Speaker 1: You are listening to The Dan Patrick Show on Fox
Speaker 1: Sports Radio. Greetings and welcome inside the Dan Patrick Show
Speaker 1: here at Fox Sports Radio. Jason Smith and Doug Gottlieb
Speaker 1: in for Dan and the Dan Nets today. Happy Tuesday,
Speaker 1: Big day today for you. We have so many big
Speaker 1: stories coming out of the National Football You've got Mark
Speaker 1: Maski from the Washington Post. He's gonna stop by with
Speaker 1: us in a few minutes. Major League Baseball is trying
Speaker 1: to figure their situation out as they get rolling this year.
Speaker 1: Their schedule came out, but they got problems getting off
Speaker 1: the ground. The NBA also try to deal with their
Speaker 1: issues as players are going to report to the bubble.
Speaker 1: Dwight Howard is actually in for the Lakers now, which
Speaker 1: is a really big deal. We talked to Rick Bucker
Speaker 1: about that on the show a day ago, that the
Speaker 1: Lakers really need Dwight Howard there and Dwight Howard's going
Speaker 1: to be there. So all this stuff and more we
Speaker 1: have throughout the show today, but absolutely the big story
Speaker 1: of the day and brought to us first by a
Speaker 1: liquor store employee in Kansas City, Patrick Mahomes and his
Speaker 1: five hundred and three million dollar extension. What the deal
Speaker 1: could be worth in total value is five hundred and
Speaker 1: three million. But Doug, a woman in Kansas City, a
Speaker 1: liquor store manager, tweeted out yesterday about an hour before
Speaker 1: the news broke, a front office employee of the Chiefs
Speaker 1: came in to buy six bottles of champagne. I asked
Speaker 1: him what it was for. He said, it's not the
Speaker 1: Chris Jones extension. So how great is that? That's part
Speaker 1: of the conversation. Oh, it's Chris Jones game. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: it's something bigger. She tweets out, it's the Mahomes deal,
Speaker 1: and an hour later, Adam Schefter tweets it out. So
Speaker 1: a liquor store in Kansas City is our source for
Speaker 1: NFL information. That's awesome. It's an amazing It's that's it's
Speaker 1: super fun, right, and I like people that pay attention
Speaker 1: to things and also speaks to me what what it's
Speaker 1: like to play football in Kansas City. You know what
Speaker 1: it's like to matter. I actually think that's part of
Speaker 1: this story. Like there's a look when you see the
Speaker 1: number and you know deal could be earth up to
Speaker 1: five hundred and three million dollars. I talked to several
Speaker 1: NFL front office guys like, you know, it's kind of
Speaker 1: a team friendly deal, and you're like, wait, what, Like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean if he did a series of one year deals,
Speaker 1: you know, and anybody can walk in could get essentially
Speaker 1: four hundred and fifty million dollars over that length of
Speaker 1: time for how good he is at the position that
Speaker 1: he plays. It's actually a team friendly Like we can
Speaker 1: go into it. It's kind of a team friendly deal.
Speaker 1: But why and why would so? Why would Pat Mahomes
Speaker 1: do that? And I think the liquor store employee understanding
Speaker 1: the Chris Jones thing and under that that's I just
Speaker 1: there's something different and special about being the biggest fish
Speaker 1: in a smaller pond, and I think that one of
Speaker 1: the things that some of these guys that chase it
Speaker 1: start to understand. Like I would guess that Kevin Durant
Speaker 1: is going to experience this in Brooklyn for sure. I
Speaker 1: don't know how much he experienced it in Gold State,
Speaker 1: because even though that's a big pond, the Warriors were
Speaker 1: a really big team. But there's something specially to everyone
Speaker 1: in the town understand knowing who you are and what
Speaker 1: you're about and wearing those team colors and knowing what's
Speaker 1: going on a team like that's actually really cool. And
Speaker 1: I think that's a big part of Pat Mahomes loves
Speaker 1: playing in Kansas City, loves playing for you to read,
Speaker 1: likes the organization, loves the offense. But more than anything,
Speaker 1: like I just Kansas City's my jam, and I think
Speaker 1: it all works. And that actually is part and parcel
Speaker 1: of the story. Plausa Liquor is the store. Katie Camlin
Speaker 1: is the manager's name, tweets this out, then deletes it
Speaker 1: because she feels weird, like, Oh, I don't know, should
Speaker 1: I do this? Should I not? Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 1: And then an hour later, Adam Schefter has the news
Speaker 1: shortly after you and I came off the air yesterday,
Speaker 1: and then she tweets out, holy blank, I beat Schefter.
