The Kevin Sheehan Show - Wilkinson Report: Few Answers

Episode Date: July 2, 2021

Kevin and Thom again today with follow up on the Beth Wilkinson investigation into the Washington Football Team that resulted in a $10 million fine but more questions than answers. Also, why can't Kevin and Thom get Twitter Verified?  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 Sheehan Show. Here's Kevin. The show today is brought to you by my friends at my bookie. I know it's not football season and not everybody's interested in gambling right now. And we always say, you know, tread lightly on this stuff.

But if you don't have a shop or you're looking for another shop to compare lines and prices against, Go to MyBooky at mybooky.orgie.orgie.com and use my bonus code, Kevin D.C., and they will give you essentially half of your deposit to bet with. So you will get your 50% of your deposit. You'll get a credit to your account. So if you deposit $1,000, you'll get $500 additional bucks in your account, totaling $1,500 to bet with. so they'll credit you all the way up to half of your deposit up to $1,000. Lots of soccer. I'm actually very interested, Tommy. I'm going to be watching both of the soccer quarterfinals today.

I even passed on a golf opportunity yesterday so that I could watch the two Euro Cup quarterfinal games. I know that you can't wait for those. Tommy's with me today. I just mentioned Tommy's name, and you're like, oh, whoa. wait a minute, Tommy's there again? He's not with me in studio like he was yesterday. But after the news broke, after we recorded the show yesterday, about the Wilkinson report and the results of it and the punishment, if you want to call it that, levied by the league against the football team, I asked Tommy to join me on the show today. By the way, subscribe doesn't cost you anything. And please rate us and review us if you haven't done that.

Some of you have asked why I ask that all the time. We are doing very well and we're pleased with, you know, all of our advertisers. And we're pleased with the number of people that are listening to this podcast. It is a real healthy-sized audience. And we thank all of you for listening. But the ratings and reviews drive the rankings in podcast land. So Spotify or Apple, where they rank the podcast. Those rankings aren't driven necessarily by how many people are listening, but it's how much they like your show.

Now, a lot of you rated us right when you started to listen, and we were ranked super high, and I appreciated that. But if you haven't done it and you can do it, it just helps in the advertising of the show to be able to cite lofty rankings, which we've had and we continue to be among the only local sports content shows. ranked consistently in the top 200 of podcasts anywhere in the sports category, but we could use more ratings and reviews to keep us in those rankings. So a quick rating of five stars and a quick review of like one sentence of how much you like the show on Apple or Spotify, those two places in particular, if that's where you're listening to us. If you haven't done it, it really, really helps. So Tommy's with me because the show today is going to be, you know, a conversation about the league statement about the Beth Wilkinson report because we don't have anything from Beth Wilkinson because there isn't a written report.

There's no written executive summary. There was an oral report given to the league, which the league then put out a statement on. And then the team had a statement as well. But this is what we're going to talk about today. and maybe at the end of the show, I will do a little bit on the Nats and some sports. So for those that don't know, and I'm assuming most of you do know, the league yesterday announced the outcome of the investigation

that the independent council led by Beth Wilkinson performed over the last 11-plus months. And the outcome of that was spelled out in a pretty long statement by the team. But it ended with the conclusion, which is that the team was fined $10 million. $10 million, which, by the way, which will be used to go to charitable organizations that deal with anti-bullying, healthy relationships, character education, and a lot of women's related organizations as well. Tommy, when I saw that, I thought, huh, what a break for old Dan, 10 million bucks, and he can write it off because it's going to charity, which I have not seen anybody else speak about, and I could be wrong.

Maybe they can't because it was a fine or a punitive thing. maybe they can't write it off, but I thought, well, most charitable donations are, you're able to write those off, and maybe he will too. Now, Neil and Rockville told me this morning that the expenses associated with the investigation, which the team also has to pick up, he estimated that it would be between $4 and $5 million that Beth Wilkinson and her group made off of this investigation. So maybe the total amount of this is like closer to $15 million. But that's it. No draft choices. If I were, if I were a woman's group, and I could be, if I were a woman's group,

I would take that money and throw it right back in their face, go it right back in their face. And I'd let the world know I did that. Well, if you're going to do it, you have to let the world know. there's no benefit to throwing it back in their face the kind of benefit you'd be looking for without telling everybody about it yes that's what i would do yeah um we survived without dan schneider's porn money will continue to survive yeah so um i'll go first all right and i'm going to just high level it and then you can high level it and then we can get into more detail

First of all, I'm not surprised at the punishment. When they waived the debt limit and then they loaned him the money, as you reported, or some of the money, to buy out as minority investors, that was the day that we obviously came to the conclusion that he's not going to be forced to sell the team. That there's no smoking gun out there or there's nothing out there that implicates him enough to force him out of ownership. We knew, I mean, they're not waiving the debt limit and then loaning the money to buy out his minority investors if he's on his way out.

That was, so I was not surprised by the punishment. Just so you know, the punishment was the most severe for an owner or team in NFL history. But I also understand it's a drop in the bucket compared to the value of the team. Number two, I am very surprised that at the very least we didn't get, and I'm just that we didn't get something from Beth Wilkinson. You know, a three to four page executive summary of the investigation at the very least. I also, however, would say in the same breath that this is not comparable to all of the exhaustive 140-page written investigations by Ted Wells and others for Deflategate and other things. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison because those

investigations did not interview people with promised anonymity. So they're not comparable from that standpoint. At the same time, I would wonder why they couldn't have done something from Beth Wilkinson in terms of a report with not identifying information or, you know, or false names. Of course they could have. They could have. You don't have to identify people in order to, you know, use their valid quotes.

