Tag: Washington Post

Remembering a Washington-Philadelphia game on a historic December day

Remembering Pearl Harbor and it’s connection to Washington and the NFL.

The Redskins were hosting the Eagles in a big game in Washington to close out the regular season.

Who was the quarterback for Washington that day? No, not Kirk Cousins, Mark Brunnel, Brad Johnson, or Doug Williams. Not even Joe Theismann, Billy Kilmer or Sonny Jurgensen.

You see, this was December 7, 1941, some 83 years ago, and the quarterback was Hall of Fame QB Sammy Baugh. It is what transpired on this day that we understandably recall more than an NFL football game between rivals.

The Redskins were 5-5 on the season, while the Eagles were 2-7-1. Baugh threw three touchdown passes that day, the final in the fourth quarter, giving Washington a come-from-behind 20-14 win.

However, what transcended this game was what occurred shortly before 1 p.m. Eastern time. The Japanese plotted and determined to fly eastward from Japan to Hawaii. Shortly before 8 a.m. in Hawaii, suddenly, the skies over the US Naval Base at Pearl Harbor were filled with Japanese planes.

Three-hundred and fifty Japanese aircraft, in a surprise attack, bombed Pearl Harbor for 75 minutes. Twenty American Navy vessels were destroyed, eight Battleships, and more than 340 airplanes. Over 2,400 Americans were killed in the Japanese attack, and many more were wounded.

The Japanese had plotted to surprise and destroy the American Pacific Fleet, giving the Japanese time to move further into the Pacific, taking control without interference from the US Military.

There were no TV cable news networks or cell phones. Word was sent to the nation’s capital via telegraph. The news then traveled to Griffith Stadium at Georgia Ave NW and W. St. NW in Washington, DC.

If this were to occur today, fans across the stadium constantly checking their cell phones would be made aware of the news by their family and or friends. Others also using their phones would receive news updates. Word would spread rapidly throughout the stadium.

But in 1941, the fans had none of these modern conveniences. Consequently, announcements began to be made by the public address announcer during the Redskins-Eagles game.

“Admiral W.H.P. Bland is asked to report to his office at once!”

“Joseph Umglumph of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is requested to report to the FBI office at once!”

“Capt. H.X. Fenn of the United States Army is asked to report to his offices at once!”

Shirley Povich was age 36 and a sports columnist for the Washington Post. Upon the game’s conclusion, his column was entitled, “War’s Outbreak is Deep Secret to 27,102 Redskin Game Fans,” December 8, 1941.

Remember, there was no Washington Post website where you could quickly post a story. Thus, his story would be in the Monday morning paper edition.

That day, US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivered a speech in response to the surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. “Yesterday, December 7, 1941, a date which will live in infamy. The United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan…”

The US Congress then declared war on Japan. The US was officially entering World War II.

At once, the Redskins-Eagles game wasn’t such a big game after all.

Commanders possible stadium site and F-16 fighter jets are involved?

Politics getting in the way of Commanders’ potential new stadium.

Sam Fortier of The Washington Post broke in his Tuesday story that Maryland is asking for the city of Washington to give Maryland one of its Air National Guard Squadrons.

If the city met their request, Maryland would not oppose the upcoming vote of a bill that the city needs to pass regarding federally owned land.

Are F-16 fighter Jets being negotiated to prevent an NFL team from leaving Maryland and returning to the District of Columbia?

Is this a prime example of what is wrong with American elected officials today?

The District of Columbia wants a bill to pass, making it more possible for the Commanders to return to the city.

If passed, the plans could go forward, the site could be redeveloped and a new stadium could be built on the very hallowed grounds of RFK Stadium where the Redskins won five NFC championships and three Super Bowls.

Enter the state of Maryland, saying this would be an unfair advantage for the District in regaining the team from Maryland. The Commanders presently play in Landover at Northwest Stadium.

Are there some powerful politicians in Maryland considering lowering protections designed to prevent attacks on our nation’s capital? And all for the sake of attempting to keep an NFL team in your state?

Would city officials actually consider the Commanders worth losing some of their protection?

How in the world did we get to where elected officials today would propose such in negotiations?

