The Kevin Sheehan Show - Anesthesia & Snyder

Episode Date: June 24, 2022

Kevin and Thom today on plenty of topics including the pain Dan Snyder has inflicted on Washington DC for 23 years, the benefits of anesthesia, the Wizards' pick in last night's NBA Draft, and a brief discussion on the greatest tight ends in NFL history.  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. Tommy is with me today. The show today presented by MyBooky. Go to MyBooky.com.

MyBooky.orgie. ag. Use my promo code. Kevin, D.C., and they'll match your first deposit, dollar for dollar, all the way up to a thousand bucks. A couple of segments on the show today. The follow-up on the Goodell hearing and our thoughts on that. and a few NBA draft thoughts as well.

And actually, Tommy, I've got a subject that I'll hit you with in the final segment of the show today that I did not prepare you for, but you won't need preparation because I know who your number one all-time guy is at the position that I want to talk about. But anyway, you know, no podcast yesterday. Sorry, folks. I had a previously scheduled thing. I had a colonoscopy yesterday. It went fine. You've had them before.

right? Yes, I have. Yeah, they're no big deal. The prep is the, is the hard part if it's even that hard. I mean, it's not fun the prep, but there's nothing, you know, it's just kind of a pain in the ass to be sitting, you know, near the toilet for the 12 straight hours. Yeah. But, you know, I did actually, listen, listen, I had the prep, I had one many years ago. I had the prep where you couldn't eat anything but yellow for three days. that's unbelievable just jello yes and and the stuff you had to drink over that three-day period it's changed a lot Tommy I took pills I didn't have to drink the I I've done the drink one before I did that one a few years ago and then I had to come back for another one in a you know

whatever they found some stuff that was benign totally benign but instead of coming back like every five years or 10 years, it had to be closer to every three to five years or whatever. But it's now pills, which makes it much easier than drinking that horrible stuff. Oh, yeah. So I did want to just, before we get into

the stuff we're going to get into today, you know, they use anesthesia, you know, you go under, you're sedated. And every time I've ever been under, you know, I've had a couple of surgeries back in others. And

And I just, I always think about, and by the way, the whole process of anesthesia of, all right, look, in five to ten seconds, you're going to be asleep. And then all of a sudden, you're just boom. And the next thing you know, it's like, it's done, it's over. But I always think about, or let me ask you, do you ever think about just how lucky we are to live in the time that we're living in with things like anesthesia? anti-biotics and certain vaccines and aspirin, you know, in your case, television. But seriously, do you ever think about like just the Civil War, like the amputations, you know, if you've ever watched a lot of stuff on the Civil War, I mean, it was like, here's some brandy and a towel to bite down on.

Here we go. You know, as the saw was, you know, as the doctor held the saw in his head. I mean, how awful that would be. Here's what I do. I do the opposite. I project 50 years from now how to look at how archaic what we are doing now is. Right. That's what I think about.

I think about it 50 years. Just think what we're doing now to the generation 50, 60 years from now is the equivalent of what you just talked about. Do you think it is, though? I think it will be. I'm sure it will be, but I can't project, you know, how. it will. I think it, put it this way. Medical stuff and pain associated with things like surgery, there was a time in which there was nothing that was out there to dull the pain, the personal, physical, inflicted pain. That is a pretty big deal. That's incredible progress and we're lucky

to be living through a time when we didn't have to deal with that. I mean, you know, one of my favorite HBO series was the John Adams series where, you know, what's his face? God, I'm blanking on. Paul Giamatti. Paul Giamatti and Laura Lennie. Laura Lennie played Abigail Adams. I mean, that was really well done. It was off the book about John Adams.

And, you know, she had, she had cancer. She had breast cancer. And there was no, you know, there was no anesthesia. That's one of the episodes. And I just, I think about that stuff. And it's like, oh my God, thank God we have something that you don't have to deal with that kind of pain. You know, I've looked this up before and I didn't look it up for this show. So I may be a little bit off and somebody may tweet me to correct me.

But like the early forms of anesthesia, I think was chloroform. I think they basically took chloroform and, you know, pushed, you know, buried your nose. in it, so you passed out. I think that's true. That may be. That may be. Listen, I've had three colonoscopies in my life. Yeah. The second one,

I woke up while they were doing it. What? And yes, I woke up I think you've told me this before. Yes, and I'm screaming. And they're saying, shoot them up with more stuff. Oh, my God.

It was horrific. I'm surprised everyone back for another one. Oh, my God. Yeah. So did they just totally fuck up the sedation? Yeah. Yeah, they did. Oh, my God.

And I woke up, and I don't want to describe it, but it was as bad as you can imagine. I don't want you to describe it. Okay. Oh, my God, we may have just lost half our audience. All right, enough of that. I want to get to Wednesday. Let's talk about another colonoscopy. Yeah, which was painful to watch.

I had Howard Gutman on, so those of you that didn't hear, you know, it was our immediate reactions right when it was over, and it was before, by the way, which I do want to get to today, the statements that were put out by Tanya and Dan and Jason Wright and then one by Ron Rivera that I think is, really kind of off base. And I want to get to that in a moment. But what did you think of Wednesday? Well, I think it was, if your target is Dan Snyder, I think it was all you could hope for. I think they accomplished half of what they wanted to do. Look, not to blow my own horn, because you know I don't do that.

Yeah, right. But I've been right about this committee all along from the start. this was what they were planning on doing. This was their goal. And they accomplished half of that with Goodell. They didn't get them in person, which loses someone a dramatic effect, but they got him on Zoom. And they made him look uncomfortable if you're complimentary, awkward, if you're not.

And they gave him every chance to defend Dan Snyder, and he never did. Not once. even when they said, can't you get rid of this guy? He didn't say, why would we want to get rid of this guy? He's an NFL owner. You know, he didn't say that. He said, I can't. Yeah, it was one of the squad members, Rashida Taleb's last question before she finished up.

It was actually one of the only questions, in my opinion, that really got to anything. I thought it was a complete joke for the most part. I don't think so. I think except for the bar stool comments and everything else, I think I would have liked to have seen more focus on the post, you know, like the intimidation and harassment campaign. That's what I would have liked to have seen more focus on, because that happened after, you know,

They keep talking about this is in the past. Well, that's recent. It's the last 18 months. I would like to see more focus. Yes. So I would like to see more focus on that. Okay. It was rough at times.