their valid descriptions of what happened. Right. But again, it's not, I saw a lot of people yesterday comparing, you know, well, Deflategate had a 136-page report. By the way, I read that thing. I'll never forget it, the Ted Wells thing, where he didn't understand the ideal gas law, which was hysterical. But it's different because there was no promised anonymity to the 150 people that were

interviewed for this investigation. Thirdly and lastly, I don't view Tanya becoming the day-to-day co-CEO operator responsible for day-to-day responsibilities, as spelled out by the league, that Tanya is going to have day-to-day responsibilities for a few months, while Dan is going to focus on things like the stadium and other matters. this is not a suspension people. A suspension would have been called a suspension. There would have been no downside to a $10 million fine and a six-month suspension for what they did describe in their statement as a culture that was hostile to women. This is not a suspension. Now, the one thing that makes me hesitate a little bit is Mark Maskey's,

tweet that said that Dan's return to the day-to-day operations of the team must be approved by Roger Goodell. Now, that makes it sort of a partial kind of suspension, but if he were suspended, there would have been no downside for them saying that. So I don't view it as a suspension that she's got the day-to-day team operations, which, by the way, is, just super comforting, isn't it? And that he is focusing, like Michael Scott, focused on the big picture and Jim took over the day-to-day operations when they decided on that. But he's still involved. He's allowed to go to games. He's living with the co-CEO under the same roof. So anyway, there's a lot more in terms of my thoughts on some of this, but I'll let you have that.

it in terms of big picture takeaways. Okay, I was trying to envision how this went down, and I came up with this. Beth Wilkinson walking into Roger Goodell's office with a handcartes, full of boxes that have depositions, interviews, you know, court documents, maybe some videotapes, physical evidence. I mean, boxes of stuff that she had to bring in on a handbook. cart. And she sits down in front of the commissioner, and she says, Mr. Commissioner, and he says, before she goes on, he says, look, Wilkie, I see you got all that stuff there. Just give me the short strokes. Here, what happened? Was it bad? And she said, yeah. And he asked her again. Is it bad now?

And she said, no. And he said, okay, hell of a job, Wilkie. Just take that stuff on your way out and put it in the incinerator next to my door where we get rid of all the stuff that could hurt the league. Pamela down the hall has a massive shredder. She'll be helping you with these boxes. These boxes full of depositions. Yeah. I mean, there's documents out there.

There may not be written a report, but there are transcripts of interviews and documents out there. So, I mean, and, you know, Beth Wilkinson, I wrote when the team hired her. She's a good soldier. She is an NFL lackey from way back. Okay, she's the one who stood on the courthouse steps and told reporters during a concussion lawsuit

that the NFL never hid any medical information from its players. So in the end, she's going to do what the league wants her to do. So in a way, I mean, I wrote back in when this is all now. that he'll probably get a fine, and, you know, little else will happen. Now, you know, given the time that they were investing in it, I think some people hoped, well, there must be something going on. I mean, Roger said back in February that the report was about to be released, you know, or about to be completed before, like at the Super Bowl week, and here we are in July.

So I think the time that it took gave people some false hope that there might be something substantial that will come of this. And like everything with this football team, it's always false hope. Yeah. Look, I mean, the Goodell League statement, you know, went into, you know, not great to tell about specifics, but I thought there were a couple of things that were interesting about their statement. Number one, in the opening or in the second paragraph, Wilkinson was not specifically tasked with confirming or rejecting any particular allegation of inappropriate conduct. Really?

Well, she was asked to investigate allegations of a hostile workplace culture at the football team that included allegations of bullying and harassment and to make recommendations regarding that. So I would imagine in the process of trying to find out whether or not there truly was a hostile workplace culture, weren't there specific and particular allegations that needed to be investigated and confirmed or rejected? Hey, this person said you said this. This person said you bullied this person. True or not? I didn't understand that at all. if it was specifically put in there to address some of the things in the Washington Post stories and other stories like, you know, the incident at fight night where he said, she said, with Dan trying to, you know, set his good friend up with one of the cheerleaders saying, hey, you know, why don't you take him up to a hotel room?

or the now very, you know, famous incident of the plane ride back from the country music awards in Las Vegas, which resulted in a $1.6 million settlement with a woman who was on the plane who claimed sexual harassment. They settled for $1.6 million. We do not know the details of what happened on that plane. but the settlement included, you know, both parties agreeing that the team did not admit any wrongdoing in the incident. There's confidentiality associated with that incident, and an insurance company paid off the $1.6 million. The team did not. That means that the insurance company found the team worth, you know, whatever that insurance policy was to protect them against these

kinds of claims, they certainly found that it was worth paying out on behalf of the team because the team was not involved in any wrongdoing. So, you know, there's all of that, you know, which by the way was a big push from her to find out more about that. We don't know what she found out about that particular plane ride. There's been an effort by the Washington Post to unseal that information, but I don't know that that information will ever be unsealed. She got a she got 1.6 million dollars. Ultimately, they did not admit any wrongdoing. We know that. And there's a confidentiality clause associated with it. I think that that's... I know that. But, you know, but, I mean, that's a confidentiality agreement that forced, obviously, by the football team and

the owner. The NFL could have said to Dan Snyder, you need to absolve, like part of the problem here, is the NFL could have said to Snyder, you need to absolve everyone of any confidentiality agreements related to this investigation and all non-disclosure agreements, which I call don't tell the truth agreements. You know, the NFL could have forced Snyder to do that or will suspend you indefinitely. What do you think he would have done? I don't know on what basis the league would have the right to do that. I mean, they're obviously a private corporation.

They don't have to follow the... But a lot of... I would bet you the problem with that is that there are several owners with confidentiality agreements and settlements with various things. But there's only one under investigation right now for sexual harassment. Yeah.

Well... There's only one that a special investigator was assigned to investigate. I mean, if we start looking under everyone's bed in the NFL, it's, it's... going to get messy, which again is part of the problem here as well. You know, I mean, it's a strange concept, but we've always felt that NFL owners look at Dan Snyder and say if they can get rid of him, they could get rid of me too. Yeah, there for the grace of God go by. I'm just saying that in that statement from the

league, when they put in there that Wilkinson was not specifically tasked with confirming or rejecting any particular allegation of inappropriate conduct. I think they're almost putting that in there to say she didn't have anything on the $1.6 million settlement because that wasn't part of the investigation's responsibility or purview. I just thought that was weird. But look, in that statement from the league, Wilkinson interviewed more than 150 people, most of whom weren't current or former employees of the club, many of whom conditioned their participation on a promise of anonymity. She interviewed Dan Snyder twice. Dan Snyder in the club released current and former employees from any confidentiality obligations for purposes of speaking with Wilkinson and pledged that there would be no retaliation against any current or former employee who did so. And then the bottom line is that the league said, you know, this was the Goodell statement.