Fortier reports that Senate Majority Leader, Democrat Chuck Schumer (NY), is involved in the deal. Also reported by Fortier was that Schumer had already met with Commanders owner Josh Harris and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.

Whenever I am surprised by the actions of those we elect to be wise leaders for us, I am reminded of wise words of wisdom from Thomas Sowell.

“No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems—of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.”  Thomas Sowell

Will the Harris Ownership Group eventually change the name?

One longtime Washington reporter believes ownership will eventually change the name.

Two older Redskins fans from the DMV got together on the “Kevin Sheehan Show” podcast. Wednesday.

Tom Friend grew up in Chevy Chase, Md., and went to Rolling Wood Elementary, as did Commanders’ new majority owner, Josh Harris and minority owner Mark Ein. Friend stated that his sister was in their class.

I recall Friend covering the Redskins as the beat writer for The Washington Post back in the late 1980s. He is now a writer for the Sports Business Journal.

Sheehan asked Friend regarding the “Commanders” team name.  He referenced that at one point, the franchise did attempt to move from Redskins to Warriors, but it was shot down.

Friend continued with an objection, “I don’t know why. You look at what the Chiefs fans do, and the Braves fans do, and you think, ‘What is the problem?'”

“I had someone else tell me they (Harris Ownership Group) are looking at it now. More than look at it, they are going to do it at some point. It’s just a matter of when. I am not reporting this. I am just telling you what I hear from people close to the situation.”

Friend told Sheehan that Dan Snyder got rid of Redskins quickly, changing the name, so why couldn’t they get rid of this name that virtually very few in the fan base likes? He went as far as saying, “No one likes it; get the heck rid of it!”

When Sheehan asked if Friend’s sources are “in the know,” Friend instantly responded, “Somewhat in the know, for sure, for sure, absolutely, 100 percent.”

Friend continued, “This was always a franchise that did nothing but celebrate Native Americans. I went to RFK my entire life from six years old, and not once did I ever Tomahawk chop or do the war chant. All we said was, ‘Hail to the Redskins!’ In all seriousness, there was no mocking going on.”

Of course, Friend is correct; the hypocrisy is evident. But the bigger news was Friend saying the Harris ownership group is already discussing changing the Commanders’ team name in the future.

Should we be surprised? The Harris Ownership Group has been impressively ahead of the game, and in time, they are going to get this right as well.

How Kim Mulkey reacted to The Washington Post’s in-depth profile ahead of LSU’s Sweet 16 game

Kim Mulkey has commented on The Washington Post feature story about her career.

Right after The Washington Post dropped its feature story Saturday on LSU women’s basketball coach Kim Mulkey, she questioned the timing of its release.

Before the profile was published, Mulkey to call it a “hit piece” during a press conference last weekend and to threaten a lawsuit against the paper if it published anything she thought was untrue. The feature story by Washington Post reporter Kent Babb skewed more toward a thorough portrait of a great but complicated coach, rather than an explosive bombshell report. But Mulkey still seemed defensive about when asked about it.

Reacting to it in an interview with ESPN’s Holly Rowe, Mulkey questioned why the story was published Saturday not long before LSU’s Sweet 16 game against LSU. For timeliness, it’s common in journalism to publish big features around major events related to the subject of the story.

“Are you really surprised by the timing of it?” Mulkey asked Rowe. “I can tell you I haven’t read it; [I] don’t know that I will read it. I’ll leave that up to my attorneys.” 

We’re not sure if Mulkey will ever comment on the feature story, as she will likely continue to point to her legal team for an answer.

[lawrence-auto-related count=3 tag=78332]

Washington Post releases profile of LSU women’s basketball coach Kim Mulkey

While some former players were critical of Kim Mulkey’s style, the profile didn’t feature any new allegations against the LSU coach.

After a week of speculation and a cloud hanging over the LSU women’s basketball program amid its NCAA tournament run, The Washington Post finally released its profile (subscription required) of coach [autotag]Kim Mulkey[/autotag] on Saturday morning ahead of the Tigers’ Sweet 16 game against UCLA.