I mean, you know, it's a rough process. But I think in part they accomplished what they wanted to do. Yeah. I thought it was just theater for the most part. It was just a chance for people to spend five minutes to get. their message out. I thought they missed on so many questions. They were disorganized. They were ill-prepared for the most part. I think what was much more instructive in terms of an update to this story is, you know, as you said, the post story, but really the post story came from this 29

page with attachments memo from Carol Maloney to everybody in, you know, prior to the Goodell testimony. Reading through that is much more, you know, instructive as to what did happen and what's been happening with this, you know, shadow investigation that Mr. Snyder was running with his dossier. I mean, I just, I thought, I mean, every single time I ever sit down to watch any of these things, I am always blown away. And I shouldn't be anymore at just how completely disorganized. And in some cases, just not real quick on their feet. Most of these politicians are. I thought it was really not very productive. But again, I think if you haven't read the 29-page memo, that was off of the post story that came out the morning of, which was Wednesday. That has a lot in it. And a lot of the detail in the attachments,

especially from the gentleman who was the chief operating officer from 2001 through 201 through 2006, a name, to be honest with you, I had never heard before until earlier this week. I think that that was great. But Tommy, they just missed. I mean, they were just totally ill-prepared. There were so many questions. Oh, my God. I don't think it was. Look, Kevin, I mean, how many public hearings have you been through and sat through? They're always train wrecks. Okay. Well, you just admitted they were train wrecked. You said they accomplished a lot. I think they did. I don't. But the whole process, by itself is an ill.

It's not a good way to gather information, but it is a good way to put people on the spot. And that was the whole point, and that's what they did. But they didn't do it enough. There were so many questions that were just, I mean, if you and I had been there, we would have been able to ask the questions that made sense. Imagine a talk show with 20 different hosts on it.

Tommy. You've got two and a half hours. Tommy. It's they didn't, in most cases, there weren't even questions asked. And if they were asked, they didn't allow for his answers. He was cut off. Let me, let me give you some of the questions that should have been asked, all right? That weren't. And you may say, well, that was asked. And then I'll say, yeah, but they didn't really give him time to answer. First of all, you know, nothing really specifically was asked about, whether or not Snyder reported the allegation about the woman on the plane coming back from the country music awards in 2009. There was a reference to it, but there really wasn't an allowance for an answer on that because based on the reporting by Will Hobson, it was League protocol at that point in time for the League to handle that investigation. The League did not handle the investigation. Snyder's chief counsel, Dave Donovan, and Mitch Gershman, along with this guy, Howard Shapiro from Wilmer Cutler Hale, they handled the investigation.

So I would have wanted to know, did you know about this allegation? And then why didn't the league handle that investigation? I think that one of the big questions that I said to you, I think on Tuesday, that needed to be asked was, what was Beth Wilkinson's recommendation? at the end of this investigation. That was not asked, and that is a problem. Yeah, I mean. That was not asked. And if he said, well, we didn't ask for a recommendation,

you say, well, it's been reported, and is it true that she recommended his removal as owner? Yes. You know, that should have been asked, absolutely. I would have definitely asked this question, Tommy. Was the $10 million fine of the team or of Dan Snyder? because, as you know, shortly after that fine and the statement that went with it, which was pretty condemning of the situation in Washington, Dan had his lawyers calling people like you to tell you that he wasn't fined the team was

and that he wasn't suspended. So I would have been put on the spot when he tried to defend what they did. somebody should have said, well, is it true you find the team and not the owner? And you say, you know, he's not involved in the operations, what he's suspended? Because he's been seen at team events. Oh, you're right about both of that. You're right about that. I got more.

I got more. It's just I don't expect details to come out of things like this as much as theater. I'm not saying that I expected a lot more. I'm just saying this is why I don't think what we, what most of us that had been following this day to day for 23 years, and certainly over the last two and a half years, this is why it wasn't satisfactory. You know, there was much more of an opportunity here. You know, I would have also asked, how was that $10 million fine paid? You know, because there is thought that the team just made a $10 million tax deductible donation as part of

the fine. I would have also, I would have also asked, you know, were the, the, other owners in favor of your punishment because recent reporting by Mark Maskey, among others, in the Post, revealed that the owners didn't think the punishment was harsh enough. But to your point, by the way, I would have really focused on the last 18 months. I mean, they put the memo out about this shadowy investigation. They had all the details. I mean, are you aware, Commissioner, that Dan Snyder, after the league took over the Wilkinson investigation, initiated his own investigation that included using the court system in, by the way, Tommy, I think a dishonest way to petition records of journalists and witnesses and others with the

result being intimidation and targeting. And by the way, it also led to offering, according to reports, and that memo offering of hush money to silence witnesses. Are you aware of this commissioner? I think Goodell addressed that when he said they told him to stop doing it. Yes, and he also said with that, that, you know, he said that this did not necessarily impact the investigation. It didn't impact it. And I said, and my follow-up would have been, look, whether it impacted the investigation or not.

not, his attempt was to impact the investigation, right? I mean, it doesn't matter what the result of this shadow investigation was. His intent was to impact the investigation, so will he be considered for further punishment? Because to me... When you think about it, what happened in the past 20 months is far more culpable than what happened before that. I mean, this is like the cover-up is worse than the crime. Look, going back... This was his attempt to cover it up. Going back to the 2009 event, you know, it's really a he said, she said, okay?

I mean, the bottom line is, you know, there were witness... In fact, it's actually more than he said, she said, because the only witnesses corroborate his story, not hers, and that is that nothing happened on that plane. But what is, of course, noteworthy is that the league had a protocol at the time that any sort of of accusation like sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, sexual assault in this case, that the league was supposed to run the investigation. So they didn't. So why not?

And then as far as the last 18 months, I mean, there they are. They're running this investigation, the Wilkinson investigation. And this dude's doing his best to do what he always does, which is to essentially prove that it's someone else's fault, not his. but in the process is intimidating witnesses who testified that they felt intimidated. But the point here is, even if Goodell, which he did say, we didn't think it impacted the investigation, well, that's not the point. The point is your owner did something that you didn't know about with the intent of affecting the investigation.

Hello? Like I— Yeah, I know. So, you know, I don't know. I'm not saying they didn't— They didn't miss opportunity. I still think they accomplished what they wanted to do. I mean, a simple question, like, you know, will he be punished for running this investigation

when his intent was to affect the investigation? You know what I would have also asked him? That would have been a good question. You know what I would have also asked him? I would have just said to a guy that knows this organization, okay? He used to go to games in RFK. I would have just said, describe in your own words, Mr. Coch. Commissioner, what the organization was and meant to the league 23 years ago and what it is now.

Just in your own words, tell us the difference between the organization pre-Dan Snyder purchasing it and what it is now to the league. I mean, I don't know if you would have gotten anything from him on that. Right. But, you know, there are a lot of people, most of the owners, a lot of fans, and certainly Roger Goodell, who understands what he's done. to what once was a beacon franchise in the league. And he knows the reason for it. You're right. You're right. You're right.

Anyway. Well, when we conduct our own hearing... We'll never do that. We'll do these things. So, I think the follow-up to this is important to get to. You know, you had the statement from, you know, the Snyders and Jason Wright and then the Ron Rivera statement, which starts, by the way, with all due respect to the proceedings, I want to clarify a few things.

When Dan and Tanya Snyder were in the process of hiring me, they asked me to do two things. When, exclamation point. By the way, can I add parenthetically, that hasn't happened yet. And then help us change our culture. So to be clear, on January 2nd, 2020, which was the day he was hired, we started putting into place tangible protocols in our efforts to correct any inappropriate workplace issues and improve our workplace environment. And then he just goes on. I'm not going to read the rest of it. You know, the hiring of Jason Wright, all these protocols. And now they're a beacon of diversity.