Speaker 1: And then she puts the tweet back up and says, hey,
Speaker 1: come buy your liquor for me. It Plausa Liquor, wear
Speaker 1: a mask and go chiefs. So this is where I'm
Speaker 1: gonna need to go to get my you know, my
Speaker 1: my football scoops. I'm gonna have to visit a liquor
Speaker 1: store very frequently. Uh in Kansas in Kansas City, and
Speaker 1: maybe I'll start here in LA Maybe I'll go somewhere
Speaker 1: They're gonna have a scoop on If I had gone
Speaker 1: to a liquor store the other day, I could have
Speaker 1: gotten a scoop on a big story. I mean, who knows,
Speaker 1: I got Guys. It's like in the movies when cops
Speaker 1: have to go to strip clubs for some reason, like
Speaker 1: always once they have to go, Oh, we gotta find
Speaker 1: out this information where oh they work at you know,
Speaker 1: girls girls, girls down on the boulevard. Okay, let's go.
Speaker 1: I'm may have to do that. Just start going to
Speaker 1: liquor stores and just asking random questions about LA sports. Hey,
Speaker 1: so what's going on in the bubble everything? Okay in Orlando? Yeah,
Speaker 1: here's what I hear, and then I get all the scoops. Yeah. No, look,
Speaker 1: I mean there is something. Somebody will be you know,
Speaker 1: the the bus boy or the you know, the the
Speaker 1: room service guy in the bubble will will know more
Speaker 1: than Malika Andrews will, right, I mean just just just
Speaker 1: will h and be willing to share. Um. I'm waiting
Speaker 1: for the gottleiap stories from when you played ball overseas.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm waiting for the the the the employe. Well
Speaker 1: that was that, honestly is one of the parts that's
Speaker 1: most difficult about when you play in a college town,
Speaker 1: about adjusting to life as a professional when you're playing overseas, right, Like,
Speaker 1: you know, I just I remember playing in Russia and
Speaker 1: we won the Russian Championship and being on the back
Speaker 1: of a flatbed and you know, they're blowing music and
Speaker 1: we're doing like some parade and most people didn't know
Speaker 1: who the hell we were, right Whereas when I was
Speaker 1: like in Stillwater, Oklahoma, I'm a household name, and it's
Speaker 1: it's a different adjustment. I don't know, I just I
Speaker 1: would Kansas City is as close as you're going to
Speaker 1: get to a college town feel for the NFL, you know,
Speaker 1: and they were always the little engine that couldn't. They
Speaker 1: would always find a way to lose, not just losing
Speaker 1: the playoffs, but lose at home and usually lose with
Speaker 1: a lead and lose because they were super conservative. And
Speaker 1: now they you know, they do the opposite, and they
Speaker 1: do something the opposite of being conservative. They have a
Speaker 1: perfectly good quarterback and Alex Smith, who's a perfectly good dude,
Speaker 1: right and he can clearly get you to the playoffs
Speaker 1: and got the Niners, should have gotten to the super Bowl.
Speaker 1: And it wasn't his fault they lost the Saints. Right,
Speaker 1: He wasn't the one who couldn't feel a pun or
Speaker 1: a kick. But but he's there was nothing wrong with
Speaker 1: Alex Smith. He didn't use his wide receivers. But there,
Speaker 1: and there's a ceiling there, and so they they trade
Speaker 1: up and get Pat Mahomes high ceiling, a little bit
Speaker 1: of a low floor by somebody, some people's estimation. They
Speaker 1: do what no one or people don't want to do anymore,
Speaker 1: which is sit a guy for essentially his entire first year.
