The Kevin Sheehan Show - New Snyder News

Episode Date: February 4, 2022

Kevin and Thom today on the congressional hearing yesterday which produced new allegations about Dan Snyder's conduct with a former female employee. During the show, news broke about the deal Snyder and the NFL have had which has for now, prevented the release of the Beth Wilkenson report. The boys also talked about the late Ed Truck, Jayne Mansfield, and more.   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 Cheyenne Show. Here's Kevin. All right, Tommy's here with me today. We will get to the testimony down on Capitol Hill yesterday with six former Washington team employees, one of whom just came on the radio show with me just moments ago, Melanie Coburn.

We will discuss that. We will discuss Tommy's column, which I thought was kind of interesting. interesting and strange, actually. We'll discuss that. It has to do with the Washington football team. I have a couple of, you know, after sleeping two nights on the new name and the new uniforms, a couple of additional thoughts on all of it. But did you know, Tommy, that the Winter Olympics are underway?

Yes, I did. Did you really? Yes, I did. Yeah, I do. I knew. Look, because I look, I covered three Olympics. I pay attention to the Olympics. I think the Olympics are a horrific scam,

and one of the worst atrocities that are foisted on us every four years. Well, every two years now, with the winter and the summer going every two years. And in China, it's particularly insulting. So, yeah, I've been paying attention to it. I swear to you, first of all, I know how you feel about the Olympics. For the cities that host them is really what you're. you've always said, that they're a scam for the cities that host them. But for the viewer... In this case, it's not a scam for the Chinese. They love it. Of course. Because they think it gives

them a credibility on a world state. I swear to you that I did not know that the Olympics had started and only figured it out last night when I started switching channels around because I was looking for Arizona, UCLA, which was a really good basketball game last night, between the number three and number seven teams in the country. Arizona, by the way, was a six and a half point favorite after they had gotten beaten by UCLA a week and a half ago by 16. So that kind of reeked. So I was rooting for those wildcats last night at home. And that place, God, the Pack 12 is pretty good this year. And Arizona and UCLA in particular are really good. Anyway, I was flipping around. I'm like, the Winter Olympics, there's like a skiing event, there's a hockey game going on in another

USA. I didn't know the Olympics had started. When were the opening ceremonies? Well, first of all, the opening ceremonies are happening today. Yeah, they happened this morning. I walked in my studio due to the radio show, I was flipping around, and there were the opening ceremonies live from Beijing. I mean, for as much as NBC pays for these Olympics, Tommy, shouldn't somebody like me, look, I'll blame my, I'll take the blame if I'm an idiot for not knowing that the Olympics had gotten started a couple of days before the opening ceremonies, which I know is not unusual anymore. A lot of the team event stuff will actually begin because there are so

many games to be played in kind of, you know, group stage, tournament stage, the whole thing. So they start those things before the actual opening ceremonies. But if I did not see these Winter Olympic events on television last night, I wouldn't have known that the opening ceremonies were scheduled for this morning. Doesn't NBC like have to worry that someone like me, and I bet I'm not the only one, I might be. somebody like me has no idea and had no idea that the Olympics were starting with this one i think they are i think they're i think they're very worried i mean i think

viewership was down significantly in the summer olympics in Tokyo uh last year which was supposed to be two years ago but got canceled because of covid uh and i think they're expecting even worse this time around in terms of ratings and you know they're they're in a bit of a panic because there's most of the buzz around the Olympics is why are we given this opportunity to a country that you know seems to specialize in persecution yeah um they paid 7.75 billion dollars in 2014 for the Olympics through the year 2032 I mean my god I'd love to see the ROI on that, the return on investment on that, because it just doesn't seem like it makes any sense at all. Now, I do understand that it's a phenomenal opportunity for advertisers specifically that want to target women that don't get to do that typically through most of the other major sports and sports contracts.

You know, this is, the Olympics always have the highest number percentage of women. In fact, I think more women watch the Olympics than men do. I think that's, that might. If I'm wrong about that, I apologize. But more women watch the Olympics than any other sport. And so it's more of a family event, more of a family event. I think more families gather, you know, I have this notion of people gathering around the TV, which doesn't happen anymore.

But, you know, I think there's general discussion and more interest family-wise. It's like more of a connection. It attracts people who don't usually pay attention to sports. Yeah, but there is a significant percentage, and I don't know what it is. I'm sure I could find it somewhere of women that watch the Olympics. And so this is a much, it's a much wider, you know,

target for NBC in terms of potential advertisers because it's not simply men 25 to 54 or really men 18 to 54, whatever the main target is for much of their other sports programming. But here's the thing, and not that, you know, I mean, I live in a world where I read stuff and, you know, a lot of people don't. But I think advertisers are in a situation where most of the media, most of the things that have been written about the Olympics so far,

a lot of stories have been out there pointing out the advertisers who didn't have the guts to boycott the Olympics. That's not the kind of coverage you want. Yeah, right. Oh, man, those rates are pretty steep. But you know what? We're in. And then you get slammed for spending all that money.

I have no idea what a 60-second spot costs. The 60-second spots for the Super Bowl are like, I'm pulling it up right now, but I read it the other day, $6.5 million for a 30-second spot in this year's Super Bowl. Oh, my God. Oh, that's the gold standard. Yeah. The Super Bowl. I mean, I remember when they hit a million, you know, 15 years ago or whatever, and it was such a big deal. Oh, my God, they're charging a million bucks for a 30-second.

spot. And by the way, ad inventory, according to this story in USA Today that I'm reading, and I think Mike Jones actually wrote it. No, it wasn't Mike. Ad inventory is pretty much completely sold out for the game next Sunday at $6.5 million per 30 second spot. Boy, you know, I've thought about this so many of those companies are doing it and really end up seeing some sort of a return for it. It's clearly a branding play for many of them, you know. But, you know, especially when you get these companies that you're not that familiar with that spend the money to make you familiar with the company, I wonder if it really pays off, you know, a couple of spots during a Super Bowl for that kind of money.

I would bet for a lot of them, it's a vanity thing. What? Remember when GoDaddy started doing it? Yes. I think it paid off for them. It definitely paid off for them. Yeah. Yeah. And I think, you know, from the jump, wasn't Danica Patrick their spokesperson?

Yes. I think so. I mean, maybe not. Maybe she came along afterwards. But to have a recognizable sports face, and by the way, a sports face that a lot of men really, you know, liked, that was a very effective campaign and probably very much worth it. But I bet you in some of these cases, it is, well, look, in some of these places, in some of these spots, for the McDonald's and the Cokes and the Pepsys and the Burger Kings, et cetera, it's defensive. You know, it is, well, we have to be there because Burger King or Wendy's is going to be there. You know, we have to be there because Coke is going to be there.

But for some of the smaller unknown companies, I doubt it pays off. And in some cases for, you know, their CEOs, they may have a very profitable company. It's more of kind of a vanity play. You know, it's more of a, you know, look at me and look what we did. We're running spots during the Super Bowl. Week from Sunday will be the Super Bowl. We'll have plenty of time to discuss that next week. I'm very upset that Tommy won't be able to participate with me on radio next week for Super Bowl trivia,

but I will be doing Super Bowl. But I will be doing Super Bowl trivia on radio next week. I can't afford it. It's one of my... I can't afford it. I'm in semi-retirement. I can't afford to shell out. money to winners anymore. People love that. And, you know, I think I'm going to have to change some of my

answers to, you know, many times I'll have an easy entry level. The way the Super Bowl trivia contest works for those of you that don't know, is there three levels of questions, something that's kind of easy, something that's kind of difficult, and then kind of very difficult is the third level. And if you get all three, Tommy and I used to offer a prize. And because the radio station was so cheap, we would basically offer cash out of our own pocket. And we got beat once. One time we got beat. But typically that first level question,

I do a lot of, you know, Redskins Super Bowl-related stuff. I'm going to have to go back and change a lot of the answers. Like, you know, what year did they win their first Super Bowl? What's, you know, what's, you know, I'm going to have to change it to 1983, I guess. Well, they did win it in 1983. Yeah. Yeah.