And they've been, you know, audited by this vestry light, you know, independent consultant that's been auditing their, you know, situation. And it's now, you know, an organization that respects its employees and values its employees and has one of the best HR departments. And okay. But the problem with that, Ron, is, you know, the last 18 months, your owner, your owner, Mr. Snyder and his legion of lawyers were head faking courts into providing information that allowed Mr. Snyder to target intimidate and ultimately. do what you will find if you haven't figured it out already is what he does best.

And that is blame others, in this case, Bruce Allen, for his franchise's stench. When he posted that on Twitter within two minutes, I retweeted it with the following that says the harassment and intimidation of women who came forward to speak out against Dan Snyder and the commanders happened after January 20th, 2020. I mean, this was a tone-death statement. It was. And you know what it was? It was, and in part, there was so much grime that came out of that hearings.

It was such, it was oozing all over the organization that he thought he needed to wash his hands publicly. Well, you know what? He shouldn't because he made himself look foolish with the statement. I know. It was as if he hadn't been paying attention to. the detail of what was coming out. Like, with all due respect... And what's going to be the defense?

What's going to be the defense of him and Jason Wright? Two most powerful people in the building, besides the owner. They didn't know? That's going to be your defense. I didn't know. Well, what else defense will they have? The point is... There is no defense. They shouldn't be defending, exactly.

Like, don't talk about, don't try to fool us. You know, it's the line from our favorite... show from Joe Bennett when she says to Michael and to Jim. You can't give me gravy and tell me it's jelly because gravy ain't sweet, is it? But I... You see, they can help themselves because of the slime that covers everybody who has any kind of close association with this guy. They feel compelled to say, hey, you know, I need to want.

wash this slime off myself. I mean, this is what happens when you get into business with this guy. You can be the cleanest individual on the planet, and you'll walk out of that building, and you'll be

full of stench that won't come off for years. I would have recommended, don't put this out. I don't care who's telling you to put it out. Keep your head down. Don't comment on the owner. It's a no win for you to comment on the owner. You don't understand, by the way, all due respect to you, you know, Ron, you don't understand the now near, you know, quarter century of built up vitriol for your boss, Mr. Snyder. And to continue to refer to it as if this is

something in the past and now everything is so much different, no, it's not. Because we just learned about what he was doing while the league had Beth Wilkinson investigating the toxic workplace. By the way, I would have also asked the simple question that I've said to you many times. It's like, did you know, did you realize that most of these allegations, as Mr. Snyder was presenting his 100 slide dossier, which basically tried to make it out that this was all Bruce's fault, did you know that most of these allegations were related to the toxic workplace? And by the way, the direct allegations involving Mr. Snyder himself happened and predated Bruce Allen's hiring. Like, I still don't understand why they keep pushing this thing out there that all of this stuff happened on Bruce's watch.

It's Bruce's fault. It all happened when he was the team president when 85% of the allegations are predate Bruce's hiring. when Dan had his hands and paused all over everything. I'm not saying that things didn't happen when Bruce Allen was deemed president, because I'm sure they did. But I'm just saying that, I mean, the organization's arrogance never relented. Never. Whatever. I just, I would tell Ron Rivera, stop telling people that the organization is now a beacon of diversity and culturally so much different.

You might be right. But your owner, while you've been. out there improving the culture with Jason was out there running a shadow investigation to try to intimidate witnesses with the purpose of saying once again that none of this had anything to do with me. It was someone else's fault.

He'll never, ever be able to take accountability for any of this. And this is why it won't work out for Ron or Jason or anybody else that is in the organization. It's just as long as he owns it, it will stink from the head down. Yes. And he's the head.

Yes, it will. And you're going to get slimed right along with them. You know, I mean, if you haven't figured that out by now, and you really are not very smart. I mean, I understand why you would want to be here. I understand why you're not, we wouldn't want to walk away. I mean, there's a lot of money involved. But you must have figured out by now that your reputation,

when you walked in that building, it's not going to be the same when you walk out. I mean, everybody has referred to it as the reverse car wash forever now. But the truth is, is that no one thinks any less of Mike Shanahan, you know, after his exit. Oh, I think a lot of people. I don't know. I think there's a big segment of people that question his coaching ability. I don't.

I think it'll keep him out of the Hall of Fame. Well, he wasn't in the, well, I don't. I think that most people understand that this place that, like, Joe left with reputation intact? I mean, we're talking about the handful people who can't be tarred, okay? Yeah. And Joe. But I think, Mike Shanahan's reputation was stronger before he came in the building than after he left.

How about some of the stuff, though, that's coming out of the, you know, the attachments to this memo. Oh, my God. I mean, I don't, you know, look, I mean, these are. are these are testimonies under oath. It doesn't mean that, you know, everything is the way it's been described. But for those of you that have missed some of it, I mean, I'll read you the one that really, you know, I think speaks to a lot of the stuff that, you know, a lot of us have heard about him as a person and as a manager over the years. So this was the testimony of, what's his named David Paulkin. Is that it? The guy that was the C-O-O during...

Who I had never heard of either. I had never heard of him. He was the C-O-O from 2001 to 2006. So question to Palkin. You mentioned an interaction with Mark Lerner. What are you referring to? And his answer, well, this one is fairly embarrassing. Mark Lerner, prominent business, local business person here in the Washington area, now the owner of the Nationals. Actually, it's his father who's the owner, but Mark was, you know, what was Mark's, uh, uh, was he, was he was he the CEO or team president? What was he? Uh, I'm not sure what his title was when they bought the team. He is the managing general partner of the team now. All right, whatever. It's actually not really relevant. Everybody knows who the learners are and that they own the nationals. And so this guy said the learner

family had a suite, um, or their business had a suite at FedEx field. And they also as real estate owners in the Washington area. They happened to own some real estate around near FedEx Field that we needed for parking. We meaning the Redskins needed for parking. And we completed a business deal with the learners that in Dan's view

was way too much money to pay, but we needed the parking. And this happened. The story I'm telling happened to me and it happened to, and there's a name that's blacked out in this particular piece, it's redacted, I guess,

where Dan wanted to see Mark Lerner's suite. And we go up there to his suite. This was on a non-game day. And Dan asked me to pour milk on the carpet under the seating in Mark Lerner's suite so that the sweet would smell like sour milk when the Lerner family came in on game day. And he had us do that on another occurrence. And so if you're asking me things I regret doing, that would fall under that category. I owe Mark Lerner an apology, but I did it because Dan told me to do it.