Speaker 1: Then they trade away their starting quarterback, give him, hand
Speaker 1: him the keys. And not only did they they almost
Speaker 1: get there the first year, and a lot of times
Speaker 1: what happens is when you get there a year too early,
Speaker 1: sometimes those expectations become too great. Then they get back
Speaker 1: the next year and oh yeah, by the way, they
Speaker 1: get behind against Houston and they're down twenty four nothing
Speaker 1: at home, and they didn't flinch. And that's the reason
Speaker 1: that you that that game is the reason that you
Speaker 1: get Pat Mahomes because he didn't really play well in
Speaker 1: the Super Bowl, he didn't for two and out three.
Speaker 1: Collers didn't play particularly well. Even the throne of the
Speaker 1: Tyreek Hill was behind him. I mean, that's not his
Speaker 1: best football game. But the reason that they moved Mountains
Speaker 1: and moved Alex Smith out was down twenty four nothing.
Speaker 1: They knew he could bring him back, and he did,
Speaker 1: and now they reward him with a massive, massive contract.
Speaker 1: It's a cool story. Patrick Mahomes is now a guy
Speaker 1: that's going to turn Kansas City into the new New England,
Speaker 1: right because before Brady and Belichick show up. But you
Speaker 1: know the Patriots. Look, they play in a big market
Speaker 1: in Boston. But was New England really what one of
Speaker 1: the big hubs of the NFL. It wasn't. It's in
Speaker 1: a big city, but it wasn't a place where you
Speaker 1: went to four. Okay, Well look and now look what
Speaker 1: they've done. He keeps signing Brady, He stays there for
Speaker 1: almost all of his career. Before he can't take anymore
Speaker 1: he goes and signed to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. But
Speaker 1: now New England is mentioned, like when you mentioned the
Speaker 1: Dallas Cowboys and the Pittsburgh Steelers, is one of those
Speaker 1: heritage teams that hey, okay, when we talk NFL, this
Speaker 1: is who we talk about. And now when we talk
Speaker 1: football for the next ten years, this is what we
Speaker 1: talk about. We talk about the Kansas City Chiefs because
Speaker 1: now clearly they have signed a guy that is going
Speaker 1: to bring them too, maybe three more Super Bowls, you know,
Speaker 1: winning a Super Bowl already at twenty four years old.
Speaker 1: They have bought that kind of relevancy for at least
Speaker 1: a decade. And you know, the funny bit about his contract, Doug,
Speaker 1: is that you're right, the first you always have to
Speaker 1: look at the first few years of a contract, right
Speaker 1: the big money is in the headline, right, richest deal
Speaker 1: in team sports. It could be worth up to five
Speaker 1: hundred million dollars and most likely Mahomes is going to
Speaker 1: see a good chunk most, if not all, of that money.
Speaker 1: But in a few years, this deal is going to
Speaker 1: be irrelevant, right like all quarterback deals are all. Look
Speaker 1: at this deal, you know, you go back and go, okay, wow,
Speaker 1: the Kirk Cousins deal looks pretty good right now, because
Speaker 1: you know, he's a guy that gives you thirty touchdowns
Speaker 1: and ten picks a year, and well, that's a pretty
Speaker 1: good deal when we all thought it was, oh, this
Speaker 1: is crazy, this is all over overwhelming, and why would
Speaker 1: you give Kirk and all that money. He's only getting
Speaker 1: about twenty million dollars more than Carson Wentzwood over the
Speaker 1: course next four years. But the most interesting part of
Speaker 1: this deal to me is that he's got up like
Speaker 1: he's got a clause built into the deal that like
Speaker 1: the next two years of his deal kick in when
Speaker 1: he's on the roster in the spring. Like usually you
Speaker 1: get for players, it's okay if they're on the roster
Speaker 1: by such and such a date, their money is guaranteed
Speaker 1: for the year. Well, Mahomes has that like rolling for years,
Speaker 1: like his twenty twenty one money is getting. If he's
Speaker 1: on the roster beginning of twenty twenty one, his money
Speaker 1: is guaranteed through twenty twenty three, and then twenty twenty two,
Speaker 1: it's through twenty twenty four and then so it's it's like,
Speaker 1: if you want to get rid of him or you
Speaker 1: want to move on, it's hard because you're locked into
Speaker 1: him for two more years because you kept him on
Speaker 1: the roster. Let's face it, Mahomes isn't going anywhere for
Speaker 1: the next few years. So while the money is really
Speaker 1: good for Kansas City, you look at that and go boy.