What were the, give me the three Super Bowl winning seasons for Washington. Because somebody might say, you know, 83, 88, and 92, and I'll say, no, that's not right. And they'll say, yes, it is. Just ask the football team. Just ask the commanders. Ask the second line to the commander in chief. Speaking of the commander in chief. of the Washington commanders.

Dan Snyder was the subject of two new allegations yesterday in this House Reform and Oversight Committee roundtable with six former employees of the Washington football team. And there was, you know, for the lack of a better description, and maybe this is hyperbole, but there was a bit of a bombshell allegation from a Tiffany Johnston. Tiffany Johnston got very specific. She is someone who, I don't know if you knew this from reading the story or from watching it, Tommy,

but I asked Melanie Coburn about this because she was one of the other women that testified and she was on with me this morning on radio because the Tiffany Johnston stuff was new. Tiffany Johnston alleged that Dan Snyder sexually harassed her at a business dinner, said that he put his hand on her thigh underneath a table after she was asked to dress cute and then was placed right next to Dan during this business dinner. She had to remove Snyder's hand from her thigh under the table while trying to sustained business discussion to avoid a scene. After dinner, Johnston said that Snyder insisted she joined him in his limousine for a ride to her car as he placed a hand on her back and pushed her

toward the vehicle's door. She declined but was able to break free of Snyder's grip. She said only because his attorney intervened and said, Dan, Dan, this is a bad idea, a very bad idea, Dan closed quote. Tiffany Johnson had never made this allegation public before and did not meet with Beth Wilkinson. That was one of the things that I don't think was made clear during this roundtable thing yesterday. And maybe somebody cleared it up afterwards. I didn't read it. But in talking to Melanie Coburn, who was also part of the six employee group to testify in front of several Congress men and women yesterday. She said that Tiffany Johnson had never made that claim publicly and that she did not speak

with Beth Wilkinson for her investigation. In addition to that allegation, there was a letter written by a Jason Friedman who worked for the company, worked for the organization at the time, and he corroborated her story the part of it where Dan pushed her or tried to push her into the limousine. He did not corroborate. The letter did not speak to the sexual advance during the dinner. Unless he was under the table, how would he know? Of course, yeah.

That would be a harder one to be there for. Now, the Snyder put out a statement. Snyder's statement read as follows, quote, I apologize again today for this conduct and fully support the people who have been victimized and have come forward to tell their stories. While past conduct of the team was unacceptable, the allegations leveled against me personally in today's roundtable, many of which are over 13 years old, are outright lies. I unequivocally deny having participated in any such conduct at any time and with respect to any person. The league then came out with a statement. And the Wall Street Journal had a story this morning written by the way Tommy, that guy, Andrew Beaton.

I saw that. NFL to probe new allegations of misconduct against Dan Snyder. The league said it's going to launch a new probe into these new allegations. The quote was from the league. Hold on the statement from the league. We are grateful. to the witnesses who again demonstrated courage by sharing their painful experiences, the NFL is reviewing and will consider Ms. Johnston's allegations as we would any other new allegations

regarding workplace and misconduct at the Washington commanders. We will determine any further action as appropriate. So the big question after we, you know, put the, you know, we, we preface all of this with the most important part of this story are the victims, are the alleged victims, and that they're well and they continue to heal and get better and get whatever they are trying to get. But for the purposes of this podcast, it always comes back to one thing. And that is, will this be the thing that costs Dan Snyder, his football team? Your reaction is what? It's a step closer. I've been telling you all along that this committee wants to have hearings, public hearings,

and put Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell in front of them as witnesses. And they got a lot closer to doing that yesterday. No matter what anyone else tells you, this has been their goal, and I think this will be ultimately what would, if anything does Dan Snyder in, having to testify in a hearing with the whole country watching as opposed to maybe a YouTube roundtable, which was very effective. And, you know, I think they accomplished what they wanted to accomplish. But a congressional hearing, you know, public without COVID restrictions, you know, not a, not a Zoom hearing,

but an actual public hearing where people have to show up for it, I think that's the goal. and I think they feel confident that they're going to be able to do that now. I know Jerry Conley, a member of the committee, was on with Russell and Pete yesterday, apparently, and he said that that's the plan. That's what they're shooting for. A hearing with Goodell and Snyder as witnesses. Where they would have to testify under oath? Yes.

What's the likelihood of that happening in your mind's eyes? Well, I think it moved from 50-50, like I said, before the 60-40. And the caveat is the NFL has a very powerful lobby. Okay? They spend a lot of money on Capitol Hill. They have an office in D.C., and they use it for the purposes often. So, I mean, you know the way business operates on Capitol Hill. You can underestimate the power of lobbyists and the impact that they have.

So, you know, you have to temper that, but they're swimming upstream now because of this of this YouTube roundtable. That was held, this video roundtable. Why do you think Congress would push this forward? Well, I think, one thing, I mean, it's a Democratic Congress, it's a Democratic House. you know, the committee is run by Democrats, then the chairwoman, what's her name? Carol Maloney? Carol Maloney from New York.

Right, has made it clear, well, you know, this is their intent all along. I just think that they think that the NFL has operated in the dark. look, this is the noble concept. I mean, the reality concept is it's a good thing for headlines and spotlight, okay? But the noble concept is the NFL operates in the dark, and it needs to be put in the light from time to time, and they think they'd shy the light on it.

I'm not naive enough to think that nobody's doing it also for the good of the attention that they'll get. Yeah. So let's just assume for a moment that that day came. Dan Snyder, Roger Goodell, but really let's focus in on Dan Snyder, you know, sitting down, raising his right arm, swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Not in a court of law, but in testimony in front of a congressional hearing on, you know, workplace, you know, culture in the NFL, whatever they would title that.

And let's just assume for a moment that these allegations, this most recent one, is true. It happened. He's going to stonewall them by just saying over and over again, I just don't recall that incident. That was in 2005 or that was in 2007. That's 10, 12, 13, 15 years ago. But I don't believe that that happened at all. but I mean if he's under oath he's certainly not going to say yeah I did that

well look there's three answers when you testify under oath yes no and I don't know those are the only three answers that you give it'll be the third one right okay okay so

but but it doesn't mean well I don't know Roger Clements Roger Clemens looked like a fool when he said to be Congress I misremembered or something like that. It's a bad look. And the NFL at that point, I can't fathom that they'll be able to live with the anger that this guy has dragged the commissioner up on Capitol Hill to testify.

I mean, he'd be there only because of Dan Snyder. Yeah, actually. He'd be there for himself, but because. it's because of its inability to deal with Dan Snyder in what would be a reasonable and logical manner. But ultimately, I got to think the other owners are saying, I mean, look, in the steroid hearings that were held, the play, after the steroid hearings were held on Capitol Hill, it was the players themselves who saw them, one dragged after the other on Capitol Hill and having to testify, the player, union who said, we can't keep doing it, we've got to stop doing this.