You know, there's so much going on there, not the least of which is that there's a lot of people who have done business with the learners who would like to pour sour milk all over them if they could. Yes. I mean, it's not an unusual reaction, but it's, again, it's very illustrative of how petty this man is, too. It is. It's, I mean, we've, you know, most of you have heard the story about the vanilla ice cream on Mike Nolan's desk. the early days when he was coaching for Norve and he didn't, Dan didn't like the defense and thought it was too vanilla. And so he left a gallon of vanilla ice cream on Mike Nolan's desk. So when Mike Nolan walked in, it had melted all over his desk. You know, you probably heard the

story about him putting a cigar out on somebody's leg at a dinner meeting. These are this, you know, this is, you know, this is the kind of person he, he has been. Tommy, I've said this to you before when these kinds of things have come up. I am surprised that at some point along the way, somebody didn't take his teeth out with one punch and make sure that he was sipping through a straw for six months with the way he treated people. But I guess when you're in that kind of situation, most people, you know, when they're being bullied or intimidated and managed in that way, and by the way, if they're making really good money, I guess most people put up with it, or maybe somebody did try to take a shot at him at some point,

and he just had too much security around him. That's the thing. I mean, I've seen Snyder a lot at games and stuff like that. Me too. He has guys around him that look like they've killed people. Yeah. Okay. So that could be a problem. This is why, as long as he owns the team, they're just never, ever going to win.

Never. It's never going to happen, people. Sorry. I mean, you might have a good year like 9 and 8, 10 and 7 being a playoff game, but there is a reason that he's 55 games under 500 and they've won two playoff games in 23 seasons. It's him. It's not Joe Gibbs. It's not Marty Schottenheimer. It's not Mike Shanahan. It's not Ron Rivera. It's not some of the really good players who have been here. It's him. So what happens next in this whole drama? What do you think, happens. What happens? Well, I mean, the news from Wednesday was, you know, Carol Maloney announcing that they were

going to subpoena, Dan Snyder. We'll see whether or not that works. I think, you know, some legal people are skeptical as to whether or not, you know, it'll be easy to serve it. And then A, and then B, whether or not, you know, the pushback and the legal wrangling over him appearing is going to take, you know, a amount of time to wait, you know, that we end up in November. And this thing gets dropped by the Republicans if they win the House. Although after the news today, I don't know what's going to happen in November now. We'll see. But we're not getting into the news of the day right now. It's actually breaking as we're recording this. But with respect to Roe v. Wade, I'm talking about. So I don't know. I mean, it would be great. It would be really riveting, I think,

to see him, you know, to see him questioned and be forced to testify. I mean, for those that say, look, I'll, I pushed back on your, you know, kind of overall thought that a lot was accomplished from Wednesday, but I wouldn't push back on the fact that I thought it was entertaining. I mean, I thought it was frustrating at times to watch because I think we that are following it and a lot of you guys that are listening knew a lot of the questions that should be asked and they weren't being asked. And if they were asked, people, you know, the commissioner wasn't being given time to answer it. And if he did answer it, the obvious follow-ups weren't asked.

But, you know, there was some, there were some entertaining moments in it, but it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining as seeing Dan squirm. I mean, I would love to see it, but I'm, skeptical as to whether or not it'll happen. No, I think it'll happen. Maybe not the way we want. I think it'll happen. Look, The government served subpoenas on everybody. Okay. And if somebody pointed out to me, when they wanted to arrest Steve Bannon, when he was on a yacht in the middle of the Long Island town, they just send a coast guard out. Yeah, that was American waters.

No, they could do the same thing on any foreign flagship anywhere in the world, I was told by a Coast Guard official. I was not told that, but... Okay, well, they can. So him being a yacht and con is not going to stop him from being... I've been right about this goddamn committee all time. What do you mean you've been right about it the whole goddamn time? He hasn't... I mean, you have legal executives.

He hasn't appeared. The whole thing from the start. No. And here we are with Goodell having testified. And now Snyder getting subpoenaed. I know, but what did it accomplish? It's been not sure power. powerful and influential that any of your so-called legal eagles have predicted.

Oh, look at your defensiveness coming through. Oh, Tommy's way ahead of all of our legal eagles that have weighed in on this. Why? Because Goddell was acting. They will serve him. Nobody said that Goodell wouldn't testify. None of the legal experts push back that Goodell might not appear. They just said it's going to be hard for Snyder to. They doubted that either one would appear.

When this initially started. Much more, much more of Snyder. Of course. Yeah. Well, because everyone knows that's the last thing Snyder will want to do. And like I said before, this is what Goodell is paid for in part to do this kind of stuff. But I don't think the testimony will be public. I think it will be done private behind closed doors.

Well, what fun will that be? Well, that won't be fun, but I think that it'll wind up being a private interrogation, for lack of a better word. But I think he's going to get served, and I think he's going to, I don't think it's going to, he's going to put it off until November. Okay. I think he's in trouble. Let me just say, I hope you're right. On Capitol Hill and on Park Avenue. Okay.

I hope you're right, but that doesn't answer the key question. The key question is, what will it lead to? how much closer are we to him losing his team? Much closer. Much closer than ever before. Because of what? I think, well, because of the whole drama and shit so that it went on with. Because we heard Goodell did not make any defense of Dan Snyder whatsoever as an owner.

It basically said his hands were tied, you know. but that was one answer he certainly didn't summary Dan Snyder on Wednesday no but he didn't but he didn't make any opportunity to stand with him either well I mean he

certainly defended their right not to you know make the Wilkinson report transparent and had actually I think a somewhat intuitively an intuitive answer to

the redaction thing. Like when he said we kind of learn from the Miami situation that redactions don't always work, I've always kind of had this thought that redactions, like people in the know are going to more times than not be able to put two and two together to figure out who the redacted name was. And it makes sense to me that some people would not come forward and testify per the Wilkinson request. if the testimony, if the report was going to be made public even with redactions.

This was the most vile thing that came out of Goodell's mouth was saying that he was protecting victims. Why? The whole hearing, one of the points of this hearing is to give victims a voice. Right. Well, and to hide behind them was vile. But Tommy. And as far as redaction, the only people now who know what was in the Wilkerson, report is the guy who the Wilkinson report was about. He knows. Yeah, but I'm going to push back on this. I have thought all along, why not just redact the names and make it public, you know, make it

transparent. Well, first of all, there isn't a report. I mean, let's be clear about that. I mean, there was some reporting from the post that says that there were four written different sections. Summary. Yeah, of summaries. And I'm sure that if she were asked, she could probably turn over her oral presentation. I would imagine she's got notes from the oral presentation. But with respect to just redact the names, you know, we certainly are very aware of the women that are, you know, behind the hashtag release the report. I'm not suggesting that there aren't a lot of women that came forward that had an expectation maybe that the report.

would be made public and they want it made public. But I also believe the commissioner that many of the witnesses that came forward probably did not want it made public. Not witnesses, people who were questioned. Yeah, I'm sorry. A big difference. Well, no. Well, wait a minute.

The Wilkinson report, no one had to go meet with Beth Wilkinson. Right. So they had 150 people that did. How do we know that they didn't? How do we know that the NFL didn't give them orders to? We're talking about, what do you mean give orders to? Did they subpoena these women to testify in front of Beth Wilkinson? It wasn't a court of law.