I want to thank Beth Wilkinson and her team for conducting a thorough and independent review of the Washington Club's workplace. By the way, I don't know if you picked up on a lot of Washington Club throughout. Workplace culture and conduct providing both the club and me with a series of thoughtful recommendations based on her findings. Beth and her team performed their work in a highly professional and ethical manner. Most importantly, I want to thank the current and former employees who spoke to Beth and her team. vital information that will help ensure that the workplace environment at the club continues to improve. It's incredibly difficult to... That's the biggest insult of all.

Right. It's incredible. Thanking the victims. Right. Thanking the victims. And then, by the way, going on to Laude and compliment Dan and Tanya for turning things around. But I just wanted to get to the final part of his statement. The commissioner concluded that for many years, the workplace environment at the Washington football team both generally and particularly for women was highly unprofessional. Bullying and intimidation frequently took place, and many described the culture as one of fear, and numerous

female employees reported having experienced sexual harassment and a general lack of respect in the workplace. Ownership and senior management paid little or no attention to these issues. In some instances, senior executives engaged in inappropriate conduct. themselves, including use of demeaning language and public embarrassment, that this set the tone for the organization that led to key executives believing that disrespectful behavior and more serious misconduct was acceptable in the workplace. And then they get into the problems were compounded by a small HR staff. By the way, I want to just make this point before I forget it, and then you respond.

For anybody that read the post story or both of the post stories and said, a lot of he said, she said, it's the Post, they have a vendetta, the whole thing. Well, this confirmed these lines from the commissioner in this overview of the Beth Wilkinson 11th month long investigation confirm the Post story, basically. Yeah, you're right. That's a good point. Absolutely. It did. Why did you hesitate to say it was a good point? You hesitated there. No, no, because I wanted to get off what I was going to say. Okay. And make sure that I pointed out that it was, that that was a good point. The public embarrassment, the public embarrassment reference.

I mean, that's Snyder's M.O. with everything. Yeah. I mean, that's what he does. He publicly embarrasses the people below him. He enjoys that. He gets off on that. Yes. We've heard that for years.

Yeah. I mean, that's going to change all of a sudden. And so more involvement is going to change all this. And that's rich. And we'll get to the Wall Street Journal story. But the reference in that Wall Street Journal embarrassment that he's going to be more involved, then the NFL comes out with this thing where Snyder is going to basically step away. So which is it?

If he's not part of the problem. That's a good point, right? Yeah. Yeah. In the puck piece. If he's, yeah, at one day he's going to be more involved, and then the next day they say, oh, no, no, he's stepping away. And paying attention to the big picture stuff. I didn't think about that.

In the puff piece written by the Wall Street Journal, but it should have been more like the Montgomery Journal. They talk about him becoming more involved because he's been so less involved. And now he's stepping away to handle just big picture issues, and she's going to be involved in the day-to-day. Yeah, good point. I mean, they can't even keep track of all their life. So I wanted to, I wanted to, are you finished with that point or did you have another one? That was a good point. I have other points, but I'm finished with that one.

That was a good point. I forgot, I didn't pick up on that. So I wanted to mention about the Wall Street Journal Puff piece, which was an embarrassment, as you so eloquently wrote in your column and said on the podcast from earlier in the week. it really was an embarrassment that they essentially, you know, didn't push back on any of these things. Obviously, it was a bought and paid for a thing. There were ground rules, the whole thing. Well, somebody told me, and somebody just told me to look up the name of this person. And so I did, and I didn't know the name of this person.

I missed this news. But Will Missilebrook was hired on May 11, 2021 by your Washington. football club or Washington football team to become the organization's first ever chief creative and digital officer reporting directly to Jason Wright. Missile Brooks' resume includes recently being the global head of creative for custom content, creative marketing, and original programming across all platforms and consumer touch points for the trust, the Wall Street Journal, Journal, Barron's Group, and Dow Jones Media Group. Okay.

There's the dots. There's the dots. There are the two dots. So this was obviously more, well, obviously, this could have been set up by him with the journal for the purposes of having a big story, which was, by the way, breaking the news that Tanya Snyder was going to be the co-CEO of the organization. The problem was the rest of the story. And that leads me to this.

and that was the football team statement with the Snyder quotes in it. Because once again, it's just terrible, terrible strategy, in my opinion. Because it starts off with a statement from Dan Snyder. Actually, the whole thing is a statement from Dan Snyder. Quote, I have learned a lot in the past few months about how my club operated. he apparently has just learned Tommy in the past few months about his... Well, he's been in a coma. About how his club is operated.

And the kind of workplace that we had, it is now clear that the culture was not what it should be, but I did not realize the extent of the problems or my role in allowing that culture to develop and continue. I know that as the owner, I am ultimately responsible for the workplace. I have said that and I say it again. You know, this is just a... continuation of, I wasn't really aware of it because it wasn't my fault. I wasn't involved.

Now, I am the owner and ultimately it is my responsibility. But when I was away during all those years and not, you know, involved as much as I should have, those people, Bruce Allen, and by the way, the three minority owners, Fred Smith and Bob Rothman and Dwight Schar, they just ruin the culture. Two things on that. One, can they not do the math or understand that we can do the math? Most of these allegations are from 10 plus years ago. So 10 plus years ago is when he admittedly was much more involved than he has been over the last 10 years. Now, trust me, the bullying the demeaning, the, you know, whatever was going on, there were still a lot of dumb, arrogant people in that organization.

And it would not surprise me if a lot of this stuff was continuing to go on. But in terms of those 42 women, most of them are from, are about allegations from 10 plus years ago when he was involved. Hello, you dumbass? And your PR department, can't you figure out that if he had, hasn't been involved recently, but the allegations were from when he was involved, then he should have known. I don't get that. The other thing, too, to suggest as you did the other day, that he hasn't been involved. Look, I do know for a fact based on multiple sources that he hasn't

been in the building and he has been more away from the day to day over the last seven, eight, nine, ten years than he was in the first ten years. But, we've already pointed out, Dwayne Haskins, RG3. You know, there's the Lewis Riddick story, remember, with Albert Hainsworth. Now, that was 2009 before Bruce or 2008, whatever it was, when they went around the room and said, you know, 13 people basically said no in Albert Hainsworth, and Dan said, too bad, we're doing Albert Hainsworth. You know, how about all of the shots of him, you know, at practice in those, you know,

oversized Michigan fab five shorts that he would have on, you know, the Redskins logo all over it, but, you know, the things that basically came down below his knees, you know, with the, you know, the three sizes over, you know, size shirts that he had on standing there looking like a dope, watching the practices, always, you know, at games. This guy was less involved, but he was still way involved. Every single road trip game, they had big parties the night before. that he was a big part of. So I don't want to hear any of this stuff about him being so detached.