You know, we've got to have stricter testing. That's what triggered the stricter testing for steroids. It was the Capitol Hill hearings. And it was the players union themselves that agreed to do it. The biggest impediment to testing was the players' union. And then they agreed to stricter testing because they felt they took a big, embarrassing hit. And I think, you know, I think there's a measure of that that will go on here.

And at some point, I mean, I think the NFL and the other owners are going to grow tired of being embarrassed by this guy. But I would have bought that already, and I've been wrong. Yeah, I would love to see it. It would be fascinating to watch it. And, you know, if you got to that step, I don't know if that means you're that much closer to Snyder losing his team. And I hear you on Goodell and the other owners just being like, good God, this fucker, he just keeps dragging us through this stuff with the name and then the toxic workplace and the suing. I mean, it's just, it's always something with him.

and I'm sure that a lot of the owners would love to see him go away. I don't think there's any doubt about that. But even if that day came, you know, that's not a criminal trial. That's not a civil trial. And the bottom line is what they would do is that they would focus a lot and really try to turn the conversation to what the workplace is today. I don't know if you saw this article and somebody sent this. to me actually very recently, but I'm going to read it to you. There was a third-party audit obtained by Axios. The third-party company, the audit company, was, where's their name here? Vestri-Late.

It was an outside consultant that conducts ongoing audits of workplaces, and they conducted an audit of the current Washington commanders now workplace. And what the findings were is that in most relevant areas, including the process for employees to report misconduct, and what happens after such reports are made,

it includes detail... Hold on, let me read this from the beginning because it's not that long. Because I'm going to jump around here and it's not going to make any sense. The National Football League believes its Washington franchise, now called the commanders, has solved many of its toxic workplace problems.

according to a third-party audit. The House Oversight Committee will hold a fact-finding hearing today, so this came out yesterday on sexual harassment, intimidation, and other misconduct that came to light last year. Those relevations ultimately cost the team $10 million in fines, prompted owner Daniel Snyder to step down from day-to-day operations. The NFL never released a full report, yada, yada, yada, we understand that. The organization, however, did retain an outside consultant called Vestri late to conduct ongoing audits of the club's workplace. The first audit was completed last October, and the second is dated January 29, 22. Both audits, plus other documents, were provided to the House Committee, which was expected, as they did, to hear from six former club employees.

the newer report finds significant improvements in most relevant areas, including the process for employees to report misconduct and what happens after such reports are made. It includes detailed discussion of eight substantiated HR investigations begun since the prior audit, including one in which a contractor used an anti-Asian slur and one in which a male dance team member made an inappropriate overture to a female dancer. The contractor was not used for the remainder of the season, and the male dancer was fired. Surveys reported improved culture and inclusion index scores throughout the organization, although women gave the organization lower scores than men. The bottom line, the audit tells a very positive story about what happened after Snyder stepped back,

making it less likely that he'll be allowed to resume control. Well, that, I don't, I mean, I just read that for the first time. Yes, I've read that. That's the point of the whole thing is look how good it worked without him around. Yeah, but the point is he's still been around. I mean, you know, Dan Snyder has, you know, focused on the stadium and the whole thing, but as his lawyer called you to tell you, he wasn't suspended, all right, he wasn't curtailed, he wasn't fine, the organization was fine, $10 million.

I asked Ron Rivera on two different occasions during the season, does he talk to Mr. Snyder? Yeah, I saw Mr. Snyder the other day in the building. You know, we talked a little bit about the team. You know, he hasn't stepped away. You know, the auditors obviously know that, yet they felt the need to point that out. right and you know and maybe what does that tell you yeah it tells you that they're trying to say as long as he's not in control things will run fine but you know that's essentially what he's been saying for you know whenever these subjects come up and i mentioned this yesterday in the podcast i have other thoughts on on yesterday which i'll get to in a moment but his statement

Snyder's statement was really there was a part of it that rung very familiar to me and i wonder if it did to you as well. When he said, and when he made the statement, hold on, let me find it now. Oh, the part of the statement where he said, the allegations leveled against me personally in today's roundtable, many of which are well over 13 years old, are outright lies. There have been multiple times now where he has referred to these allegations in the post stories and at other points in time as being very old allegations, things that happened many, many years ago. And I would first of all say, well, so what? Doesn't matter.

Yeah, there's a statute of limitations on some of this stuff. You know, Neil told me, Neil and Rockville, the legal contributor to the podcast and to the radio show, prominent, you know, Montgomery County attorney, told me that for something like what Tiffany Johnston alleged yesterday, that that is in D.C., fourth degree, it could be fourth degree sexual assault, but that there's a statue of limitations on it and were well past that time frame. So, you know, he keeps referring to these allegations being back, you know, a long time ago. And then Tommy, how many times have we heard him say that, you know, he's, you know, he's sorry for the workplace misconduct.

He hasn't been as involved and he needs to get more involved, as if to say this was all Bruce's fault. But as I've pointed out many times, and I don't understand this unless I'm missing something, he says about the allegations they're, you know, from 13 years ago. But that's the time that he was actually involved day to day. It's been in the last several years that there really haven't been any allegations, because most of these allegations are, you know, 10 years old or older. And why can't somebody explained to him that when you say you haven't been involved recently and you need to get more hands on, well, the last time you were hands on, this is when all these women complained about the culture. It's amazing to me. I don't understand how they haven't

figured that out. But, but, but, I mean, and here's the other thing, too. I mean, what we're, what we're talking about here is him being held accountable. It doesn't matter what it happened 10 years ago, 13 years ago, he was never held accountable. And it's just the NFL want to have an owner who is capable of that kind of behavior. This speaks to accountability. You know, they may have made changes. You know, they may be, you know, it may be a kumbaya place to work now, you know, but somebody's got to pay.

I'll tell you what, it's more diverse than any other organization. And one of the other hot topics of the week is diversity, especially at the head coaching position. And he has one of the two minority head coaches. He has the only team black president. He's got a black general manager. He's got a female co-owner. And he's got a female in the broadcast booth. I want to just speak real quickly to yesterday.

So the NFL is going to open up a new investigation on these new allegations with Tiffany Johnston. Okay. And to me, here's what I think it's going to lead to. I think it's going to lead to finding a finding that requires the NFL to once again reiterate this very toxic workplace culture for women and that Dan was potentially a participant and they find him in actually suspended. him this time. That's where I think this lands. I think he actually literally, directly is said, you are getting fined and suspended for this allegation. You know, this is conduct, you know, detrimental to the league. I don't think it'll cause him to lose his team. I don't

know that it will lead to congressional hearings with him. I think the league is powerful and they'll figure out a way to avoid that. And part of it will be for them to find him and suspend him. And this time, for him to accept it rather than get on the phone and call everybody and tell everybody it wasn't. And then they'll just sit back and hope that there are no new emails that come out. I actually wanted to ask you, you think it's pushed it closer to potentially him losing his team, but more importantly, some sort of congressional

hearing with him and Goodell. Did it push it closer to getting the Beth Wilkinson report made public? You would have to, look, you would have to assume it did. I think that's true. I think you would have to assume it did because, I mean, if the biggest bombshell, I tell you what, what if it's possible that there's a bombshell in the report that's bigger than what came out in the hearing yesterday? Well, I've told you this before.

I don't, I would, I personally don't believe that that could be true. Because I think in this day and age, I think in this day and age, the league couldn't have ignored that. They couldn't have hoped that they could just brush this under and say, you know, we can never get this past because the owners are afraid of their own skeletons and their own, you know, misdoings over the years. But if there's something that is legitimately the smoking gun, you know, which yesterday is as close as we've gotten because we don't know what actually happened on the airplane for the $1.6 million settlement situation with that woman, even though she did speak to Beth Wilkinson. But if there's something worse, like legitimately a lot worse in there, I think I'd be surprised.

