Sale teeters amid uncertainty, renewed ire from NFL owners
WASHINGTON — When the Washington Commanders announced in early November that owner Daniel Snyder was exploring the possibility of selling the franchise, the annual meeting of the NFL’s team owners in late March seemed to be a reasonable target by which a deal with a buyer could be found. Yet with that meeting now just weeks away, the next steps in the prospective sale of the team appear uncertain.
Several potential buyers have been identified, at least two of whom have submitted bids, but the interested party with the most financial wherewithal has been prohibited thus far from making a bid. Snyder has made demands of the league and other team owners for legal protections that would extend beyond him selling his franchise, three people with direct knowledge of the NFL’s inner workings now have said. And with the league’s second investigation of Snyder and the team’s workplace entering its 13th month, some owners leaguewide are angry enough about those demands to renew their consideration of taking a vote to remove him from ownership if he refuses to sell.
NFL owners have never voted to oust a fellow owner by forcing the sale of a team, and they have reasons to be cautious in considering such action.
The first is that the legality of such a move has never been tested, and even if it held up, it likely would be far from an expedient process.
Asked whether such an action would withstand a legal challenge, Gabe Feldman, the director of the Tulane Sports Law program, said this week that it’s difficult to predict the outcome of unprecedented decisions. Feldman noted that the NFL’s constitution and bylaws — a set of documents to which all owners agree — clearly spell out the process for removing an owner. That process includes a closed-door hearing that gives the owner in question the opportunity to challenge the decision. In Feldman’s analysis, as long as the NFL follows its own procedures, its decision would stand up in court.
“If they follow their own rules, then the constitution and bylaws itself say that the decision is final and binding,” Feldman said. “Then, the question would be: Does Daniel Snyder try to claim that this is an antitrust violation — that all the owners have gotten together to conspire to prevent him from continuing to own a team?”
If so, Feldman said, the NFL likely would argue that it’s pursuing a legitimate goal of protecting its brand.
“If they go through the process to determine that Daniel Snyder is harmful to that image and integrity,” Feldman said, “they have the right to remove him.”
The owners are confident that any vote to force Snyder to sell his franchise would withstand a legal challenge, according to someone with direct knowledge of their views, who said: “You will not defeat that. But it would be bad for everyone.”
If Snyder digs in, he could ask a court for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction to put any decision by the owners to force him to sell his team on hold while an underlying lawsuit proceeds, Feldman explained.
“This type of emergency relief is rarely granted, but it would — at least temporarily — almost immediately prevent the NFL from removing him,” Feldman said. “Without the immediate relief, the case could take months or years to wind its way through the courts.”
The possibility is under consideration after Snyder angered several owners and NFL
Commissioner Roger Goodell by issuing his demands, according to the three people with direct knowledge of the situation. According to those people, Snyder seeks indemnification from future legal liability and costs if he sells his team and has threatened to sue if that condition is not met.
“He’s not going to get that,” said one person familiar with the owners’ views.
ESPN reported Tuesday that the federal investigation of allegations of financial improprieties by Snyder and the Commanders in the Eastern District of Virginia is focused on a $55 million line of credit the team had taken out without the knowledge and required approval of Snyder’s former limited partners.
Goodell declined to comment Tuesday at the NFL scouting combine in Indianapolis.
Snyder also wants to keep confidential the findings of attorney Mary Jo White’s investigation into him and the team, the three people with direct knowledge of the situation have said. The NFL has said that it will release White’s report publicly. The Commanders denied the accounts of the sale process of those three people.
Moreover, Snyder has refused to entertain a bid from Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, who owns The Washington Post, out of “spite” over The Post’s coverage of Snyder and the team, according to one person with knowledge of the process. While it is not clear whether that is simply a negotiating tactic by which Bezos eventually will be allowed to bid, continuing to exclude the wealthiest prospective buyer would rile fellow owners further, according to a former NFL executive well-versed in franchise sales. Owners have expressed public support for Bezos to own an NFL franchise. That could be the Commanders. Or it could be the Seattle Seahawks, if the estate of late owner Paul Allen sells the team in the coming years, as expected.