Speaker 1: You know, it's hard to look at something like that
Speaker 1: and go, boy, that's really ingenious that. You know, if
Speaker 1: if guy have a bad year or two, or if
Speaker 1: I yet I'm still you still got me. It's a
Speaker 1: kin on some levels to the rollover contract. Right, it's
Speaker 1: a kin to the rollover contract. And um, you know,
Speaker 1: so the rollover. But but look, the he's gonna make
Speaker 1: as much as he's not gonna make a ton in
Speaker 1: terms of salary and quote bonuses the next two years
Speaker 1: he does. I believe by next March he's gonna get
Speaker 1: like one hundred million dollars because that's the way these
Speaker 1: deals are structured, where you get you have to it
Speaker 1: goes into an escrow account and you actually get it early,
Speaker 1: and so it should end up earning him way more money, um,
Speaker 1: way more money than it actually says on paper. One
Speaker 1: hundred million dollars a lot of money. Anyway, you get
Speaker 1: that money early rather than paid out over time. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, the opposite of essentially a Bobby bonilla. And
Speaker 1: you like, look, he's gonna make a ton of money.
Speaker 1: I can only tell you though that um twelve years
Speaker 1: is no matter what it looks like at the back
Speaker 1: end of that deal, it's too long. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: a and and that you only sign that. There's a
Speaker 1: bunch of layers to this. Okay. So for people who
Speaker 1: don't remember Jerry McGuire, right, Jerry McGuire on some level
Speaker 1: was was based loosely, loosely on an agent and they
Speaker 1: actually used his office for you know, you know, shooting
Speaker 1: part of it. And that agent was a guy who
Speaker 1: is Lee Steinberg, who was the quarterback agent. And this
Speaker 1: was a Lee Steinberg deal. And again I'm not being
Speaker 1: critical of Lee per se because it is a good deal.
Speaker 1: That are some quirks to it that that that do
Speaker 1: mandate he's going to get more guaranteed than some traditional contracts.
Speaker 1: But twelve years is really really long, right, ten year
Speaker 1: deal plus two years at on, that's twelve years. That
Speaker 1: gives away any sort of leverage of being a free agent.
Speaker 1: You know, Annie Reid eventually does retire. Who the head
Speaker 1: coaches he's not, He couldn't, he won't really or shouldn't
Speaker 1: really have a say because he's not going anywhere. It's
Speaker 1: a no trade clause. This is him signing up to
Speaker 1: be an a chief for life, which sounds good into
Speaker 1: a microphone, but in business, it's not a great business practice.
Speaker 1: So those numbers are super inflated because it helps. It's
Speaker 1: Lee Steinberg saying I'm back now. Only did I sign
Speaker 1: the Pat Mahomes and did I get him the biggest
Speaker 1: contract in the league. I got him the biggest contract
Speaker 1: in the history of professional sports. Meanwhile, most people in
Speaker 1: the sports, like, dude, a twelve year contract is dumb.
Speaker 1: You shouldn't do that because this guy should be on
Speaker 1: the market in four maybe five years and he can
Speaker 1: make even more money. It does signify that Pat Mahomes
Speaker 1: is super happy. He loves Kansas City, he does love
Speaker 1: playing for Andy Reid, he does love the organization, and
Speaker 1: now he gets to take care of everybody. But that
Speaker 1: those ridiculous numbers of twelve years and five hundred and
Speaker 1: three million dollars a potential that's simply to help the
Speaker 1: agent recruit the next quarterback class in the next uh
Speaker 1: in this football season if we have one, yeah, I
Speaker 1: would say that you look at the next probably six
Speaker 1: years at this like, look at this until he's thirty
Speaker 1: years old. Right, because at some point two things are
Speaker 1: going to happen. Number One, he's going to look like
Speaker 1: he's not not not quite a bargain, but it's gonna be. Boy,
Speaker 1: look at all these other guys that have passed Homes.