And I know some of you probably... You're probably right. I'm surprised that you agree with me, because I'm surprised you're not saying to me, you're naive. The league is so powerful they think they can get away. with not just finding him $10 million bucks and that this will never see the lighted day? Well, we'll find out. We'll find out if it does see the lighted day,

I guess we'll find out if that's the case or not. But, you know, again, I think if there's, I think you're right that he'll wind up probably being fined and suspended, but I don't think that's going to be good. And here's the other thing. I mean, this woman, Tiffany Johnston, is that her name, right? Yes. Okay.

I mean, she didn't speak to Beth Wilkinson. I know. She came forward now. I know this from watching my, you know, from my law and order diploma that I got in cases like this, victims tend to come forward, you know, as more information comes out. Victims who might not been willing to have spoken before or who have, have seen this kind of behavior before, they tend to trickle out as public, as more public information is conducted in an investigation. So I don't know why this woman didn't talk to

Beth Wilkinson before, but there may be more Tiffany Johnston's out there now. Well, Counselor, let me tell you why she didn't speak to Beth Wilkinson before, because Melanie Coburn, as I've already mentioned to you on the show was on the radio show this morning, and I asked her, did Tiffany Johnston ever come forward and talked to Beth Wilkinson? She said, no. Tiffany's been very hesitant to come forward. It was a family decision. They did not want to get involved, but the more and more we spoke, the more and more she felt compelled. And then Melanie said, there are 10 to 12 and more other stories from women that we know of, but they are still too hesitant to come forward. but perhaps they'll come forward at some point, too, and tell their stories.

This is what happens in cases like this, yeah. Yeah, thank you, Law & Order for helping us. Dumb, don't. I never watched Law & Order. Never watched it. It's a, well, it's not a well-win. It's an okay-written show that is self-contained in an hour. You know, it's not bad TV.

I can't say it's good TV. but anyway. Okay. Listen to me, talking, saying Dick Wolf. I mean, Dick Wolf who basically has about 10 shows on TV. Okay, what else on this? Oh, here's the other thing on this that I wanted to mention, and that is if they ever tried to take his team away,

and Neil pointed this out to me, it could be really complex and problematic given that the co-owner of the team is his wife. And she's female. I don't, like, I don't know how that would work. I think that's overblown by Neil. It would be complex, but not because of his wife. It would be complex because Snyder, you know, I mean,

Snyder will spend money on lawyers to the day he died. No, no, no, no. We all understand that, that this would be litigated, and it would be years and years and years. And, oh, by the way, you know, how he would go after all of the other owners and their stories that he probably knows. He knows where the bodies are buried. But he's just saying that, let's just say ultimately they were successful

in getting three quarters of the owners to say he's out. His wife is the co-owner of the team. I think you're right. I don't think it's very complicated. It's a family-owned team. So the family, I guess, would be barred. But, you know, he could, I guess, theoretically, transfer most of the equity or the majority equity.

to her and then sell his stake, his minority stake to another group of investors, and she would then be the majority owner. And so the team would remain in the family because I think part of why he's hanging on and continues to hang on is arrogance, obviously, lacking in self-awareness, all of those things. But I think he sees this team eventually being owned by his kids and staying in the family. Yeah, I think so. what if she's called to testify? Well, I mean, she wasn't an employee, but she wasn't a day-to-day employee at the time, right?

Well, you know, I mean, wives know, tend to know about their husband's behavior. Yeah. Especially a guy like Snyder. What do you think he would do? What do you think at that point he'd throw up his arms and say, fine, I'll sell the damn team. I don't know. It's got to be cheaper than a divorce. settlement. Well, I mean, she's got to know about a lot of this stuff already. But let's not forget that

the other day when he introduced her, he introduced her as the co-owner and his partner and his partner, which by the way, was odd. Yeah, I love the way how they now portrayed themselves as like Ozzie and Harriet, you know, Dan and Tanya. Well, she, she towers over him and God, he looked, he didn't look great the other day. I'm not, look, I'm not one to speak right now, but he didn't look totally, you know, together. I mean, the last couple of times we've seen him, he's looked haggard.

I mean, unshaving. He looked like a guy who just, he looked like a guy in the crowd who just won a free jersey. It really did. Come on up and get your prize. Oh, man, you know, with the pleaded pants and that didn't fit and the goofy letter jacket that they had on the other day. I mean, probably the first time he's ever had a letter jacket.

That's a cheap shot. But, you know, he just looked, you know, unkept kind of, didn't he? Yes. He kind of wandered around the stage. Look, I would bet that the last year, year and a half for him has been unbelievable. believably stressful. But that's if you assume that, you know, he's kind of self-aware of what's being said about him. And I'm not always sure that he is.

I don't think that family really knows how despised. I shouldn't say the family. How much Dan knows at how much he's despised. I mean, it's... I think you're right. Imagine, you know, imagine what it was like in that building yesterday. The day after they make the big unveil about the commanders, and have the, not from 24 hours later,

have the news cycle filled with stories like this about the owner. I mean, what can morale be like in an organization like that? This was next to the stadium? This was the biggest thing they could possibly do, you know? and it fell with a stud and it didn't even last a new cycle. This is what you have said before. This is, you know, when, I mean, you essentially kind of wrote a column about this, that they can't put, Ron Rivera wants to move forward, move forward, move forward.

And in Wednesday, 222 was supposed to be the day that we stopped looking back. Well, as long as Snyder owns the team, the past is going to constantly, constantly be in the present. And it's not going to be pleasant either. I wanted to just mention one other thing because, you know, you watch Law & Order. And I never watched Law & Order. But I, because I was looking after you mentioned it,

because the woman that is, you know, pretty attractive, and I forget her name, actually. And I'm looking for her name, and I don't know why I can find it. It's a name that sounds. kind of Eastern European. Who stars... Mariska Hartigey.

Mariska Hardigay. Is that the woman... Jane Mansfield's daughter? Thank you. Yes. Okay. I just wanted to make sure. Because, you know, of all of... If you ever, you know, as a guy or a female,

if you ever, you know, go into one of those modes of just looking at, you know, past things, Like, I've done that thing with, like, the female sex symbols of, you know, the 30s and the 40s and the 50s. And Jane Mansfield was a beauty. I mean, an absolute beauty. But, you know, her death came at a very young age and a terrible car accident in Louisiana. You know that story of her death, right? Oh, yeah.

It's an awful story in which, you know, I mean, I don't want to be. gross here, but she was basically decapitated in the car accident, killed immediately. Yeah, she died like Michael's old boss did in the office. Yes, yes, she did. She did. What was his name? Ed Watt, Ed Wattcher. Oh, God.

I have to get the guy's name. I know. You remember? He was so upset about, by the way, couldn't stand him as a boss because you know who played, who played his old boss. Remember, they brought him in. Ken Howard. Ken Howard. Great. Yes, the white shadow. Yeah.

Oh, my God. What was Ed? Let's see. Ed Truck. Ed Truck. Good, good call. Ed Truck. Ed Truck. Ed Truck. Ed Truck. Ed Truck died, everybody. My former boss. Oh, Michael, I'm sorry. And then Dwight did the research and found out that he was in an accident where he was decapitated, which made Michael very uncomfortable. And then the bird dies. Do we title today's show, Jane Mansfield or Ed Truck?