But if your employer tells you to speak to an investigator, what do you do? But most of these, which employer, hold on, I'm talking about the women that came forward and more. You know, of the 150 people that Goodell says testified or spoke with Beth Wilkinson, and maybe testifying is the wrong way to describe it. But spoke with Beth Wilkinson. Many of them are very much out there about release the report. But it's not 150 of them. You know, according to Goodell, there are many that would not have come forward

if the report was going to be made public, and they needed those women to be able to come forward. You know what? He didn't say women. he said people who were questioned. He would talk about people who were questions. Okay. Okay.

There were a lot of people questioned in that report that really were not victims at all. Okay. And really have no standing in protecting their identity as far as I'm concerned. Okay. Okay. I'm only concerned about the people who were victims, and I think his protection of it is bogus. I don't know if it is or is it. I don't think there were 150 women.

I don't know. Well, I don't know if it's 150. women or 150 people whose discussion with Beth Wilkinson was important to learning what happened in the Washington organization. I don't know. I mean, there were a lot of people who weren't victims

or didn't make allegations like you're implying that were questioned that knew a lot about what went on and probably were very important to the results of the Wilkinson investigation. All I'm saying is, it's not that I'm

just taking him at his word. It's that I can logically see and think that it's very possible that there were people that said, I'm not talking to Beth Wilkinson if this reports made public, even if my name's redacted. To me, that that's not unreasonable to think that there were people that said that. Yeah. How many of them were women who were victims? What's the difference? What do you mean? What's the difference? It's the difference between everything. No, it's not, because if you needed everybody to speak to Beth Wilkinson to learn about what happened,

then you needed to speak to these people. But are you suggesting that every single woman that spoke with Beth Wilkinson is okay with their name appearing and in a transparent open to the public report? Look, if there's many more than 40, then Snyder should be in jail. Many more than 40 women. If there's many more than 40 women who were victims, then he should be in jail. Let's just say that it's 40 women that spoke to Beth Wilkinson. Are you telling me that all 40 of those women are okay with their names being in a report that's made public?

How do you know that? Well, again, they spoke to the post. No, they, well, they spoke to the post on the condition of anonymity. A lot of those women spoke on the condition of anonymity. Well, how hard is it to get releases from these women? I mean, it was 42 women. How hard would it be? How hard would it be to get releases from women to agree to a redacted report? How hard would it be to go back and get these people to agree?

I don't know the answer to that. Do you know the answer to that? I don't think it would be very hard. I don't know why you would think that. What do you think? Are they all on the yacht with Stan Snyder and Kahn? No. Everybody who was questioned in this, how hard would it be to go back to say, look, we want to release your part of the testimony of this.

Will you sign a release for that or not? They say no. Then you just don't release that part. I think it's overwhelming majority of people who were questioned. would want their testimony released redacted. Well, if you're asking me, how hard would it be to go back and ask these women if they're okay with the report being released? That's not hard at all. The key here, though, is how many would say yes.

And obviously that they're, well, not obviously, the commissioner's telling you that there were many that did not want their name to be a part of a released report. He didn't say, he wasn't talking about victims. He was talking about people who were questions. How do you know that? He didn't say that. Well, because he didn't distinct. He didn't make any distinction. He wasn't asked to make a distinction.

Well, that's because he knew it was a protective answer. When he said many, he wasn't talking about victims. Well, but Tommy, the 42 women that were mentioned in the post, the majority of them came forward on the condition of anonymity. Wouldn't you make the, wouldn't you make this? stretch, wouldn't you stretch it to say, well, these people probably came forward in the Beth Wilkinson investigation with the understanding that they would be kept anonymous and that the report wouldn't be released? No, I don't.

I think a majority of them expected the report to be released. Well, I don't know if it's a majority. We know that some expected it to be released, but we don't know that all of them did. I mean, we know that like 12 to 15 of them did, and they've been behind very, you know, actively in the, you know, release the report. report movement. But there are 150 people that were interviewed. And I'm saying they're not all victims. And Lisa Banks' clients, which are at least 40 of them or more, I think can easily be questioned as to whether they not, when they want their information released on their

redacted situation. It would be a simple thing to do. Well, the redacted part was the part that started this conversation. All I'm saying is that when he explained that they, learned something from the Miami situation about redactions, that makes sense to me. Does it not make sense to you? Not to me. It was a focus argument. So if I was being

if I was being investigated by Congress for treating my employees poorly, and they asked you to come testify, but you didn't want your name mention, you just wanted it redacted. And it was when you

said to Congress, You know, there was this time, we were at the Super Bowl, we were on Radio Row, and this very attractive woman who was on the cover of Sports Illustrated sat down for an interview. And Kevin made fun of me and continues to make fun of me to this day because I couldn't speak for about 10 minutes, but it was because I was trying to come up with the director's name or whatever it is that you use as the excuse all the time. Did I get that right? It wasn't a legitimate thing.

That is good. What's the director? So my point being is you want your name redacted, and then the report comes out, and the redacted name is talking about this incident. You don't think people would be able to put two and two together to find out that it was you? Listen, I would call you up and say, and my point is you could easily go back and ask that person. We want to release your testimony. Of course you could.

And what if they say no? Then you don't release that part. Oh, you don't release that part? Right. Okay, so that's different. If you're saying that the, you know, let's just call it 15, 20 women, how many women that met with Beth Wilkinson that are released the report. And by the way, I want the report released. And I think, you know, that if they had expectations, it would be released.

I'd like it for them, okay? Because they were, they certainly were victims of some sort of toxic workplace. By the way, that's not my opinion. That's what the commissioner has said. Yes, it is. Over here. You're right. So I would certainly want it released, but again, and I don't know why you're making a distinction

between the alleged victims and the people that helped sort of describe that these victims actually were victims, people that were in the organization that also came forward because of the 150. I understand they weren't all women that were victims, but they had. helped corroborate the victim's stories in the workplace environment. They were very important, maybe some more than others. The bottom line is if a lot of those people, and who knows, maybe a majority of the 150 said, I'll only speak with Beth Wilkinson under the condition of anonymity and that my name's

never released and maybe said, and my name's not put in redacted form, all I'm saying is that part of the story is believable to me. Well, I think he used it as a cover. I think he used it as a cover that he was protected. Well, let's not get Bob down in this. Well, so if you believe it was a cover, hold on, let me get this thought out. If you believe it was a cover, well, then he was taking bullets for Snyder. No, he was taking bullets for the league.

The league didn't release the report. You suggested they did nothing essentially for Snyder. And if he was pretty steadfast on why the report. wasn't released. Right, and that's always been the league's position. That would be a reversal of what Goodell has been saying for months about this. He wasn't protecting Snyder. He was protecting himself there.

Well, I mean, the release of the report, you don't think it would help Snyder, do you? No, I don't. Okay. No, I don't. But he's already said that, you know, he already chose a pass. He was going down with this report, and he wasn't going to switch lanes at the last minute. He would have looked even more foolish if he did that. I think Dan Snyder is in trouble. Okay. I think that, I think what has happened is Dan Snyder has consumed the football team.

There is no commanders anymore. There's only Dan Snyder. It's all just about Dan Snyder. And here's an illustration why. A few, maybe a month and a half ago, the Washington Post came out with an editorial when Virginia was talking about, you know, setting aside, you know, four or five, a billion dollars for, you know, maybe a stadium in Virginia. The Post came out with an editorial saying that they were against this, that no public money should be used for a stadium anywhere.