He was less involved when Bruce came in and Mike came in in the football decisions day to day. But he was involved in some big ones that went badly, Dwayne Haskins, the relationship with RG3, etc. But again, if most of these accusations that were investigated, and were written about and have been written about. We're from the period of time when he was very involved, I don't know why they think we can't do the math on that. Whatever. I know.

Well, look, they don't care if you think they're stupid. They really, the NFL is at a level of arrogance that is really unmatched in professional sports right now. I mean, last year, they brought in $12 billion in revenue with hardly anybody in the stance. Okay? So, I mean, that was about $3 billion short of what they had, you know, projected in a normal season. But still, $12 billion, and we don't need you. We don't even need you to show up. They'd rather have people show up, but yeah.

Yes, they would, of course. It's better for business, but they don't need. them. Did you say the difference was $3 billion? Well, I think they projected $15 billion in 2020, but before the pandemic. And it turned out they brought in $12 billion in revenue. That's not profit. That's revenue. I don't know what the profits are, but I'm sure they're obscene. Now, read this part again where it talks about public embarrassment that happened in the organization. Can you find that again? Hold on. Beth and her team performed their work in a highly professional.

Okay. The commissioner concluded, based on Wilkinson's review, the commissioner concluded that for many years, the workplace environment at the Washington football team, both generally and particularly for women, was highly unprofessional. Bullying and intimidation frequently took place, and many described the culture as one of fear,

and numerous female employees reported having experienced sexual harassment and a general lack of respect in the world. workplace. Ownership and senior management paid little or no attention to these issues. In some instances, senior executives engaged in inappropriate conduct themselves, including use of demeaning language and public, including use of demeaning language and public embarrassment. Okay. Just to show you that it wasn't just women. In the post stories, they made the reference of their reporter that Snyder had ordered Dennis Green. who was in charge of the business operations president,

who had been a former male cheerleader in college. I might want to point out the Washington football team will now have male cheerleaders. Yes. Okay. That he ordered Green to do cartwheels for their entertainment. Yeah. And basically ridiculed his background as a male cheerleader. So it wasn't just women.

This is Snyder's. This is what he does to people below him. Well, this is why I noticed in this statement from the league how many times the word bullying was used. You know, because this has been really an issue of sexual harassment and misogyny. But the bullying applied to, you know, a lot of employees, male or female. And that's the one thing, well, it's definitely the one thing much more than sexual harassment or even misogyny that I heard over the years about just what a dreadful person he was in the way he treated employees. And by the way, the way a lot of the people that he hired sort of took that lead and also treated people very poorly. There are a couple of instances that some of us had at the radio station, but I don't know one person that didn't immediately stand up and say, no, you're not going to talk to me that way.

But we didn't work for them. We didn't work for the team. You know, we weren't paid by the team, you know, even though Red Zebra, Dan Snyder's organization owned it. But one of the things we realized pretty early on is he was very distant from the radio station, never set foot into. it. We never really had any communication with them. And it was, you know, very much for the most part, until the last few years, sort of an autonomous kind of thing. But we would hear a lot of stories, you know, about the way people were treated. And that's the one thing that immediately hit me in reading the league's statement is just how many, I mean, I think the word bullying is

used six times in that statement. And so that was, of the hundred And 150 interviews, I think the demeaning way and the bullying way in which employees were treated by various senior people was perhaps as much of an issue as anything else was. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And, you know, now he's going to be more involved so that bullying will be less, I'm sure. Well, boy, in that team statement, did they, you know, compliment them. Oh, the other thing I thought, from the statement and from the team statement and from, by the way, the Wall Street Journal puff piece from the other day, they consistently are trying to get across through their messaging that the culture change started in 2019 at the end of that year. You know, when Dan heard Bruce say the culture is damn good. And that apparently was the spark. It wasn't the post story. It was

they want everybody to know that the changes, you know, with the hiring of Ron Rivera were started long before the post story came out, as if to say they recognized it and didn't have to be told of it. They were already recognizing that their culture was failing and they were already working towards, you know, fixing it. You see the 2019, like beginning near the end of 2019 mentioned multiple times that Dan and Tanya, Snyder started to make, you know, a series of significant organizational changes based on, you know, recognition that the club's culture wasn't good, which was, by the way, apparently was a revelation to them at the time. Look, ultimately, we've said this before. They have made a lot of changes. And maybe the culture right now is the best that it's ever been because they've

gotten better and higher quality people into the organization and they've let them do their jobs. And yes, the football conversation can be compartmentalized for me anyway. Yes, it can. And I can talk about how I actually think, and I believe this, that there's more reason to be optimistic than there has been in maybe seven, eight years since 2013, you know, following the 2012 season. but I am always reminded, especially when I'm near you like I was yesterday, but even when we're just sitting here talking as of the Surgeon General's Warning, which is support this team at your own risk. Dan Snyder still owns it.

And so as long as you understand that going in, and you understand the odds are stacked heavily against a sustained winning culture, But as my good friend Gary Braun said to me many years, and it's something I've used many times on this show, a good season does not make a good organization. The NFL is designed for the worst of organizations to have occasional good seasons. So that's what you're really rooting for as long as he still owns the team, regardless of how high quality the coach and the team president are. Okay, because we have had before a really good, high-quality, good people as coaches and didn't have sustained winning.

So as long as you understand that a good season does not make a good organization, sustained winning and a culture of sustained winning makes a good organization. And that's something that I think the odds are stacked very heavily against. With that said, I will root for the occasional good season, which may be the same. this upcoming season will be. Now, let me point out a couple of other things I wanted to get to. Can we do it right after we take a quick break? Because I've got to get in some sponsors.

You know, it's your podcast. You can do what you want. I know, but I sort of think that it's partly yours, too. At least the two days that you're on it. More thoughts from Tom and me right after these words from a few of our sponsors. I wanted to point something out that Nikki Jabala from the Washington Post pointed out. and that was that the Snyder Washington punishment and recommendations were almost identical to what Mark Cuban and the Mavericks got back in 2018. Excuse me.