When we come... One piece of trivia about Jane Mansfield. Yeah. She spent some time growing up in Penn Argyll, Pennsylvania, which is right next to East Trousburg. Oh. In the Poconos. Really?

And that's where she's buried in Pen Argyll, Pennsylvania. About five miles from East Strasbourg. And that's her daughter, right? I mean, that's her daughter. Yes, it is. She was married to a weightlifter named Mickey Hardegay, a big-time weightlifter. Bodybuilder. So how old is his daughter, her daughter?

Is she in her 50s? Something like that? Because she must be older than that. Because Jane Mansfield must have died when she was an absolute child. child like baby. Yeah. I don't know. Who are your

favorite pin-up girls of past? Mariska Hardigay is 58 years old. She was born in 1964. And when did Jane? So Jane Mansfield probably died shortly thereafter in that car accident. Yeah.

Pin-up girls from the past. Like, do you have any favorites? I mean, this is more your era. I didn't grow up. I grew up with Farah Fawcett and Cheryl Teeggs and Cheryl Ladd. I mean, the Cheryl Teague swimsuit poster and the Fishnet swimsuit is like one of the all-time famous, if you grew up in the 70s or 80s, that was it. You know, Cheryl Teegs was great.

Farah Fawcett was probably more like 70s and Cheryl Teegs was more 80s along with Cheryl Ladd. And they, I guess you would call them pin up girls kind of, although So, you know, Cheryl Ladd was, you know, along with Fairfosset, was, you know, they were movie and television stars as well. Yeah, there was a woman named Mamie Van Doren, who was kind of like Jane Mansfield. She was married to Bo Bolinsky, a great wild man pitcher for a while. She was a big pin-up girl. But I tend to gravitate more towards my 60s television stars.

like Elizabeth Montgomery and Bewitched. Or Barbara Eden and I dream of Jeannie. Really? Yes. Yeah, they would be more, or Tina Louise and Gilligan's Island. That would be more my speech. The first woman you mentioned, is that the Van Doren from the Quiz Show movie? No, no, not Charles Van Dors.

Oh, okay. Not related to that family. great movie good movie by the way yeah excellent movie so Elizabeth

Elizabeth Montgomery and Bewitched like you like I guess you just like the powers too that they had no I like the babe I like the babe

I like Elizabeth Montgomery more than Barbara Eden and I like Tina Louise you know one of the arguments I mean is who do you like more ginger or Marianne yeah right

in Gilligan and I'm a ginger guy. I like Tina Louise. Like I was in Archie comics, I was a Veronica guy and Betty was like the other girl. So I tended to like the more

glamorous ones. I just pulled up a list just that ranker thing that, you know, it lists the top 50 pin up girls of the 50s, which really isn't your era. The 60s would have been. But Ava Gardner's number one,

Marilyn Monroe is two and Jane Mansfield was three. And then it's Sophia Loren, Anita Eckberg. And then Bridget Bardot is on this list. I'm just looking for names that I recognize. Probably Tina Lola Bridgeta. I'll bet. I don't see her. Betty Grable.

Betty Grable's on the list. Okay. Uh-huh. Okay. What else? Are Barbara Eden and Elizabeth Montgomery alive? By the way, we're talking about pin-up girls in a podcast. where we just talked about sexual misconduct and harassment.

Good point. Good point. But aren't we doing it in sort of PG fashion? I don't know. Are we doing it? I don't think there's any PG fashion for this. Are we doing it in respectful fashion? I guess.

I don't know. I mean, so do you think we should eliminate this part of the conversation from the podcast? No, no, no. No, no, exactly. Because this is us. This is us to a take. I mean, I've done this before where I've looked, because I find it fascinating because remember, like,

in the era of just movies, you know, no real television shows, you know, the pin-up girl was, that was the big deal, you know, the Rita Hayworths. And, like, when you watch old war movies, you know, it's always they're sitting there, I mean like Shawshank Redemption, right? They're sitting there and they're watching a movie. And I think that was Marilyn Monroe, maybe a movie with Marilyn Monroe and I forget. But I find that era just different and interesting because they essentially were just pictures.

And now it's just so much more. It's video, it's interviews. It's obviously from a pornography standpoint accessible to everybody at any time. I have no idea how. accessible pornography was in the 1940s or 50s or even 60s, but I would imagine that it was just magazines, you know, in the back of a drugstore somewhere. I don't know. Let me tell you something.

What? Let me tell you something. Ads in what, ads in, I don't know, what's a mainstream magazine these days? Ads in Vanity Fair today would have been pornography when I was growing up. No, good point. Yeah. Right. Yeah.

And my pinup girl, my number one pinup girl growing up, I got it now. Raquel Welch. Oh, yeah. Well, I mean, even in the 70s, she was probably older, but I certainly remember Raquel Welch. Yeah. You know, as a kid in the 70s. But again, like, I should pull up what the list is, so I'm not forgetting any here as we continue with this conversation, which is actually interesting. I think we should stop.

No, I don't. Right now. I wonder if there's like actually, they really didn't call them, you know, pinup girls in the 70s. But, you know, I'm right. Farah Fawcett was obviously, she was probably number one for most teenagers in the 70s. I was a kid.

Late 70s, though, you know, it would have been for me. It was like Cheryl Teagues. Cheryl Teagues, Cheryl Ladd, Kate, what was the other one from Kate Jackson? Yeah.

The show I never really watched. Oh, you didn't watch Charlie's Angels? No, I watched, I knew Kate Jackson from the rookies, a cop show I watched. I kind of remember the rookies, kind of. Who were the male stars of the rookies? I think George Sanford Brown Exactly That's who it was

Yes Was George Sanford Brown Um Kate Jackson Boy God almighty You know what What am I going to be like when I'm 80 Spouting off all these names Where I can't remember

When I took my medicine in the morning or not Hold on you know I'm forgetting that Jacqueline Smith was one of the Charlie So the original Charlie's Angels were Okay Farrah Fawcett Jacqueline Smith And Kate Jackson

I'm pretty sure. Right. Cheryl Lead. No, Cheryl Ladd was a replacement. Sherylade. That's right. That's right. Was she a replacement for Fair Fawcett?

I forget. I don't remember. I know this about Cheryl Ladd. She's like, you know, she's like a very, very good golfer, like a single-digit handicapped golfer. Okay. That's it for, that's it for sexual harassment and pinup girls. to open up the show.

We'll talk about something else right after these words from a few of our sponsors. Don't forget to subscribe to the podcast. Also, rate us and review us, especially on Apple, where you can write a one to two sentence review that would really go a long way in helping us generate more ad revenue for the podcast.

So I want to read this tweet that I got from Corey on Twitter. He wrote, I've been having this thought all week. Kevin sure is worked up for someone so apathetic. I swear he had an hour dedicated to the burgundy and the numbers being wrong because it's too pixelated and diluted by the white. He literally had a segment exploring cranberry red versus garnet red or garnet red. That made me laugh out loud, Corey.

I appreciate that. You're right. You're right because, look, part of it, is I think if I didn't have this job, this week would have been me to me. I, you know, I obviously would have paid attention, but I would have just expected the worst, which, by the way, we pretty much got and just been okay with it. But, you know, I have to generate a lot of content on radio and on the podcast, you know, in talking about this, but I will.