That's not unusual. That's been their position from even when Jack Kent Cook wanted a stadium. That's been their position for years. three weeks later, this week or last week, they come out with another editorial against a stadium anywhere. But this time, it's because of Dan Snyder. That is dramatic. The Washington Post, as an institution in this town has just said, you shouldn't build a stadium for any number of reasons, but here's another one we're going to give you,

because of Dan Snyder. That's got to kill the NFL who desperately want. One of the most important things an owner does is get a stadium built. And now you have the paper saying, no, no, no, we're not just against it because it's public money. We're against it also because the owner is such a scumbag. Okay. Your position is he's going down. He's going to be...

I think he's very close. He's going to be forced to testify, but behind closed doors, not publicly, and that there will be three quarters of a vote to vote him out. That's your position here on June 24th. Yes. Okay. I'm just going to tell you, I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other. I really don't. I think that he's going to do his best to, you know, run the clock out, you know, by pushing back on this subpoena.

legally and trying to run the clock out on November on that. Maybe it'll work. Maybe it won't. I'm not really sure. I don't have a strong opinion on that. I do think that your idea that if he were to do it, that perhaps there would be some sort of negotiation to do it in private might sort of be the way it works out. But I really don't have an opinion on whether or not it'll work out. I do have kind of an opinion on what all of this is leading to. I think the 18 months, last 18 months of him running this shadowy investigation, the league

knew about it because he was making pitches to the league with a 100 slide PowerPoint, you know, dossier, you know, essentially blaming the whole thing on Bruce Allen. I think this, you know, the details of the 2009 incident clearly they had to know.

By the way, that's another question that should have been asked. Did Beth Wilkinson know about the 2009 allegations against Snyder. And if the answer were yes, and I think maybe there was some reference to it, again, it should have been, well, at the time, the league had a protocol that the league handled all sexual assault, sexual harassment related allegations. Why didn't the league do it? I mean, it's possible that Snyder hid that from the league to a certain degree and ran their own investigation and maybe it's news to the league. I don't know. But the last 18 months, his behavior,

obviously this is new stuff. I mean, this guy's going around. I mean, we kept wondering, by the way, like, why he was going after this Indian-based company and why Bruce Allen was being taken to court for some sort of discovery in Arizona, you know, which ultimately led to emails, et cetera. Well, it was all for the purposes of convincing the league. And, you know, first of all, first of all, targeting journalists trying to intimidate witnesses, whether he intended to do that or not, witnesses said under oath that they felt intimidated by private investigators showing up at their house.

Some of them were offered money. By the way, let's not forget the report that the Snyder people have denied that the woman from the 2009 plane was offered more money not to speak to Beth Wilkinson, but she did. Where am I heading on this? I guess it's just the thought that I always have when we get knee-deep in. to this, and that is, one, eventually there are going to be enough of these people that just say, my God, what is he done? We can't continue. And it's never going to stop with him. But they're going to take great risk in trying to vote him out because he will go scorched earth. He's a vindictive SOB as the last 18 months of him running his own parallel investigation proves.

Like he is out for Bruce's hide. He's out for Bruce to take the fall on all of this, even though most of it didn't happen when Bruce was even in the organization. So they're going to take great risk. But I always come back to this. How in the hell could he be having any fun owning this team? How can't this be incredibly stressful on him? Maybe not him because he's such a narcissist.

and he doesn't believe that he has anything to do with any of this. But his family, and doesn't he at this point, hasn't he come to the realization? Certainly his family has that he's the most despised person in the history of this city that isn't a politician. That he decides, I'm going to do what's best for my family and I'm going to sell the team. For, by the way, $6 billion. perhaps. Yes. You know, and I'm going to pay off my... If the Broncos went for... If the Broncos went for $4.6 billion,

this is well over $5 billion. Yeah, isn't it $4.85? I thought it was $4.85 that Walton's paid. I think it was $4.65. Okay, maybe you're right. So it's well north of five. You know, estimates now some people saying five and a half to six because of the market difference. And he'd be able to pay off the loan, you know, that he took out to pay off his minority shareholders and live happily ever after.

Not as one of 32, not as one of these. By the way, how many people want to hang out with this particular owner? This was always an argument from people that said, well, he wouldn't be friends with Matthew McConaughey or George Clooney or any of these people if you weren't the owner of an NFL team. I mean, are these people actually really friends with this person? But I just, I still think it's at the end of the day, there's a chance as full of himself and as narcissistic and is lacking in self-awareness as he is,

that he might choose. You know, Howard said to me the other day, in many cases like for Ron Rivera and Jason Wright and people in the organization that are good people now, remember the culture is so great now. And I'm not disputing that, that it's a million times better than it was. That maybe, you know, to continue to be this distraction that will never end, maybe I'll do the right thing and sell the team. I don't think he would do it for that reason.

I think he might do it for his family maybe. But I feel like that's still very much. I think that that's in play more than him being ousted. That's his, I just don't, I don't know where this is going to answer your original question. Don't you think it would come to a goldwater moment with Nixon where the owners, the ones who still talk to him, go to Dan and say, look. you know, maybe. You got to sell the team.

It might be a good idea. To give him a heads up as to what was coming. Yeah, but then would they do what Ford did and then pardon him somehow? Like, pay him an extra billion dollars to go away because how about that is a possibility? How about the other 31 owners create a pot and say, you're going to sell the team and you're going to get $5.5 billion? We've now put in another half billion dollars. for you to go away. We really don't want you in a club anymore. I think you could start a GoFundMe campaign around the DMV to pick up that tab.

Yeah. Well. To pick up that tab. Look, here's the simple thing that somebody said to me, the NFL wants to pass to go from Capitol Hill to your football stadium. Not from the football stadium to Capitol Hill. that's what they want this is this is one of the most important lobbying tools the NFL has a football

team in the nation's capital and it's all warped it's all in the wrong direction oh I mean and it's been that way for a while and I do think that the last 18 months in what's come out and all of this test I would love to know

how much of what a horrible person he's been to his employees into clients, how much of this they knew? You know, like, there's a lot that's come out here over the last week. What was so much more important than Wednesday's, you know, show with Goodell was all of the detail in this memo with all of the attachments. I mean, that's much more, I mean, there's a lot of new stuff in there. Oh, by the way.

And you got to wonder how long. Well, how can sponsors still live standing next to this guy having their logo on their product? How can those sponsors still live with that? Yeah. Well, Tommy, you just probably, you know, ding, ding, ding, hit the nail on the head, just like with the name. You know, ultimately, if, you know, sponsors say, I don't want to have anything to do with that man. And I'm not just talking about the local, you know, sponsorships and obviously tickets and everything else. but I'm talking about NFL, big-time NFL long-time sponsors.