The profile, reported on for more than two years by Kent Babb, wasn’t exactly the “hit piece” that some expected. It focused mostly on Mulkey’s career history and relationships with players, and it doesn’t feature any new allegations against the coach, who has been no stranger to controversy throughout her career.

Mulkey is painted in the piece as a coach who is respected for her effectiveness by her former players, though they are often critical of her management and disciplinary style.

[autotag]Angel Reese[/autotag], who was suspended earlier this season for four games, was the subject of one section of the profile in which Mulkey apparently told a supporter via email last season that Reese was left off an awards list due to her GPA. In another email, she complained that Reese is one of several players who “stay on that social media crap.”

Reese did not provide comment for the story from The Washington Post.

Much of the story centers around Mulkey’s alleged discomfort with her players’ sexualities. This isn’t a new allegation; in 2013, former Baylor star Brittney Griner alleged that Mulkey advised players to keep quiet about their sexualities.

Several other former Baylor players went on the record with The Washington Post to echo those allegations, adding that Mulkey would often comment negatively on the way players dressed or wore their hair.

In the article, former LSU star [autotag]Alexis Morris[/autotag] takes issue with that characterization of Mulkey.

“Coach Mulkey is not homophobic,” Morris said definitively, per Babb.

Mulkey, who in a recent press conference threatened legal action against the newspaper if it published a “false story” about her, declined comment multiple times for the story, though Babb was in contact with her attorneys, as shown in the profile.

She was asked by ESPN’s Holly Rowe about the post ahead of Saturday’s game and said that she hadn’t read it and probably wouldn’t, though she said she wasn’t surprised by the timing.

With The Washington Post story now published, the Tigers seek to put the distraction behind them and return to the Elite Eight in back-to-back seasons for the first time since 2007-08.

Contact/Follow us @LSUTigersWire on Twitter, and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Louisiana State news, notes, and opinions.

Follow Tyler to continue the conversation on Twitter: @TylerNettuno

Saints are likelier to extend Demario Davis’ contract than trade him

The Washington Post’s Jason La Canfora reports that the Saints are seeking to trade linebacker Demario Davis, but he’s likelier to sign an extension with New Orleans:

Could the New Orleans Saints trade Demario Davis? That’s what Jason La Canfora is reporting for the Washington Post, chalking it up to the team’s complicated salary cap situation.

“The Saints are pushing to find a trade partner for cornerback Marshon Lattimore and linebacker Demario Davis, two linchpins of their defense, according to people in the industry,” La Canfora wrote.

Davis currently has a salary cap hit north of $18.1 million, third-highest on the team, and trading him would only save about $4.9 million.  He’s the NFL’s oldest starting linebacker at 35 but he’s won four consecutive spots on the Associated Press’ All-Pro team, with back-to-back appearances at the Pro Bowl Games. He hasn’t slowed down yet.

If they’re so worried about the cap (and they aren’t; New Orleans’ reported moves have them in the red by just $10.9 million) the Saints would save almost twice as month money with a standard restructure: $8.09 million. And they’d still have Davis on the roster. He is entering the final year of his deal so there’s a risk of him leaving a lot of dead money behind next year by taking that route.

Which brings us to the possibility of an extension. Cutting a new deal with Davis would save even more money (around $8.6 million) by redoing his contract and spreading his already-guaranteed money out while insuring he’ll get to retire in black and gold. That’s the approach they took with Tyrann Mathieu (and Cameron Jordan last summer), and it makes sense to use the same mechanisms with Davis. He’s an important leader and playmaker on their defense.

You should never say never in the NFL, but the money alone makes trading Davis a bad idea for the Saints. Combine that with his contract status, his still-impressive level of play, and the options available to them and it’s tough to draw the same conclusions La Canfora came away with. The only certainty is that Davis can’t be playing for New Orleans this year as his contract is currently written. Whether it’s another restructure, extension, or something else, something’s got to give.

[lawrence-auto-related count=4]

Commanders forced to go inside the bubble; Howell up and down

Some good and bad from Sam Howell as the Commanders finished up minicamp.

[connatix div_id=”3f8b015acdd24c648befc5d5dac47469″ player_id=”afe1e038-d3c2-49c0-922d-6511a229f69c” cid=”7cbcea0d-4ce2-4c75-9a8d-fbe02a192c24″]

The Commanders had to practice indoors Thursday, closing their mandatory workouts for the week.