I tweeted that out 10 minutes after the Snyder news broke. Oh, I'm sorry. Let me rephrase. I wanted to point out that Tommy tweeted something out shortly after the news broke yesterday. that made it very clear that the NFL took the NBA punishment of Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks, almost literally to the description in all of the recommendations. It was a $10 million fine that went to women's leadership in domestic violence organizations. He wasn't suspended, and then there was a list of like 10 to 12, you know, HR recommendations and in-house recommendations that almost mirror.

what Cuban and the Mavericks faced three years ago. Anyway, continue. I pointed that out about 10 minutes after the newsbook. But, you know, at least now, we know what the price is for rich white guys to commit sexual harassment. It's a $10 million price tag. So that's been established. So when you walk in the door and you want to treat women like second-class citizens, it'll cost you $10 million.

For most of these guys, the cost to do a business. Well, when you say rich white guys, these were fines of the organization and of the bosses that enabled that culture. We don't know specifically whether or not Dan Snyder committed sexual harassment himself. And in the case of both organizations, I don't know that the people that did or didn't were all white or not. Do you? I'm referring to the two owners. Okay. All right.

The price of allowing a culture that promotes bullying, demeaning, and potentially sexual harassment and poor treatment of women is $10 million. Okay. For the owner. Here's the other thing. What? Tanya Snyder's now fair game. Okay.

I mean, before she was. the, you know, the much-heralded and deservedly so spokeswoman for the NFL's fight against breast cancer, being a breast cancer survivor herself, and deserve all the credit in the world for that. But now she's been dragged in, and she's fair game for anything now that happens with that organization. Right. Do you think that they think that maybe people will go easy on her? think that would be a reasonable possibility. Yeah. I think they would. I mean, we don't even know her, which makes her eminently more likable than Dan Snyder. Yes, true. I mean, she's an unknown, which automatically makes her, puts her ahead of her husband. I have requested,

the station is requested as well, either one of them, as we have many times in the past, and according to their PR department, they are not being made available. a shocker. They, they, you know, it's going to be a continued

sort of reclusive thing. Now, it would be, she'd certainly be a better face of the organization than her husband.

And I would imagine, based on things that I've heard, she is certainly more pleasant than her husband. But I,

I don't know whether or not she's, you know, going to make a good co-CEO of the a good day-to-day operator or not.

But, okay, she's fair game. She is fair game. She's now vulnerable to the same criticism. Yeah, I would just suggest that unless we know that she, you know, was involved in something specifically, that she's not going to be the target of fans or media criticism because everybody's going to assume that she's doing nothing and that this is all a ruse and that her husband is still running the team. I'm not putting her in the innocent victim category. Okay.

No way. I mean, you can. I'm not. I didn't say what. I was. I'm just saying that until she is directly involved in like a decision or, you know, says something in a media press conference that we can pick apart, it's going to be hard to think that she's actually calling the shots here. Yeah. The other thing is.

for what Beth Wilkinson appears to have the final result of what Beth Wilkinson appears to have done. The NFL has basically a special counsel for investigations, a former prosecutor, Lane Lisa Friel. She's mentioned, I think, in this statement by the NFL about this. Well, what does she do? She could have done this. she could have came to the conclusion that things sucked, let's punish him a little bit, and move on. And they didn't need Beth Wilkinson.

What's Lisa Freel do? The special counsel for investigations could have done this same thing. Who has a checkered pass, by the way, in terms of covering up evidence herself. She does? As a prosecutor, yes. Yes, she does. Well, she was the one who was, you know, it's funny because she dropped the hammer on players, but not on owners.

She was accused, she was accused by the union of withholding critical information that would have exonerated Ezekiel Elliott in allegations of domestic violence. She was the one who wouldn't allow the lead investigator to meet with Goodell about this. Well, look, the answers She's also accused She's also accused of withholding evidence When she was implicated for prosecuting Notorial misconduct In an alleged rape case

Of a former New York City police officers So she's no She's no bargain either But she could have done this Her title is No, I'm going to tell you why they're A special counsel for investigation Yes, but she's an employee of the National Football League

Beth Wilkinson is not Okay No she's not But she's taken paychecks from the national football league You can't conduct A so-called independent investigation With one of your own employees For to be independent

You have to hire somebody outside of the league And that's what they did Yeah, I know that But if you're really going to be independent You're hiring somebody who you've never paid before Okay That's independent Well, so you can only conduct one independent investigation for a company or a league in your lifetime.

Once you've taken money from them once, you're no longer independent. Look, anyone who thought that that best focusing was going to be independent. You said she wouldn't from the beginning, but she doesn't work for the league. Yeah, okay. The other woman Lisa Freel does. She's just a mouthpiece for the league. How many people do you think she had working on this thing? I don't know.

You know who she's married to? Yeah, David Gregory. David Gregory. Big Nax fan, or at least he used to be. I don't know if he still is. So I've got a couple of questions for you. Why, ultimately, we've talked a little bit about it, but why, if sum it up in two sentences or less,

why isn't there a written report? Well, because I think it would be more damaging. It's always more damaging when you see something on paper or in this case in a computer bite. It carries more weight. It lasts longer. It goes, you know, it doesn't fade away. It's always there. Remember, Roger Goodell supposedly destroyed the spy gate evidence.

Right. I'll be real curious to what happens to all this stuff, and I'll be real curious, and better legal minds than me would have the answer to this. If any of these women with their attorneys are going to now turn around and sue Dan Snyder in the NFL and seek Beth Wilkinson's information that she compiled during an investigation in discovery and go to court for that, you know. Stop on that, because that was another question I had, because I am interested in what Lisa Banks' goal is with the 40-plus clients that she has. But I want to go back to something here. So how do you think, I'm just curious, an oral, you know, report on this 11-month-long investigation was delivered. How did that work, do you think?

I told you. I know, but you were being. sarcastic. How do you think it really worked? There's no point. Do you think there's a PowerPoint presentation? Do you think there's slides of this? Or do you think they said to at some point, we do not want a written report. We don't even want an executive summary. We want to spend June 27th and 28th with you over a four-hour period, two hours each day, and we want you to tell us what you found. And somebody took some notes. I like my, I, I like my explanation better.