When their game is on, I don't want my spot running in their game. You know, I don't care. We'll pay you the same amount of money, but I don't want money. And we're going to make a public statement as to we don't want our product being endorsed during any game involving that franchise or whatever. I don't know how they'd go about doing it. You know, I forgot one thing, and I think I talked about it. this with Howard at the end of the podcast the other day. At the very end of the festivities the

other day of the show, you know, after they came out for a curtain call, James Comer, the ranking member, said to Goodell, we're going to send you two written questions that we didn't have a chance to get to. I don't know if you picked up on this. Both of the questions were going to be about Dwight Schar. And the fact that, you know, one of the previous minority shareholders is no longer has been barred from ever owning equity in any NFL team. And more details are going to come out about Dwight Schar and the, you know, smear campaign that apparently he may, well, he may have been behind.

You know, this is the thing that always bothers me. It's like, hey, everybody, the truth will do. You don't need to make up lies. about this guy to create perhaps some empathy from somebody. Like the truth will do. We don't need Jeffrey Epstein stories, which aren't true, which Snyder obviously was incensed about and probably had good reason to be. You know, that Mary Joe Blair and Dwight Schar and whomever else was involved

in the smear campaign that, you know, the internet smear campaign that came out the few days before the first post story in July of 2020. But did you catch that at the end? Yes, I did. I don't. Yes. It's like you don't want any, even if there's small wins, you don't want any wins at all for Snyder.

You don't want anything that he will distort. And he'll create in his own mind is like, oh, now people are going to see that all the other stuff is bullshit too. You don't need any of that. The truth will do horrible, horrible, horrible person and owner for going on 23 years now. has ruined everything. So, I mean, maybe he will at some point realize this and realize he can't win.

That what he's fantasized about, that everybody's going to forgive him, that everybody's going to realize it was Bruce's fault, that his team now is under great direction with Jason Wright and Ron Rivera, and that when they win the Super Bowl, all will be forgiven. That's a fantasy, delusional. It's never going to happen. In fact, you have to really ask yourself now, you know, and I'm not just saying it's because of the last week. I've been saying this for a while. What's in it for anybody to actually have any level of passion? Because it's our team, because it's our city.

I mean, I used to feel that way. I don't feel that way anymore. My passion is so much less than what it used to be. And by the way, the loss of the name really impacts that ability to even, get remote, you know, I don't know, maybe I'll get excited if they are 3 and O and they got a big game in week four. I don't even have the schedule up in front of me. I doubt it, though, because I don't want to see anything good happen to him. There it is. That's my bias after 23 years of being worn down.

All right. Let's, anything else on this? No, I think we've covered what we can. All right. I want to just weigh in a little bit. on the NBA draft will do so right after these words from a few of our sponsors. With the 10th pick in the 2022 NBA draft, the Washington Wizards select Johnny Davis from the University of Wisconsin. That was the commissioner of the league announcing the Wizards first round pick. He is Johnny Davis from Wisconsin.

Tommy, did you watch the draft or not? No, you know, I missed it. I don't know how it happened. I think I was watching Andy of Mayberry reruns. I totally blanked on the draft. Johnny Davis, didn't he play for the Portland Trailblazers? Good call. He played with Walton and the team that won the title in 77.

It was Johnny Davis, right? Well, he's kind of old for the Wizards to be drafting him again, are they? Yeah, yeah. But what about this guy, Johnny Davis? What's the deal on them? I've never heard of them. Let me just start off by just saying, I think the NBA draft is really, really difficult to watch. It is, this is not an old man, get off my lawn thing, and I'm not, because it's not really about the suits and the whole thing, because I don't give a shit about that. It's a terrible broadcast, first of all, on ESPN.

It is, you know, a bunch of guys that even people like me who watch a lot of college basketball don't know much about. And in three years, most of these guys won't even be in the league. And if they are, they'll be buried at, you know, at the end of a bench. It's not the NFL draft. And it's just really, it's, I watched it last night because I was up and there was really nothing else on. but it's really not interesting to me. And it's really, it's apples and oranges compared to the NFL draft. You know that the NFL draft is essentially the beginning of the making of your football team.

You know, it is so instrumental and so important to the building of a football team over several drafts and that most of those players, a lot of them are going to make big impacts in the NFL. Most of these players picked last night in the first and second round won't have any. career in the NBA. But anyway, I liked Johnny Davis. I liked Johnny Davis at Wisconsin. I thought he was, you know, one of these guys that Tommy Shepard told me on the radio show, they're looking for high character, super competitive, fearless, clutch. He was a clutch player. He had some big games on the road this year. I liked a lot in watching him. I, you know, I did watch the Big Ten a lot. So the big 10 players like Jaden Ivy and Keegan Murray and Johnny Davis that were picked in the first round,

I had definitely watched a lot of them. He can definitely get his own bucket. He is a competitor. He is really good in kind of a half-court style offense, which is what Wisconsin played. He's crafty. I think he can shoot it. I know I saw his three-point percentage. I actually was surprised at that because he's got a very good stroke.

So it wouldn't surprise me if, you know, he isn't the focal point of a defense that he'll end up being a better three-point shooter in the NBA. He is a competitive, tough defender. You know, I just, other than that, that's all I can say about him. Is he going to be a lead on a championship contending team? Probably not is the answer. But I'm sure he will contribute. You know, I think it was a decent pick. overall. But, you know, I don't have, when they picked him, I was like, yeah, I like Johnny Davis.

There were, there were games, specific games that I remembered from Johnny Davis this year. His game at Indiana, there were several games where he played really well on the road in particular. And Wisconsin, you know, Wisconsin was good. Wisconsin finished tied for the Big Ten lead, Big Ten co-conference champion, co-champion. I mean, they weren't expected to be either. So, yeah, I kind of, I liked the player, but that's it. That's all I got on him. What else do you have? I got nothing else for you today, boss. I was going to ask you. Let me just say this. I do think that Jabari Smith, of all the players, Keehan, because I didn't have a chance to do this the other day on the draft. I like Keegan Murray, and I liked him all along. The Jaden Ivy thing is, he's a phenomenal athlete. I just don't see him as a true point guard, but I don't know that that's even important in the NFL and the NBA anymore.

I'm definitely of the top five players. Jabari Smith, to me, looks like, you know, a guy that could end up being a superstar. Anybody else, I was a big A.J. Griffin fan because I watched a lot of Duke. But there was a lot of guys I didn't see a lot of. So I'm not going to act like I did. I watched a lot of the Big Ten guys. Obviously, a lot of the Duke guys. It's amazing.

Duke had four first round picks. Carolina didn't have any, but they couldn't beat North Carolina on two different occasions. But the other thing just about the draft, it's not that I am off put by this, but I really hope that there are adults in the room at these teams and in these players' lives. There's so much a sense of the end on draft night, the culmination. you hear it over and over again. It was the hard work. This is the culmination of years and years of hard work and grinding.