Due to wildfire smoke from fires in Canada, MLB postponed the Nats home game, which had been scheduled for Thursday afternoon, as local authorities warned residents in the DMV to stay inside, also recommending their pets be brought inside.

Consequently, the Commanders took their OTA workout to the bubble in Ashburn.

With the limited space inside the bubble (remember the roster is currently at 90, while during the season, it is reduced to 53 plus a practice squad, some vets were given time off, such as Kendall Fuller and Charles Leno.

Sam Fortier of The Washington Post reported that during 7-on-7 and 11-on-11 in the red zone work, quarterback Sam Howell was both up and down, throwing interceptions and touchdowns.

When asked about Howell being the starter heading into training camp, Fortier expressed head coach Ron Rivera had stated that Howell had still accomplished/shown enough during the OTAs that he will indeed be the QB1 at the beginning of training camp.

Fortier declared perhaps Rivera was playing up his praise for his young quarterback a bit, but Fortier also sincerely felt that “it is Sam Howell’s job to lose. I don’t think he has gained or lost standing during these workouts. It is really hard to say Jacoby Brissett is nipping at the heels of Sam Howell at this point.”

Commanders have shown some real progress in two areas

Emmanuel Forbes continues to be a bright spot for the Commanders.

A local reporter believes confidently the Commanders have made real progress in two key areas of the roster this offseason.

The Washington Post Commanders reporter Sam Fortier went as far as Thursday on the Craig “Hoffman Show” on The Team 980 to suggest that if the Commanders were playing the Vikings and wanted to shadow wide receiver Justin Jefferson, it would not be Kendall Fuller, given the assignment. It wouldn’t even be Benjamin St-Juste.

No, Fortier declared it would be rookie Emmanuel Forbes who has yet to play his initial NFL regular-season game. “If you want to be CB1 by that definition, then I think (Forbes) is your guy right now. He has been impressive. In terms of minicamp for a rookie? He has looked pretty dang good.”

Hoffman then transitioned, “The offensive line is still a massive area of concern.” He asked Fortier, “Have you seen anything to ease your concern in that position group this Spring?”

Fortier’s response was noteworthy. “If you want to say that they are old, unathletic and immobile like they were last year at guard with Andrew Norwell and Trai Turner. Then, I have seen things to boost my confidence. Saahdiq Charles looks bigger and stronger, and Sam Cosmi is going to transition nicely into guard.”

Fortier continued; however, he did not feel Rivera was as confident in the offensive line as he would like to be. Hoffman referred to how confident coaches were in 2022 of their offensive line despite its ability being much less than in 2020-21. Hoffman suggested this is good in that it shows they are more aware of what they actually have and don’t have on the offensive line now than in 2022.

 

Los Angeles Rams propose to have roughing the passer penalties reviewed

The Los Angeles Rams have proposed to have all roughing the passer calls reviewed but does it have any support?

The NFL is a quarterback-friendly league and has been known to go to extreme lengths to protect players at this position. With quarterbacks being the most valuable and often highest-paid players on their teams, the league has added several rules to prevent them from being hit too hard or too low by defensive players.

Regardless of how you feel about these rules, they are designed to help reduce the risk of injury to quarterbacks and keep them on the field.

One of the most heavily scrutinized rules that protect the quarterbacks is the “roughing the passer” penalty, which by official league standards is:

“Any physical acts against a player who is in a passing posture (i.e. before, during, or after a pass) which, in the Referee’s judgment, are unwarranted by the circumstances of the play will be called as fouls.”

This rule has left many players and fans scratching their heads, but according to Mark Maske of the Washington Post, the rule may be subject to review.

According to Judy Battista, the Los Angeles Rams were the team who proposed making all roughing-the-passer calls reviewable.

It’s too early to know if the NFL Owners would approve this new proposal, but it according to Maske it appears as if the competition committee doesn’t appear to be in favor of the change.

We’ve often seen teams obtain a second chance on a crucial drive or even a game-winning drive because of these penalties. Teams may now have the opportunity to review and have them overturned.