After all, it's a three-hour tour every day for Kevin. But I will acknowledge that, you know, the day on Wednesday was such a fuck-up day by everybody involved that, you know, it almost became really interesting and did generate some passion for being able to talk about how incompetent they are, which, you know, is a regular thing I understand. I don't think we obsess about that because I think we mostly talk about sports, most of the time. I think if we were audited by Lindsey Waite or whatever that auditing firm was that audited the workplace culture, I think they would say, yeah, you know, for those of you that say they just rip on Snyder all the time, it's actually like 15% of the time. Most of the time they're talking about

other things. And I would guess that to be true. But I mean, the other day was another example of just how, you know, they bungle things all the time. And I know I obsessed for, sure over that crest, you know, them getting the years wrong. And, you know, and I, and I, and I, and I talked to, uh, to Jason write about it yesterday on the radio. Um, and, you know, it would not surprise me if they try to fix that. I said, you've got to fix that. It's wrong. And he made some claim about it being, you know, the way it's officially registered. I said, it doesn't matter. It's not the way people talk about Super Bowl teams. They talk about Super Bowl teams from the years in which they played the regular season.

We've talked about this. That's how they refer to them on their own website. Their own website. As the 82, 87 and 91 teams. Right, their own website, the Super Bowl rings, the Super Bowl banners, almost everything reflects it that way. But here we are two days removed from the announcement, you know, roughly 50 hours at this point from the actual announcement,

which was very anti-climactic anyway because we knew what it was going to be. And if I didn't say this yesterday or if I didn't say this the day before with Tommy when he was on with me, I do think that part of why Wednesday was such a dud is because we knew what the name was. You know, it got leaked. You know, Thysman spilled the beans the night before they had the video shooting through the windows at FedEx Field. I mean, I think if we really didn't know and it was a big surprise, the fact that they did it in such a clunky way with, you know, Craig Melvin asking Jason Wright and then Jason Wright passing the buck to Doug and Doug saying, the commanders, you know,

like it would have at least, there would have been some drama there. But I think, you know, because we knew the name, it made everything sort of dull and then everything else around it dreary because that's the way they presented it. I mean, it was so, you know, put together at the last minute. But anyway, let me get to what I wanted to get to, which is, you know, just over two days removed. It's not that I'm really passionate about this, okay, but I am a little bit pissed off about it. Because the one thing they promised us all along is burgundy and gold. The colors weren't going to change.

And I felt all along Tommy, and I shared this with you, and I've shared this on the podcast many times. that Wednesday was going to be, you know, a big day because it was going to be a reality slap in the face day for a lot of people. And I think I was right about that. I think a lot of people, including a lot of people that maybe didn't know, didn't even feel like they were going to end up feeling like they had lost something, felt like they lost something on Wednesday. Wednesday felt like the official first day of we don't have a team anymore.

The team that plays in Washington is an expansion team for all intents and purposes. But part of keeping everybody from feeling that way was they were going to bring the colors with them, burgundy and gold. And that the uniform, when we watched a game, it was going to look like the Washington football team and the Washington Redskins of the past. We're going to be able to turn on the TV on Sunday, or for those of you that go to the stadium, go to the stadium and see a team that looks like the team that we've been rooting for forever. Well, that's not what's going to happen.

They failed on that front. Yes, the home uniform is, I guess, burgundy and gold. It doesn't look anything like any of the uniforms that they've ever had. It's a completely different uniform, but at least that's burgundy and gold. Although, if somebody, you know, got off an airplane and had another plane to catch on a Sunday afternoon and walked to a bar with NFL football on multiple screens, and the commanders were playing the Eagles at Lincoln Financial, and they saw the two uniforms and the score wasn't, you know, they didn't look for the name. No one would ever know that it was the Redskins or the Washington team.

If they were playing at FedEx and their home jerseys, if they were playing on the road, they'd have no clue. Because that road uniform, that white on white, with what Jason Wright did tell me was the same color number that they have on their home jersey, burgundy, but it doesn't look burgundy. No one thinks it looks burgundy. Now, you know, my producer Brendan Dar, who's big into uniform, says it is burgundy, but it's the gradient, you know, kind of the grainy, gradient nature of the way the number is displayed that maybe makes the color look pinkish.

And so my answer was, well, I don't care what the color actually is. I care what it looks like it is. I mean, if something's making it look like it, it's. different color and making it look like it's not the team. Well, that's the point here. And that road uniform looks like, you know, it doesn't look burgundy. There's nothing that makes it look like it's a team that's been playing in Washington for years. Now, some dudes have really mocked up that road jersey and made it look cool. And I actually tweeted it out. And I'm not a jersey guy, but this was just too good to pass up.

And this is exactly what their road jerseys, their white jersey should look like. In fact, I'd argue that this should be their home jersey. And it's the burgundy pants, and it's the burgundy numbers, and it's the new helmet with the W on it, okay? They've got the numbers on the top of the shoulder pads. They've got the burgundy stripe with two gold stripes around it on the sleeves. That's a Washington uniform. They got the pants with the gold stripe down the side.

But they didn't do that. They promised that they would bring these colors forward, and they didn't. They don't have it in the road uniform. They've got an alt uniform that's black. I actually like that one, but that's an alt uniform. I take that and I put that to the side as far as this conversation goes. So that's it. You know, two days later, I'm a little bit more like,

they kind of lied to us about, hey, you're going to lose your team name, but that's okay. The team's going to look the same on the field. No, it isn't. It's not. It's true. They're going to fix that logo, aren't they? They're going to fix that logo.

The Crest thing? I think they have to, yeah. Yeah. I bet they do, which is easy to do, I would think, you know. Yeah, I hope. You know, it looks like, it looks like you watch Ozark, right? Yeah, well, I haven't watched seasons three or four, the first two. Okay, well, it looks like the beginning of every Ozark episode,

where they have that circle, and they have, like, four, like, drawings or symbols in the circle in different, like, quadrants to illustrate kind of, like, what the episode's going to be about. You're talking about the crest? They're calling that a crest. The thing that says commanders, yeah. I'm not expecting you to know what they call it. I just know that because that's what he told me they call it. The actual logo is the W.

That's the actual logo. Okay. You're right. I meant the credit. But it's okay. I know what you're saying. By the way, I think the – By the way.

Yeah. As far as Ozark, you know, I'm staying down here with a group of people who don't know anything about, you know, the whole Washington football, the commanders. and I was trying to explain to one of them about what the whole fear is about, and they watch Ozark. I said, okay, think of Wendy Bird on Ozark. That's the commanders. That's the football team.

The football team is Wendy Bird. Yeah, I love Laura Lenny, by the way. I think she's great. She's great in everything. Yes, she is. You know what she was phenomenal in? And it's one, it was Adams, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, um, the, the, the, um, the, the, the, um, he was. She was so good in that. She's great in everything.

Um, he was great in Mystic River. She played Sean Penn's wife. Oh, oh, my God. That's such a great movie. She was, like, she was Wendy Bird chilling in that movie. Yeah, she was such, absolutely. That movie every, you know, she was. You know, that's one of those movies that's such a great movie, but it's never on, like some of the other great movies. But my God, were Tim Robbins and Kevin Bacon and Sean Penn phenomenal in that movie. Yeah. Yeah, directed by Clint Eastwood. That movie was directed by Clint Eastwood? Oh, I didn't know that. Yes, it was.

By the way, speaking of television, we just sort of wind our way through whatever we're talking about here. I did you ever take my recommendation and and watch afterlife? Yeah. Okay. Somebody else recommended it to me too. Okay. So I recommended this to you early on in the pandemic and when we were all watching all these shows and Ricky Jervais put out the first two seasons of afterlife.