And to get to, this is a dream come true, getting drafted. And I don't want to minimize the accomplishment of being drafted by an NBA team. You know, that's something to be proud of. But last night isn't the end. It's the beginning. And there has to be people in these young, and these are young men. They're 18, 19. 20 years old, maybe 21, a couple of that might be 22, that just have to understand,

congratulations, you have a lot to be proud of. Now the work begins. Because you don't want to be the guy three years from now that's completely out of the league, maybe playing internationally, maybe not, maybe having gone through too much of the money that you got with your rookie deal, and trying to catch on as a scout or going back to your high school to get involved in the high school program. This is the beginning last night, not the end. You know, it's the culmination of a lot of hard work, yes, to get to, and it should be one of the goals to get drafted,

but the real goal is to go out now and turn this into a real career because most of them are over before they ever really get started. because there just aren't enough spots for all of these guys. And the NBA level player is really good. And these guys are really good too, but there are plenty more of them in the NBA than got drafted last night. I wanted to just ask you about whether or not you think Grunkowski's the greatest tight end of all time. Oh, no, I don't.

I thought you were going to laugh at that. You know, a lot of people do think that he's the greatest tight end of all time. all time. So what do you say to that? Well, I mean, I think he's in the conversation. Okay, that's good. Obviously. But, I mean, you know, who may, it's John Mackey. Yeah.

I think it's the greatest tight end of all time. You know, people have a hard time understanding that John Mackey, as a tight end, in the 60s and the 70s, he averaged 16 yards of catch. You know, which people think back in those days, the Stone Age, everyone through the ball like 10 yards or something like that. You know, receivers didn't do what they do today. 16 yards to catch for a tight end is an amazing number. Yes, it is. Over the course of a career.

So, no, I mean, I'm still, and I mean, I'm biased. I wrote a book with John Mackey. Tony Gonzalez is in the conversation. Cali Wenzhou is in the conversation, and Gronkowski's in the conversation. All right. I wasn't sure that you were going to actually acknowledge that Gronk should be in the conversation, because he should. He was truly an uncheckable force. And by the way, was great at everything.

You know, he wasn't a pass receiving, you know, he wasn't just a receiver. But you know who my number one is, right? Is it Winslow? Yeah. Yeah, it's Winslow. And I don't think anybody's ever going to get me off that Kellen Winslow is the greatest tight end of my football watching career. I don't really remember John Mackey, but I know certainly as a football fan and somebody

who really appreciates the history of the NFL, I do realize how great John Mackey was. But Kellen Winslow was really, and look, look, there was a lot around him. You know, you had John Jefferson, you had Charlie Joyner, you had West Chandler, you had Chuck Muncie, you had a quarterback in Dan Fouts. But the guy that was the star of that team was Kellyn Winslow. Kellyn Winslow was the alpha. Kellyn Winslow really, the early 80s, for you people out there that are younger,

that listen, and we have plenty of you guys out there too, which, you know, makes us both very happy because that means we can do this for a long period of time, hopefully. Go watch some of Winslow. Find some of the YouTube games. Find the 1981, the January 82 playoff game in the Orange Bowl against the Miami Dolphins. I still think the greatest NFL game ever played. The double overtime, 4138, Chargers win with Winslow catching 13 passes and blocking two kicks on a day in which he was suffering from heat exhaustion. He was the, I can't say the first, because you'll tell me it's Mackey, it's Russ Francis, it's, you know, you probably have others that were just, because Russ Francis was a great

tight end, and I do remember Russ Francis. Yes, he was. But Winslow was one of the first, I think, of the physical freakish athletes, 6-6, 250. pounds, could run like the wind, had probably some of the greatest hands in the history of the game, would blow by you in Jordan Reed fashion for you younger people as a receiving type, but would also run over you, could block. He did everything. Winslow to me was the tight end on really one of the most entertaining teams that didn't win a lot. I mean, they won, but they never got to a Super Bowl, one of the most entertaining teams of my NFL rooting life, were those early 80s

chargers. Those chargers were a lot of fun to watch. One last thing, as a tight end, obviously he's not listed among the greatest, but I think he's one of the most entertaining. And boys and girls, just do a YouTube search on Mark Bavaro someday. Okay. Yeah. He was a force of nature on the first. field once he got the ball. He really was. I mean, he was. He was an all-around tight end, but when he caught a ball from Phil Sims,

if you were in his way, more likely than not, you were going to be roadkill, because he was going to run you down. There's a video. There's a video of him carrying Ronnie Law 10 yards down the field. You know who else was like that? And I think is underrated in this conversation. Not that I would put him in the top five or probably not even the top 10. Todd Christensen was that way.

I always felt like he was very underrated as a tight end. Yes, I think you're right. Well, the Raiders had a couple of them, Todd Christensen and Dave Cassie. Dave Casper. Dave Casper was, good God, was he smooth? He was a smooth tight end. And of course, you know, Gonzalez, of course, is very much in the conversation as the greatest tight end of my time. Yes, he is.

I mean, I think statistically it would be Gonzalez, you know, followed by maybe gronk. I don't know. I didn't look up the numbers. I mean, obviously we're living in a different time, which is why receivers and tight ends numbers are far different than what they are now. But I would imagine that Gonzalez and Witten and Gates and Gronk probably have the greatest numbers for tight ends of all time. That's my guess. I should have looked that up. I should have looked up. Gonzalez, I think, is clear cut number one all time in pass reception, receptions and yards. Yeah, Gonzalez,

15,127 career yards. All right, that's 2,000 more than Jason Witten and 4,000 more essentially than Antonio Gates. But, look, Washington had

one of the real great pass-catching tight ends of the 60s into the 70s and Jerry Smith. I mean, was really, really a great player, special player. I think he was. And I'm going to say something. Yeah.

It might surprise you. Your boy, Cooley, if he hadn't gotten hurt and stayed healthy, I think he would have had a tremendous NFL career and would have been in conversations among the great tight ends of his time. Well, I really do. I think most people would say that Cooley was really good and that, you know, without the injuries that his career would have been obviously more productive. but the tight end that is the greatest what-if in franchise history.

He's one of the greatest what-ifs period in franchise history is Jordan Reed. Jordan Reed had he not had all these concussions and had had a normal length NFL career. He truly was uncheckable as a pass-receiving tight end. Yeah, you're right. He was special. You know, I had Jay Gruden on this show, I don't know, two weeks ago, whatever it was. and I forget what prompted this conversation. Oh, I think it was a conversation about Terry McCorn,

and I said, you know, how quickly did you know Terry was going to be, you know, what he was? And he said, pretty damn quickly. And I said, was there ever a player that you went into camp thinking you didn't think much of, but all of a sudden he blew you away? He said, when I got the job, I did not think much of Jordan Reed. He said, I didn't think it was a good draft pick. I had scouted the draft for the Bengals, and I just didn't think Jordan was going to be that good.

He said, it took me, you know, I'm trying to remember exactly what the words were, but he said, basically it was the first day of, you know, off-season activities, and I was like, whoa. And he said, still to this day, Jordan Reed may have been the most talented player he coached here. And it's a shame that he didn't have a chance to stay healthy. but okay. Are we done? Do you have anything? I think so, boss. Tommy's got a good column. Tommy's got a good column. Read it. Go to his Twitter and read it. I'll retweet it as well if I haven't already. I forget if I have or not. That's it for the week. I will be back on Monday.