One thing to note about this rule and the potential proposal is that in the NFL’s Rule Summary, it’s truly subjective and up to the referee’s judgment.

“When in doubt about a roughness call or potentially dangerous tactic against the quarterback, the Referee should always call roughing the passer”

One thing that could put pressure on the NFL to make a change is the XFL allowing anything to be reviewed once per game. They also give access to the replay booth with the head of officiating Dean Blandino.

While the goal of the replay system is to make accurate calls and ensure fairness on the field, it has been plagued by controversies. Time will tell if this proposal gets approved, but if it does, it will probably just add more frustration to an already broken system, which is the NFL Replay system

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqGxQ2v1BLo]

Greg Norman suggests Rory McIlroy has been ‘brainwashed,’ Jack Nicklaus is a ‘hypocrite,’ Tiger Woods was offered ‘high nine digits’ by Saudi-backed LIV Golf

In a story by the Washington Post, Greg Norman discusses Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus and Rory McIlroy.

Greg Norman, the public face of the breakaway LIV Golf series, says the executives and agents who currently run golf “are conspiring against LIV to protect an antiquated system that prevents golfers from realizing their own power and worth amid a global movement of athlete empowerment.”

In a story by the Washington Post titled, “The Shark is on the attack again,” Norman also criticized Rory McIlroy and others, suggesting they’ve been “brainwashed” against the LIV movement. McIlroy has been vocal in speaking out in favor of the PGA Tour.

Last month, at a media event to promote the first LIV Golf Series event in London, which is scheduled to tee off this week, Norman, who is the chief executive of the LIV Golf Invitational, funded primarily by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, appeared to downplay the 2018 killing of Saudi Arabian journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

“Everybody has owned up to it, right?” Norman said, according to London-based newspaper The Times. “It has been spoken about, from what I’ve read, going on what you guys reported. Take ownership, no matter what it is. Look, we’ve all made mistakes and you just want to learn from those mistakes and how you can correct them going forward.”

In the Washington Post article, he appears to take a similar stance.

“I’m not in this thing for Khashoggi or anything like that,” he says. “I’m in here because of the game of golf. That’s what I care about. If I focus on the game of golf and don’t get dragged into this other stuff, that’s my priority.”

Asked about his conscience, Norman again looks bewildered.

“Every country,” he says, “has got a cross to bear.”

Norman says that LIV Golf approached representatives of Tiger Woods, hoping to woo him over from the PGA Tour. Woods has publicly confirmed his commitment to the PGA Tour on several occasions, but according to the Washington Post story:

“The tour’s consultant also pitched representatives for Woods, who once staged his own public coup with the PGA Tour over marketing rights. Norman says Woods turned down a deal that was ‘mind-blowingly enormous; we’re talking about high nine digits.’ “

Norman also called Jack Nicklaus a hypocrite after recently speaking out against LIV. According to a report in May by Sports Illustrated, a complaint was filed May 13 against the golf legend in the Supreme Court of the State of New York by New York businessman Howard Milstein, executive chairman of the Nicklaus Companies who also oversees Golf Magazine and Golf.com. The suit alleges tortious interference, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty, alleging among other things Nicklaus had negotiations with the Saudi Arabia-funded Public Investment Fund, the backers of the LIV Golf Series.

Nicklaus says he told LIV on two occasions he wasn’t interested. Norman says that’s not exactly true, claiming that “Nicklaus attended a LIV presentation and later wrote in an email that the new tour had his blessing.”

“Quote-unquote, he said: ‘This is good for our game. If it’s good for the game of golf, it’s good by me,’ ” Norman says. “So, you want the facts? You’ve got the facts. Know what you said before you open your mouth.”

Money is the driving force behind the LIV Golf Series. Norman insists that first payday after the London event will be a game-changer.

“The players who decide to come on board, God bless them,” he told the Post. “They’re going to make a lot of money.”

USA TODAY’s Cydney Henderson and Golfweek’s Steve DiMeglio contributed to this article.

[mm-video type=playlist id=01es6rjnsp3c84zkm6 player_id=01evcfxp4q8949fs1e image=https://golfweek.usatoday.com/wp-content/plugins/mm-video/images/playlist-icon.png]