Speaker 1: It will happen in the next few years. There will
Speaker 1: be other guys that are signed to contracts, and there
Speaker 1: will be players all look at look at where the
Speaker 1: Mahomes contract is now. But there's that murky language of
Speaker 1: being able to opt out and renegotiate, which I'm sure
Speaker 1: is what's gonna come up at some point when Mahomes
Speaker 1: reaches thirty, if he's won another Super Bowl or two
Speaker 1: by then. So I mean, look, nobody ever really sees
Speaker 1: the end of these deals, no one, no one ever
Speaker 1: sees them. It's just it's just a way, as you're
Speaker 1: right to say, hey, look at this contract that I've done,
Speaker 1: So this will be redone at some point. And you know,
Speaker 1: I I go back to the Durrell Reevas contract with
Speaker 1: the Patriots when he signed for two years and it
Speaker 1: was like sixteen million dollars a year. Well, the first
Speaker 1: year was twelve million, and the second year was worth
Speaker 1: like like twenty million, which was not guaranteed at all,
Speaker 1: which was only so Revas could say I'm the highest
Speaker 1: paid cornerback in the NFL, because you know, that's all
Speaker 1: all cornerbacks they so want to fight over who gets
Speaker 1: the most money, who gets everything. I mean that that
Speaker 1: that meant nothing except for the headline of Revas gets
Speaker 1: the richest deal. You know, it makes the most money.
Speaker 1: You know for a cornerback year, he's averaging sixteen million
Speaker 1: dollars a year, when really most of that money was
Speaker 1: never was never gonna come. So you're right, it is.
Speaker 1: It is going to be part so Lee Steinberg can say, hey,
Speaker 1: look this is what I've done. I can continue to
Speaker 1: do this. It's business. But really, in the next four
Speaker 1: or five years, this is going to wind up being redone.
Speaker 1: But but I really just can't get over the protection
Speaker 1: that he has of having a bad year or getting injured.
Speaker 1: And it's are you're really gonna cut Pat mahomes? Are
Speaker 1: you really gonna try to move on? If you really
Speaker 1: want to move on, you're still paying him for two
Speaker 1: more calendar years. Well we got to keep paying him.
Speaker 1: So it's almost a way, it's almost a way to say, Okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: this is kind of team friendly. But in the end,
Speaker 1: if you want to get out that this has got
Speaker 1: to really be something. So I mean, that's that's something
Speaker 1: I wonder if you're gonna wind up seeing more and
Speaker 1: more of this in the future, because I always thought
Speaker 1: when Kirk Cousins signed, well, that changes the game. Every
Speaker 1: quarterback is gonna get guaranteed money for his entire length
Speaker 1: of his contract. I really did. I think, Okay, once
Speaker 1: you gave it to Kirk Cousins, all these guys coming
Speaker 1: up that are better than he is, or they're going
Speaker 1: to start getting that kind of gonna be a three
Speaker 1: or four year deal. Then yeah, if they do it
Speaker 1: three or four year deal, they will, but they won't
Speaker 1: do it on a twelve year deal, and that they're
Speaker 1: there in lies the rub. Are you surprised it was
Speaker 1: twelve years? I mean when I saw Mahomes, I'm thinking,
Speaker 1: this is going to be three or four years. It's
Speaker 1: going to be you know, all kinds of money and guaranteed.
Speaker 1: And I really was surprised when it was this long. Yes,
Speaker 1: I was. I was surprised, But you know, then I
Speaker 1: look at how it's structured. It is there's a ton
Speaker 1: like the money at the back end is you know,
Speaker 1: you're talking fifty sixty million dollars per year when you
Speaker 1: go kind of all in, and so that's when a
Speaker 1: huge and but we don't we don't know what the
Speaker 1: financial landscape of the NFL will look like then, but
Speaker 1: we have a pretty good sense that it'll be more.
