his tongue, I wouldn't have that big a problem in this circumstance where the investigation was done, by others and one's going forward to let him up go up there. The other thing we know from Happy Thanksgiving is when you consider whether Dan Snyer can make a public appearance under oath on national television, you've got to consider him as a witness. No, he's not, happy Thanksgiving. He's not a, he's not a silver-tonged gypsy. I mean, this would be really risky allowing him, he's clearly not comfortable in that.

And even if the answers were pretty benign, you wonder if he could handle that. You didn't answer the question, though. Percent chance that we see this happen in the future? I purposely didn't answer the question. I would suspect we're probably at about 40%. Really? 60% is the chance that the Democrat, that the NFL can stall this out, 40% that they think they actually can answer the questions this time. Not that they can actually deal with the underlying sexual harassment issues, but that they can answer the questions procedurally.

Namely that, go subpoena Beth Wilkinson, go subpoena others. we followed our processes. We brought the best in. We followed our processes. We are not the people with knowledge. Roger Goodell could say, I have never been at fight night or at the Redskins locker room, and Dan Snyder could say, this was news to me,

and I stepped back and let people investigate. That's the only reason. If you were talking about the people who were accused, and I'm not prejudging him, but let's say Larry Michael, whether you would have him go in, I would certainly force a subpoena and try to do all I could to avoid the answers. So does this story today impact the stadium stuff at all, in your opinion? Absolutely. The biggest harm of this story, every time Mark Maskey writes something, every time Liz right, you know, anytime the Washington Post gets one of these stories,

it makes it harder if you're a Virginia, Maryland, or D.C. politician or official to get close to Dan Snyder. And it makes it also more interesting on that issue of are the owners counting noses to see how many people would say enough is enough. That's where it really hurts. The story about the sexual harassment hasn't changed. We pretty much have a feel for there wasn't a great environment. by the way, there wasn't one in Oakland, and there wasn't one in Dallas, and there's problems in the league,

but probably nothing that affects the Danny directly. That's where we pretty much come down, but every time the story comes up, who's going to give the money that was given to Buffalo to a Dan Snyder to get in bed with him? So the best thing that would happen, if I were Dan and Jason Wright, I would say,

let's wait and see when the Republicans take over and this calms down. And let's pray Carson Wentz can team up with Curtis Samuel a lot, and we go 11 and 6. And if we're 11 and 6 and the Republicans are in Congress, we will finance the stadium. But right now, it makes it toxic. Who's going to have a press conference today to say, great news? We're giving Dan Snyder some money because the stadium's coming to us. last one for Howard and it has nothing to do with the news of today I was just curious what did you make of the Gruden story from last week where the judge denied the NFL's motion to dismiss the case against Gruden and could that lead to you know a potential trial and

discovery and then all the sudden you know the emails are part of that discovery what did you make of that whole thing see I first of all a motion to disson misniff's standard. And John Gruden has a potentially valid claim. I mean, his career went from top shelf to in the gutter overnight. And if it would happen because someone was trying to hurt him, he has the right to know it. I can almost guarantee you a thousand percent. What will happen next is that case will settle.

There's no way the NFL is going to. Let all this come out. You know that famous NDA? There's going to be a settlement and a confidentiality agreement, and John Groon will make more not coaching than he ever would have made coaching. Thank you, as always. I hope you're well. Appreciate it.

All right. Thanks, Kevin. All right. That's it for the show today. Thanks to Howard. Thanks to Michael Phillips. Back tomorrow with Tommy.