I'm being serious. I'm really curious. Because with any sort of an investigation, like any sort of consulting project or investigation, it requires a written follow-up. Like, I need it here in front of me that I can refer to at some point. I want you to present it to me in person, your findings, but then I want you to leave me with the three-ring binder. of 175 pages of investigation. That may be proprietary to us because of the anonymity promises. That's fine, but we need to have something.

But apparently there is no written, nothing written on this. She had to have put something together in writing to present it orally. She just didn't wing it. She put it down on something and went through it with them. I think it's clearly an effort to make sure that nothing gets leaked. Because remember, there was a leak. There was a leak to Jason Bishop at 1067, the fan, when he leaked that part of the Wilkinson investigation was a recommendation that Snyder

be forced to sell the team. he had to pull back on part of what he reported, which was that the league already had that report, which apparently it did not. But he apparently saw some of what was going to be in the report per a source. I think that they don't want any of the details leaked. And they don't, by the way, they paid for this or the team's paying for it. But the league ran it. They don't have a responsibility.

to provide anything. But this leads me... No, they don't. But it leads me to this. I think it's a bad move by the league in this environment not to have had Beth Wilkinson provide the information that the commissioner in the league did in that statement. That statement could have come from her in a two to three page exec summary of the investigation. And they could have said that the details of this investigation include too much information that would require us to disclose too much that we promised too much that we promised via anonymity? I think that would have done very little, because no one would have bought that. Like you said, you can include that information without giving away identity.

Well, they could have said there could have been too many connecting the dots for too many people in the media that would have unveiled some of the people in this, and this is for their protection. I'm not kidding in my reference in how I think this went, not that much, because the less that Roger Goodell was told by Beth Wilkinson, the less he might, through some circumstances, be forced to testify to in a deposition.

What he doesn't know, he can't. testify to. Right. What do they call that? What's the term for that? I'm blanking. No, no, no. Don't tell me that. Don't tell me that. A plausible deniability. Yeah, there you go. Here's another question for you. What, so Neil and Rockville this morning came on. Neil's very good at this stuff. By the way, congratulations to Neil. Neil was the one that told us. Absolutely. Neil was the one that told us that this report, would come out the day before July 4th weekend, a holiday weekend. Now, he was 24 hours off, but he said that in, you know, he said it to me.

I asked him, when is this thing going to come out? And he says, I predict it'll come out right before July 4th weekend. It'll be, you know, the last thing, you know, put out on the Friday before that weekend. Now, he, again, 24 hours off, but he had the right idea. But he said something to me this morning, because I asked him, I said, what is Lisa Banks, who's representing with her law firm, you know, 40 of these women, many of these women that were questioned by Beth Wilkinson? What is her goal here? Because Neil said to me that, look, these are sexual harassment claims. They're not sexual assault claims, which means it's not criminal. There can only be a civil outcome from a sexual harassment claim.

And there is statute of limitations on sexual harassment claims, and it's three years. So they're long past in most of these cases of being able to extract money for this. What is her goal here with these women? Well, Neil would know better to me. I don't know. I mean, I didn't know that there was a three-year statute of limitations on civil matters involving sexual harassment. That would seem to limit their opportunities for some kind of justice out of all this. Well, the answer, and I was asking you to see if you had the answer,

is to bring this guy and this organization down and to make it easier for, for women who have been subject to this kind of treatment in any business, more apt to come out and admit these things and to talk about these things. Well, how does that get done? What do you mean? How does that get done? How do you do that? Well, by bringing somebody like Dan Snyder down,

which can't happen if we don't even know what the investigation, unveiled? Right. So if there's no legal action to force that information to come out, how do they bring Dan Snyder down? What do you have to do? Protest outside of Ghost Townfield? Well, the ghost town field, the investigation they were hopeful would result in something much different, which would have felt like a win.

But you know what? The bottom line to all this is guess who won? Dan Snyder won. He won. I think there was a ray of hope that people, that maybe some of the victims thought that somebody would speak for them in the NFL, and nobody did. I think the NFL should have handled this differently. I mean, they're bulletproof.

I get it. This will go away. And once the games start, this will be a distant memory. And we won't even remember the details when the Washington, Football Club is playing the LA Chargers on September 12th. But I just think in this environment, there should have been something specific from Beth Wilkinson. I just think that the expectation wasn't that we were going to get the full report.

That had been the fact that Lisa Banks and these women were fighting for the report to be made public, told you that they had a sense that it wasn't going to be made public. But I even thought then, well, we're going to get. something from this report. We're going to get a two-pager from Beth Wilkinson with some high-level findings and a recommendation on a punishment. And the truth is, the league's statement was really long. It's a long statement. You know, it's, I don't know, it seems like it's about 50 paragraphs. But with that said, it didn't come with great detail on why the team is being fine $10 million other than

to discuss and state for the record something we've all known which is this is a toxic, toxic organization. And it was a toxic place to work. For, by the way, everybody in the organization.

Men and women. And that probably had something to do. with why he's 149, 202, and 1 since he took over ownership with just two playoff wins, the last of which came 16 years ago. Jesus. See, that's the other thing. When people talk about, all he wants to do is win and it'll spend anything.

Okay, great. The problem is his actions over a long period of time have contributed to a record that sucks. and a postseason record that is literally zero. Because one of those playoff wins came in his first year when he wanted to get rid of Brad Johnson after the trade. He wanted the trade rescinded. Without Brad Johnson in 1999, they wouldn't have won that one of the two playoff games.

And the other one came with somebody, even he couldn't fuck up completely, Joe Jackson Gibbs. It really is amazing that over a 21, season period. This team has won two playoff games. That's it. And they haven't been beyond the divisional round one time. It's all connected, people. Trust me. Joe Gibbs overcame it, went to the playoffs twice. That was great. You know, they had to win five and then six, you know, four in a row, or five in a row, then four in a row. And then, you know, Jay Gruden got him there. It's Shanahan got him there with the RG three year by winning five straight and getting in the back door.

And then Gruden did it with cousins winning four straight to get a wild card. And then last year old Riverboat Ron got him there with a seven and nine record. This has just been a dreadful organization. It really has. Hopefully it's going to change. What's painful is for people like you is you know what it can be like when it's good. God. And you know what, Tommy? I don't know what it would be like for it to be great now. We're a totally different city than we were the last time it was great. Yes. You saw a glimpse of it, the RG3 year. But even that now is nine years ago. It's such a different city now, too, and it's a younger city.