Speaker 1: Guys will be making more than they are now. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I was, I was surprised. But that's how, you know,
Speaker 1: that's how these deals get to be look get to
Speaker 1: look very very big. And you know, the question is
Speaker 1: always when can they get out of it? If they
Speaker 1: want to get out of it? And as much as
Speaker 1: you say we don't ever want to get out of it,
Speaker 1: you know you gotta think worst case scenario, right, worst
Speaker 1: case scenario. The guy isn't you know, I don't know,
Speaker 1: it's not doesn't seem to be in his personality to
Speaker 1: get lazy. But if he got lazy, if he got
Speaker 1: to be a pain in the butt, if there was
Speaker 1: just too much. But I think he feels like the
Speaker 1: Steph Curry of the NFL. Right, he feels like the
Speaker 1: Steph Curry of the NFL. In you have a franchise
Speaker 1: that you know fifty years ago won a Super Bowl,
Speaker 1: you know, is forty years in between NBA titles for
Speaker 1: the Warriors. He's son of a professional athlete, exceptionally likable,
Speaker 1: He's got this just joy of playing the game sort
Speaker 1: of way. You know, just seems like a good dude
Speaker 1: that you'd want to hang with. So, yeah, I'm surprised
Speaker 1: it's that long, but I think when you know you
Speaker 1: have Steph Curry, you're willing to do whatever it takes
Speaker 1: to make them part of your team for life. Twitter
Speaker 1: at how about a frescaut Doug at Gottlieb Show, Jason Smith,
Speaker 1: Doug Gottlieb in for Dan and the Danets. Today we'll
Speaker 1: have much more on Patrick Mahomes's deal as the show unfolds,
Speaker 1: and coming up next, we got more for the National
Speaker 1: Football League as one team's last twenty four hours not
Speaker 1: at all what they'd be expecting under the white hot spotlight.
Speaker 1: That's coming up next. Keep it right here. This is
Speaker 1: Fox Sports Radio. Be sure to catch the live edition
Speaker 1: of The Dan Patrick Show week dayson nine am Eastern
Speaker 1: six am Pacific on Fox Sports Radio in the iHeart
Speaker 1: Radio app Fox Sports Radio. The Dan Patrick Show, Jason Smith,
Speaker 1: Doug Gottlieb in for Dan and the Danets today. Big
Speaker 1: stuff on Patrick Mahomes's extension. We have more on that.
Speaker 1: We have more on the big Deshaun Jackson story that's
Speaker 1: starting to come around in the next few minutes. But
Speaker 1: oh boy, was the last twenty four hours something for
Speaker 1: the Washington Redskins football team. As yesterday, Doug and I
Speaker 1: talked on the show a bit about President Trump's tweet
Speaker 1: about Bubba Wallace and NASCAR, saying that NASCAR and Bubba
Speaker 1: Wallace should apologize for the hoax that they put out there,
Speaker 1: that the noose was put in his garage. That was
Speaker 1: something Doug and I got into. And then after the
Speaker 1: show was over, President Trump decided to turn his attention
Speaker 1: to Washington and the Cleveland Indians teams as well, putting
Speaker 1: this out on Twitter saying, quote, they named teams out
Speaker 1: of strength, not weakness. But now the Washington Redskins and
Speaker 1: Cleveland Indians, two fabled sports franchises, look like they are
Speaker 1: going to be changing their names in order to be
Speaker 1: politically correct. Indians like Elizabeth Warren must be very angry
Speaker 1: right now. It's gonna get that in want again in
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren any time. I can joining us now on
Speaker 1: the hotline for more on this NFL reporter for the
Speaker 1: Washington Post Redskins insider Mark Maski, you can follow on
Speaker 1: Twitter at Mark Maski. So just another twenty four hours
Speaker 1: for you in DC, right, Mark, You know, this seems
Speaker 1: like it's been like this for about twenty years. But yeah, no,
Speaker 1: the last week, the last four or five days, especially
Speaker 1: if obviously been very very action packed, very different, you know,
Speaker 1: very provocative, and we'll sort of see where it goes.
Speaker 1: I think we can see where it's going now on
Speaker 1: the name. We'll have to see where it goes in
Speaker 1: terms of the minority partners of Daniel Snyder. But yeah,
Speaker 1: this is a very tumultuous time for the Redskins organization
Speaker 1: and it could be sort of a moment in time
Speaker 1: where we look back, where a lot of things change
Speaker 1: that's going to take this organization one way or the other. Mark.
Speaker 1: For the longest time, the fallback was, hey, look, White
Speaker 1: America can think this is a negative, but Native Americans
Speaker 1: actually have a positive view of Redskins as the team
Speaker 1: that represents them in the National Football League. I guess
Speaker 1: has that changed? And when did that change? You know?