Well, the third season of afterlife came out a couple of weeks ago. And last weekend, I literally just sat there on Saturday morning. think it was, and just watched the whole third season. And I am telling you, it's a finale, like, I can't remember the last time I was crushed like that, like so emotional. It is so good. And so I remember many of you thanking me for giving that suggestion, you know, a year and a half ago or whatever it was, maybe it was a year ago. But Ricky Jervais, afterlife, and it's, by the way, very easily consumed because it's three seasons and there's six 30 to 35 minute episodes. It's so good.

So is it a tear-jerker kind of show? Okay. It's a combination of very dark comedy, you know, that's funny, relationships and incredible kind of moving relationships. I mean, I'm not going to spill the beans here on anything. the show starts with him having recently lost his wife to cancer. And so it's him and his dog, and then all of these relationships that he has at work and with his mailman and with various people in his life.

And, you know, the comedy is there, as it will always be there. It's more of kind of a dark comedy, but there's also a drama part and a very tear-jurker part to it. as well. Well, somebody who was all of it wrapped up in one. Had recommended this to me as well. We were having this discussion the other day. And they said, you don't like sad shows, do you? And I said, no, I don't go out of my way to seek out programming that makes me feel sad.

I don't do that. So what did he say? Did he tell you that it's just sad? Because it's not just sad. It's inspirational in many ways. Okay. Well, you know what? It's been highly recommended to me by more than you.

So maybe I'll consider it. Well, I mean, you love everything that Ricky Jervase has done, right? I'm not a Ricky Jervase fan. Oh, God. Not that he's great. I just don't like him. You know, that's right. I mean, sometimes I forget, because you didn't watch the original office. Right.

Which I don't understand that. Just like I don't understand why you want. Actually, I understand why you want. won't watch Game of Thrones because it's, you know, the perception of what you think it is, even though that's not it. I don't know why you won't watch the BBC version of the office since you're such an American office fan. I mean, you actually came... Well, I told you. I told you. I'm sick of the Brits. You're sick of them. I'm sick of them invading our culture. I'm sick of the British television. I'm sick of British actors.

Really? You don't think Daniel Day Lewis is outstanding? And speaking like they're from Philly or Delco. I'm tired of it. Stop. You liked it. You loved Kate Winslet in that. I liked it. I know that.

But I mean, you can't find American actors to do that. You can't find someone from Delco to do that. There should be a mayor of East Town season two, don't you think? Yeah. That was too good. Yeah. So afterlife and for you, the original version of the office, which is probably the most brilliant comedy ever. And I would also recommend extras, which I think is one of the most underrated things that Ricky Jervase ever did.

Extras is brilliant. It's so funny. And some of the guest cameos, by the way, Kate Winslet does a couple of them that were so funny. I don't know. you watching? Are you just watching Cojack at night? Jesus Christ. Watch some new stuff. I'm not watching. You know what I'm doing?

What? While I'm working, I mean, I, you know, I'm writing and stuff and doing stuff like that. I have the tablet on and I usually have the TV, the tablet on while I'm watching writing. It's because I'm just used to it.

And I'm going through the shield. The, uh, I'm re-watching the shield. That everybody says that was really good. It was pretty good. It was tough. When was that out, Tommy?

Isn't that a long time ago now? Yeah. Like well before Breaking Bad, right? Yes. Yeah, yeah, yeah. By the way, my recommendation to you remain sneaky Pete. I know. You and Clay.

It's right up your alley. It really is. But my biggest, my biggest whiff is the wire. That's my big. That's true. I've got to watch the wire. I would like to do a trade. I'd like to do a trade with you.

I'd like to watch the wire while you're watching Game of Thrones. But I don't think I'll ever get you to do that. No, I'm not sacrificing so you can get something good. All right, I want to talk about your column when we come back, and I don't know what else. Right after these words from a few of our sponsors. So we're not going to do Tommy's column because there's breaking news, and I'm just going to read from ESPN.com right now on the breaking news. Here it is. It's a story titled Washington commander's owner Daniel Snyder has say in whether

the findings from the NFL's investigation of the team are released. The first paragraph from this story reads as follows. The NFL may not be able to publicly release the findings of its internal investigation of the Washington commanders without the explicit permission of owner Daniel Snyder. That according to a document released this morning, Friday morning, by the Congressional Committee investigating the NFL. They're talking about the Beth Wilkinson report. They're talking about the Beth Wilkinson report that the league has said over and over again they can't release because they want to protect the security, privacy, and anonymity of all of those women, the 150 women that came forward to speak to Beth Wilkinson, when in fact the reason that they can't release the report

is because Dan Snyder and the league entered into an agreement known as a common interest agreement, which essentially said that nobody's going to release the findings of this report without the approval of the other. Tommy, your reaction to this? Well, my reaction is, I mean, this is a bombshell. We talked about bombshells from the roundtable yesterday that the committee held. This is a bombshell of information because it basically says that, you know, Dan Snyder has the power to release this information that has been held back so far by the NFL. And there are so many sins that have been committed here. It's almost hard to keep track of, not the least of which is the NFL has been lying to us all along about this report in the first place.

Yes, that's the thing that strikes me is that the NFL has been claiming that, first of all, that there is no written report. Part of this story describes that actually when Washington entered into the agreement with Beth Wilkinson, because remember, Washington was first in control of this investigation, or I'm sorry, paying for it. And then the league took it over. And part of this report indicates that Washington, as part of the original agreement, required a written report when the investigation was done. So number one, it would appear as if there is a written report. And by the way, obviously Beth Wilkinson has all of her findings written down somewhere, even though she presented it to the commissioner, per his request orally, and not in written form. But the other part is just that the league absolutely could have released this report by getting Dan Snyder and by the way themselves to agree that it could be released.

They've been hiding behind and been lying about the reason for not disseminating the report because they want to protect the women that came forth. And so, you know, I don't know if from this story, what isn't clear from this story, Tommy, is whether or not the leagues wanted to release the report, but Dan Snyder having the ability to stop that because of this common interest agreement said no. Or if both parties don't want the agreement released and they're kind of in agreement that the report shouldn't be released. Now, I would ask you, I think I have an answer to this, why would they enter into this common interest agreement shortly after the Beth Wilkinson investigation began saying to each other, this isn't going to get released unless we both approve its release? Why would they do that? To cover it up, like a mutually exclusive treaty, a nuclear treaty. so one side doesn't blow up the other. They're basically both cover their ass.

Yeah, it's like we don't know what she's going to find, but it probably isn't going to be great. So let's make sure that neither one of us can release this thing without the other. Now, look, the league would stand to be less hurt, I guess, or less impacted if this investigation actually produced a lot of stuff about the Washington place workplace, the Washington workplace culture, and it all falls back on Dan. I mean, you know, they could have easily said, you know, we got the report and it ain't good, you know, and we're going to run Dan from this league.

We're going to take a vote on this next week. Or we've got the report. Here it is. He's suspended for two years and he's going to be fined, you know, $30 million to $40 million or whatever, you know, to penalize him, but also to release the report. because really the league wasn't involved in this workplace culture. It's just one of their teams. You know, they've been hurt by, you know, ugly information before and reports,

including deflategate and spy gate and everything else. But I think what happened here, and I think the Roundtable really pushed this forward, because I think they got these documents yesterday afternoon from the NFL, the committee, or even this morning. And I think what happened is a case where, you know, the cop is sweating, one of the suspects in a room until they give up the other one. And I think the NFL just gave up Dan Snyder. I think that's what happened. I think they gave them up.