And, you know, I was lucky enough to have lived through that era where it was so. It was so. such an important part of the community. You know, that's the thing that has sucked about the last 21 years, you know. And it's sort of what yesterday, you know, I think confirmed what we knew when they waived the debt limit and, you know, loaned him the money to buy out his minority investors, is that he's not going anywhere, you know, and the fans of the team, and in many ways, the citizens of this city, you know, are worse off. because he's going to continue to be the owner.

He's a terrible owner with a terrible record and a 21-year history of ruining what we talked about yesterday, Tommy, a public trust, whatever that means, that was such an integral part of this city. You know, it was a source of pride. It was a source of, you know, pride in our city and in our, for me, my hometown. It was in a strange way. It offered up like this, you know, this thing that brought us together as a community, you know, a couple of dozen times a year.

I remember moving here in 1983 and seeing the rallies that would take place at downtown businesses on street corners. Right. You know, before regular home games. You know, not just for a playoff game, but for home games. It was unbelievable how, as a city, everyone seemed to rally around this team and connected. Everyone felt connected to something. Look, you know, because there's no way for us to read through 80 to 90 to 120 pages of what was learned in this investigation, I don't know, and I can't say definitively, that, you know, the investigation, what was learned in the investigation doesn't match the $10 million penalty.

I can't say that definitively. I don't think any of us can. It certainly seems like a very small slap on the wrist. It is the largest, you know, fine ever levied against an NFL team by a lot. the league, but it's still, we understand what 10 million means for these owners. And, you know, it's going to go to charity where it might even be tax deductible, as I mentioned earlier. So I can't sit here and say that what the league chose as punishment wasn't fair, because I don't know the details. I do, however, think that the league messed up by not revealing at least some of this investigation.

and I will forever wonder and question, you know, whether or not Beth Wilkinson had more than just, you know, this toxic culture and executives, bullying and demeaning and the whole thing. You know, that $1.6 million settlement and what happened on that plane is still of interest. but I also kind of believe that if the league really thought there was a true event that one of their 32 owners, you know, perpetrated against, you know, a woman on a plane, you know, coming back from Vegas in 2009 or whatever year that was, I don't know, maybe I'm being naive here, but I think that they would have nailed them if they really knew that he had done something. thing rather than it being he said she said or what rather it being she said and it was about somebody else on the plane i don't know well i mean he again somebody else on the plane who works for him in his presence his responsibility smoking gun you're right that's a smokey gun fair point if something happened on that plane with somebody else and it wasn't him and he didn't you know let's just uh you know speculate here uh and he

didn't, you know, come to her defense and he didn't fire that person or severely punish that person, well, then he, you know, then he participated in it for all intents and purposes as the most powerful person on that plane. Now, let me point out, apparently a lot of, as I understand it, the NFL and Washington football fans are putting a lot of faith. in Ron Rivera's presence to help change all this. Yes. And Jason Wright.

Am I right about that? You are. There's definitely an implication from various reports that the league is very impressed. And look, they said it in their statement with how impressed they were with what Dan and Tanya have done in their hiring over the last year and a half. and that there's faith in Ron Rivera and Marty Herney and Martin Mayhew and Jason Wright. Yes. Let me just point out that Jerry Richardson had his little sexual harassment party in Carolina that made the NFL force him to sell the team while Ron Rivera was the coach and Marty Herney was the general manager.

Yeah. Right, like so... He's just a football coach. And Marty Herney's just a scout, basically. Yes. A general man, or whatever his title is, I don't know. No, that's a fair point. Now, remember, the Jerry Richardson situation was different.

There was a racial component to the Jerry Richardson thing, and Jerry Richardson was on the verge of selling that team anyway, which made it a lot easier to force him out. It's not like we heard Ron Rivera step forward and say this can't happen as long as I'm the coach. Well, I don't know what he said or didn't say, but you're right. He was the coach, and I think you're right that Marty Herney was there, although that may not be accurate.

Are you sure that's accurate? I'm pretty sure that's accurate. I'm pretty sure Marty Herney was there during some of Jerry Richardson's sexual hygiene. All right. When we come back, one last thought on this, because it's a question that was posed in a column that was written on this. by somebody we know, that to me has always been an interesting dilemma to consider. That right after this word from one of our sponsors.

I wanted to finish with this, Tommy. So I read the Sally's column was really good. Your columns have been great. David Aldridge wrote a column in The Athletic, and I loved the creativity around the beginning of the column, because it's something we've actually discussed before in the past, about the dilemma if one day Dan Snyder was up there on the podium being handed the Lombardi trophy. So David started off his column today writing February 5th, 2023.

Transcript, 2023 Super Bowl, State Farm Stadium, Glendale, Arizona, Postgame. So now he has some of the post game. Terry Bradshaw from Fox says, quote, Let's get Dan Snyder up here. Hey, Dan, your team has turned everything around. You hired Ron Rivera, who was named Coach of the Year in 2021. You drafted Chase Young, who was today's MVP. Just the 10th time in Super Bowl history, a defensive player has earned the award of MVP. And last year, you went out and got Aaron Rogers to bring it all together.

And you're here now with the Lombardi Trophy, the fourth in team history. and the first under your ownership. You've had to go through so much the last few years. What's it been like for you to go through all of that and now win it all on the other side? So, David then writes, at this point, waiting to hear the answer of what Snyder has gone through, if you're still a fan of the Washington football team,

you'll have two choices. One, Hurl, H-U-R-L. in the physical sense, like throwing your Washington football team helmet, football, burgundy and gold chotchkes in the air in celebration. Or two, hurl in the sense of losing your burger dip pizza, chip, salsa that you inhaled during the game. And it's something that my friends and I have talked about in the past. Like, oh my God, what if they did win it in that?

MF is up there accepting the Lombardi Trophy. It would make a lot of people sick to their stomach. There is no doubt. But for me and David writes, after explaining the two options, maybe it's both. I think it would be both for me. I would be, okay, we did it. We finally are back here.