Speaker 1: I think that changed about the time things changed for
Speaker 1: the country as a whole. I mean there were there
Speaker 1: are are things that were allowed to stand for a
Speaker 1: long time in this country that that that simply aren't
Speaker 1: allowed to stand anymore. We've seen that, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: with some of the monuments, with some of the names
Speaker 1: of other institutions. It's an approach that that that obviously
Speaker 1: took hold in this country after the death of George Floyd.
Speaker 1: It came to the NFL. We saw it come to
Speaker 1: the NFL with the video that Roger Goodell put out,
Speaker 1: with the renewed talk of Colin Kaepernick and whether he'll
Speaker 1: be on the team. And I think what you're seeing
Speaker 1: is Roger Goodell in the NFL trying to get on
Speaker 1: the right side of history because of what has happened
Speaker 1: in the country. And we can talk about, you know,
Speaker 1: where the motives pure on this or the motives you
Speaker 1: know sort of that's the that's good business now, that's
Speaker 1: the only way to do business now. You know, that's
Speaker 1: whether the motives were pure or not. You know, the
Speaker 1: outcome is that the NFL and Roger Goodell are trying
Speaker 1: to get on the correct side of history. And now
Speaker 1: despite those arguments that were made in the past on
Speaker 1: the Redskins name. We've seen the NFL become involved in
Speaker 1: this name change or the same change. It is going
Speaker 1: to happen. That's certainly the plan right now. We would
Speaker 1: take a very abrupt about face at the last minute
Speaker 1: by Dan Snyder for this not to happen. So, yes,
Speaker 1: all of those arguments that stood over time about that,
Speaker 1: and we're the arguments that allowed the name to stay
Speaker 1: what it was. While those arguments you know, don't carry
Speaker 1: the same way and are not allowed to stand anymore
Speaker 1: in the same way than a lot of institutions and
Speaker 1: a lot of names and a lot of symbols in
Speaker 1: this country that are allowed to stand for a long
Speaker 1: time no longer are valid and no longer allowed. Okay,
Speaker 1: but this isn't like like if we're just having an
Speaker 1: honest discussion and here's what happens is right, Like, you
Speaker 1: can people, because there's such a pushback the president and
Speaker 1: his rhetoric that anything he says becomes you know, you
Speaker 1: can't you can't agree with anything he says. But he
Speaker 1: isn't wrong, right Like the idea of the Redskins was
Speaker 1: never intended to be a slur it was intended to
Speaker 1: represent strength, whether it did or did not, that that
Speaker 1: is in fact the intent, and whether it's the Native
Speaker 1: Americans inside the helmet the hail to the Redskins like
Speaker 1: it was the intent? Or am I am I off
Speaker 1: in what I've been always been told? You know, that
Speaker 1: was always stated as the attent, that this was, that
Speaker 1: this was intended to honor Native Americans. That's what was said.
Speaker 1: Over and then you saw the polling over the years
Speaker 1: that the Redskins cited is saying this is this did
Speaker 1: not offend Native Americans. And some of the polling, you know,
Speaker 1: for example, what say, you know, I not attend. Native
Speaker 1: Americans say they're not offended about this. But then the
Speaker 1: question becomes, okay, what what percentage is okay to offend? Okay,
Speaker 1: if one out of ten Native Americans are offended by this,
Speaker 1: you know it, does that make it okay? And and
Speaker 1: again I think we I just go back to what
Speaker 1: I said before, We judge things by a certain standard
Speaker 1: for a long time. I just don't think that standard
Speaker 1: is allowed to stand in more and and and again,
Speaker 1: I don't think anyone can sort of make a valid
Speaker 1: argument that the Redskins in the NFL are doing this
Speaker 1: because they think it's the right thing to do. I mean,
Speaker 1: you look around and when did this happen. This happened
Speaker 1: because there was financial pressure exerted upon the Redskins sponsors,
Speaker 1: and then the sponsors turned around and exerted that pressure
Speaker 1: on the Redskins. So so that's what sort of pushed
Speaker 1: this along. So the discussion of what's right and wrong, uh,
Speaker 1: is not what ledsion led to the decision. But but
Speaker 1: to me again, all of those arguments that were made
Speaker 1: in the past where we're evaluated in one way before
Speaker 1: and now they're being evaluated in a much different way now.