And according to one report now, the committee has given a February 14th deadline for the NFL to release the report, which essentially gives Dan Snyder, until February 14th to agree to have the report released. Yeah, I know what you're saying. In many ways, this does throw Dan under the bus and make him look like the one that can actually, you know, can actually, has control over whether or not the Beth Wilkinson report has made public. But they both do. And they didn't send this, they didn't give Congress this morning their answer as to why they can't give, you know, make the report public because of this common interest agreement

and also say simultaneously, we're in favor of it being released. That would be the ultimate throwing Dan under the bus. They didn't have to. Well, they just said, you know, it's not, we have no, we can't do it. Yeah, well, because of a mutual agreement. It makes them look bad too. And it also. No, it only makes them look bad because.

of the why initially. Right now, basically, is they committed the same crime, but they're willing to give up their accomplice. Yeah. And now it falls on the accomplice. I mean, the reason you put an agreement like that together is you are, you know,

you just want to make sure if the results are really bad, that you haven't committed to make this, the findings of this result to each other public or to anybody else. You know, and we are, we are driving a car so close to the day that I said was coming. If they, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, February 14th deadline is not met, there will be subpoenas. Yeah, this February 14th. There will be the penes to Goodell and, and, and, and, and Snyder, among others.

Um, the Democrats in the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, uh, that are part of this investigation or part of that roundtable yesterday. essentially questioned the veracity of Gidell's claims as to why the report hadn't been put out there. And then they got the information this morning as to why he couldn't put it out there, which is this common interest agreement, which was, again, repeating the agreement between Dan Snyder and the league that the report will not be made public unless both approve it. The House Oversight and Reform Committee set a February 14th deadline for submitting all documents pertinent to the Wilkinson investigation as well as the Wilkinson findings. If the NFL fails to comply, the House members wrote they would seek alternate means of obtaining documents. A chairwoman of the investigative arm of the House of Representatives, Carol Maloney, the Democrat from New York, has the

the power to subpoena documents not willingly provided. But in a letter to Goodell, the, in a letter to Goodell Maloney and Representative Rajah Krishna Mathori, Krishna Morthy, I'm sorry, who's been a part of this all along, wrote that Goodell has claimed that the NFL did not release the Wilkinson findings to protect the security privacy and anonymity of more than 100. 150 witnesses, but obviously this is not true. Right. That is not true. I mean, you know, it's coming down to crunch time.

Look, in a way, I don't know how Dan Snyder survived this. I know this is kind of nuts to say, but, I mean, there has not been a point since this started where anything has surfaced to make it look better for the team. Every motion, every movement has made him and them look worse. The problem the league has is even if they were to be able to

with lots of lawyers essentially tell Congress to pound sand that this is an agreement between, you know, within a private company. And we don't have to release this report. We paid for the report. The report is ours,

and there's nothing requiring us to release this report. So go pound sand. The problem with that strategy, which I'm sure the league is, you know, thinking of taking, is that by taking that strategy, you're now saying definitively, we don't want to tell you about what we found about this workplace that was so misogynistic and so toxic for women.

I mean, they can't do that. This is the opposite. This is the opposite of transparent. Right. This is the exact opposite of transparent. And I know that, you know, you have a new management team with a new culture, Jason Wright, and Ron Rivera, but they have touted, particularly Jason Wright, transparency, right from day one. And this doesn't matter if it happened before they arrived, what's happening now is happening while they are in power and getting checks from this owner.

You know what's interesting about this? Go ahead, finish. I'm sorry to interrupt. Go ahead, finish. No, it's just, I think that the issue of transparency needs to be addressed by the leaders of this team. There's something else that just doesn't add up to me. I'm sure it will add up to you, but let me just pose this for a moment. If Snyder had total control over whether or not the Beth Wilkinson investigation would ever see the light of day,

which he does, we now know, through this common interest agreement, why was it necessary for him or his lawyers to approach that woman, the $1.6 million settlement woman on the plane, to offer her, her additional compensation, hush money, to not talk to Beth Wilkinson or not to disclose what happened on the plane to Beth Wilkinson. You know, it's the few good men scene where, you know, Lieutenant Kaffey says to Colonel Jessup, you know, if your orders are always followed, then why was Santiago in danger? Why did Santiago need to be transferred off the base?

why did Snyder, who had total control over this Wilkinson report, ever seeing the light of day, why did he care what anybody said to Beth Wilkinson? Also, the other part, Tommy, is that, remember he released a lot of these women from their NDAs so that they could talk to Beth Wilkinson? Well, there was no risk in releasing them from their NDAs if he had final say over whether or not this report got released. Look, I was talking about a guy who's super paranoid, probably. I mean, somebody who's a megalomaniac, like Snyder, is probably super paranoid. And he probably thought he needed to pay off people, whether he had so-called control of the report or not, or shut people up. A guy like that doesn't necessarily think things through. No, he doesn't.

The league has to take the next step, which is we would like the best. Wilkinson report to be released to the public. It's up to Dan Snyder. I know you said that that's kind of what they just did, but they really didn't do that yet. We're going to find out how much the league has Dan's back right now. Unless there's like stuff in there about the league, but I don't think it is. It was an investigation into the Washington football team workplace. But we're going to find out whether or not the league really has Dan's back or now, because they're kind of being backed into a corner here. They got caught lying about the reasons for the report not being made public. So now they need to come out and say, we are in favor of releasing the Wilkinson report

publicly to the public, making it available. It's up to Dan Snyder to approve that, per our common interest agreement. I don't think they'll come. out and say that. I think that's what they'll basically agree to with committee members, whether the committee members release it or not. You know, the NFL, I mean, they're not only dealing with this. They're dealing with this lawsuit by John Gruden about the emails between him and Bruce Allen, you know? And let's remember, this Washington football investigation was kind of dormant. The, the, the, the, the, the, the emails. The emails, the emails, like, the, the football investigation was kind of dormant. The, the, the, the emails, the email. just revived it.

Yeah, but this is always their strategy. It's the Go Dean Smith for Garner's. Yeah, it's been on full life support. It's been on full blast ever since the email thing. I had pretty much died a quiet death. And, you know, but people had adopted the business as usual mode. But the NFL, and I know they're undefeated in a many ways.

But they've got they've got some lawyers working overtime these days. I mean, by the way, how about Snyder's lawyers to create this agreement? I mean, you know, say whatever you want. He's got some pretty good lawyers.

But my God, I mean, like, what they're dealing with right now, the Brian Flores lawsuit, which, by the way, could be the biggest bombshell in years if it's proven that Stephen Ross offered him $100,000 to lose games back in 2019. We got Hugh Jackson coming out. We still don't have a black head coach hired in this current offseason of coaching openings. I mean, Doug

Peterson got the Jacksonville job last night. I believe he's white. Still not one black coach hired. We've got this going on. And by the way, they play the Super Bowl next week. And see, what the league always does is they just try to. run out the clock. They try to go Dean Smith, four corners, and just say, you know, we got a little bit of a lead here because 61 million people watched our AFC title game

last week. And 120 million or something like that are going to watch the Super Bowl next week. But we do have an offseason coming up. But here's the problem. They've got a family member who will always screw up. And, you know,

I mean, really. They got 32 kids. It's kind of like, yeah, but this is a screw-up that you can't predict. This is the screw-up that always gets in the way of you moving on. There'll always be something else with this guy. Rita Hayworth was really, really good-looking. All right, we're done for the day. Obviously, there will be more looking into this and seeing what comes of it over the weekend. But that sort of broke.

Obviously, we would have led this show. with this had we had this to sort of couple with the testimony yesterday. But that's it for the day. Have a great weekend, Tommy. Enjoy the beach, the cigars, the beers, and I will talk to you on Tuesday. Have a good weekend, boss.