God, remember when Coach Joe was up here with old Jack Ken Cook and Bobby Betherd accepting Lombardi trophies? Oh, God, but look who's up on the podium for us. I think by then, I think by then, we would have had enough information to know that Ron Rivera, as I projected when he was first hired, had managed to latch on to the Joe Tory path for success and had become the most powerful figure in the organization,

more powerful than the owner. And the owner at that point would be nothing more than the figurehead. Yeah, I know what you're saying, but the big difference between like a Steinbrenner and a Snyder is Steinbrenner had won a lot. Yes, he did. Yankee fans had experienced winning under Steinbrenner before Tori got there. and by the way, they were always, I mean, there were years there where they sucked,

but there were a lot of years there where they were contenders, you know, they were still the Yankees. We're not still the Redskins anymore, literally, you know, but it just hasn't been the same. But I do know. Well, hopefully, hopefully for you, you'll get a chance to experience that dilemma. Yeah, what are the odds in that dilemma being a real case, a real life situation? You're the odds maker, not me. Well, I don't think they're high as long as he owns the team. I don't think they're very high.

I don't think so either. But then again, and I've said this to you before, Ursay made a Super Bowl and won one, the Ursay family, and the Bidwells made a Super Bowl and lost one, one that they nearly won. You know, two terribly owned franchises. In both cases, the sons were running the team. No, not Bill Bidwell. Wasn't he still alive when they lost to the Steelers? He may have been alive, but he wants to be.

that run in the team. I think it was Steve then. Huh? I think it was the younger Bidwell running the team then. Yeah, because the old man died in 2019. They were in the Super Bowl in 2009.

Yeah. It's Michael Bidwell, by the way, I think. And by the way, he's a Georgetown prep graduate. All right. Anything else? I got nothing else for you, but. Oh, I got something else for you.

I can't believe we didn't talk about this yesterday. What the fuck on Twitter verification? They finally opened it up for Twitter verification because you and I are not Twitter verified even though many people who have comparable

jobs but are smaller followings, let's just say. Are far more insignificant than us I think is what you're looking for. Actually have the blue marks and they opened it back

up and you told me, hey, you can apply for this, which you did, and we were both denied. Yes. I don't understand that. I don't understand it either. You know, I got to admit, there's part of, look, I mean, if I'm being completely honest, of course, I'd want to have the blue check, but there's part of me that's saying fuck the blue check. Well, let me tell you that I haven't cared one way or the other for a long period of time.

However, the radio stations that I have worked for care, and they have asked me, you, why aren't you Twitter verified? You should be Twitter verified. You should have a blue check. And having a blue check actually leads to apparently even more followers. And more importantly, you get mentioned with your tweets in like broad categories that are searched much faster than if you don't have it. There are other benefits to having it. I haven't cared at all, Tommy, but I've been now told by multiple radio owners, why don't, aren't you Twitter verified A and B, you should be, and C, it would benefit you and the show if you were?

So when you said- Do any of the benefits regard include beer, sex, or cigars? I don't know. I mean, you could try it in a comment. conversation on July 11th at Caddys, you know, you could say if you had your blue check, hey, I'm a blue check guy. What do I get here? I'm actually really thirsty, need a smoke, and by the way, need some company.

But neither one of us got it. I mean, look, I'm not going to mention anybody by name. I would have thought you would have gotten it. I would have thought you would have gotten it. But because there are people that we know, you know, lots of people in the market that we know that have blue checks that not just have far less like followers, but just are far less in terms of like their media presence or their responsibilities media-wise or anything else. They're peons compared to us. But they got them early on when they first got on Twitter and it never occurred to me to do. do it. But I have, so by the way, over the last couple of years when radio owners have said,

you really need to try to get this done, and I've tried to get it done. They shut it down for a few years. They shut down Twitter verification for a few years. And then they recently opened it up. You found that out. And it was a simple online application through Twitter. I answered every question. And I just figured, well, they're going to look at, you know, these various things. and based on the people that they've verified in the past, I would assume that I would get a blue check, but I did not. And they said you cannot reapply for another 30 days.

There's got to be a trick to this. There's got to be, I mean, if there's a trick to this and only a few people know it, that's a good business. Like somebody online that can say, I can get you your blue check. It's going to cost you X amount. That would be a pretty good business. I would imagine that there's some sort of trick to the trade here

that we just haven't learned. Because you said that somebody in our business who wasn't Twitter verified recently applied and shouldn't have been, but he got it and we didn't. We won't mention his name. But I like that person, and I'm glad that he got Twitter verified, but he should not, with all due respect, have been Twitter verified before us. I agree. Hey Tommy this morning on the radio show. Somebody brought up, you know, She and you're singing Danny boy, Danny boy, whatever.

I don't know what it was. It was about Snyder. And so I tried to remember some of the lyrics and I butchered them slightly. But I got, you know, I got the major gist of it. But then I also tried to, you know the movie, The Darkest Hour? You know that movie with Gary Oldman about Churchill. You did see that movie, right? Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Excellent movie, right?

Yes, very good. Incredible performance. I didn't think Gary Oldman is good. He's phenomenal. Anyway, there is a quote from Winston Churchill put up at the end of that movie, and the quote is, success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts. Now, I wasn't trying to remember that.

A caller said something, and I was trying to remember the Churchill quote about, you know, And hold on, I'm looking because somebody tweeted me the exact quote because I sort of butchered that one too. Here it is. Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm. And so, however it came up in context on the show is irrelevant. My point is, we have failed, but we have not lost enthusiasm for the blue Twitter mark. We haven't.

And now I'll never get it after saying fuck the blue check. Failure is not fatal. It is our courage to continue that counts. So we need to keep reapplying until we get it done. Or we have to seek out somebody that knows how to do this. If anybody knows how to do this and can help us, tweet me at Kevin Shee and D.C. first. And then I'll share it with Tommy. Are you done?

I'm done, boss. Now you've got me depressed about it. the blue check. Oh, don't be depressed. You weren't depressed before. I wasn't depressed before. But we thought that there was a brief opportunity for us to finally get what many lesser people have gotten long before us.

All right. Everybody have a great holiday weekend. Enjoy the fourth. I am off Monday, the radio show. If anything significant happens, I'll be in here to do a podcast. Tommy, that was awesome. Back-to-back days. Tommy and I also didn't tell you.

We had lunch together, and he had no ulterior motive yesterday to getting together for lunch. We had a great time. To celebrate his done deep. Couple of beers, some good Italian food, and, you know, catching up on each other's lives, which we haven't had a chance to do in a long time. That was fun. Yes, it was. We'll do it again.

Have a great weekend. Maybe back on Monday, probably Tuesday.