Speaker 1: Mark you reported I'm going back to your Twitter account,
Speaker 1: your report at the Washington Post. When it comes to
Speaker 1: the aspect of the minority partners wanting out, this stems
Speaker 1: from the relationship with Daniel Sneider that they're they're they're
Speaker 1: unhappy being in a business with him, and this is
Speaker 1: why they want out. It's kind of separate from the
Speaker 1: name controversy. I mean, it's it's yes and no it
Speaker 1: I mean it's I think it's separate in the fact
Speaker 1: that that that this is a business decision being made
Speaker 1: among business partners who simply don't want to be with
Speaker 1: Dan Snider anymore. And it's not something that just happened, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, because you know, the timing was and we
Speaker 1: found out about the fact that the minority partners are
Speaker 1: doing this and trying to sell their shares and trying
Speaker 1: to break their ties from Dan Cider. At the same
Speaker 1: time we found out about the fact that the name
Speaker 1: is going to change, but that that doesn't tie those together.
Speaker 1: This has been sort of a long developing thing with
Speaker 1: the minority partners. This is just when we happen to
Speaker 1: find out now. I do think it's part of it,
Speaker 1: and I think certainly for Fred Smith Um, the head
Speaker 1: of FedEx, who's one of the minority partners we're talking about,
Speaker 1: he spent a long time trying to convince Dan Cider
Speaker 1: to change the name and that was unsuccessful. And then
Speaker 1: finally FedEx when public with the fact that it had
Speaker 1: had had urged the team to change the names. So
Speaker 1: they are related issues. I don't think it's it's effective
Speaker 1: causation that the that the name issue led to this
Speaker 1: fracture in the Redskins ownership. It's one of many issues,
Speaker 1: especially for Fred Smith, it's one of many issues. But
Speaker 1: for the other partners, I think especially, it's just, you know,
Speaker 1: they believe it's time for this business relationship to mark
Speaker 1: what what what's a What's a realistic name that could
Speaker 1: honor Native Americans and the military? Right because you got
Speaker 1: a new head coach and suddenly I don't know whether
Speaker 1: he knew he was going to get this amount of power,
Speaker 1: but Ron Rivera, I mean, is like the footballs are
Speaker 1: now and apparently the business making decision making Zarcas Snyder's
Speaker 1: out of the country and this is all on his plate,
Speaker 1: and if it happens, it has to happen in short order,
Speaker 1: like what's a reasonable name? You know, it's a great
Speaker 1: question because you know, when when you listen to what
Speaker 1: Ron Rivera said and then what you know what you
Speaker 1: were just talking about, that that that the new name
Speaker 1: will be something that's at least an attempt to both
Speaker 1: honor the military and to honor Native Americans, Well that,
Speaker 1: you know, that becomes problematic because again that gets back
Speaker 1: to the fact that, well, whose opinion are we going
Speaker 1: to use on this? You know, if some people are
Speaker 1: still offended by the new names, that does that mean
Speaker 1: that it's it's not valid. So you look at the
Speaker 1: names that that that have been thrown out there and
Speaker 1: then the past and again being is thrown out there. Now,
Speaker 1: there was a time when when if Dan Sneider was
Speaker 1: going to get an Arena League team, he was going
Speaker 1: to name it the Washington Warrior. So that's something that's
Speaker 1: going to be this being talked about now. Another one
Speaker 1: that's being talked about now is the Americans. Whereas you
Speaker 1: you sort of honor Native Americans by saying that these
Speaker 1: were the original Americans, so you call the team the Americans.
Speaker 1: If I think part of that also will not just
Speaker 1: be the name, but what you know, what's the logo,
Speaker 1: what's the imagery going to be that goes along with
Speaker 1: the name. So I think when you when you talked
Speaker 1: about and based on what Ron Rivera said, this attempt
Speaker 1: to honor Native Americans, well that was the attempt in
Speaker 1: the past. So certainly when you get up the term
Speaker 1: Redskins and replace it with another term, that is at
Speaker 1: least going to make it better. But is that going
Speaker 1: to make it all right? And again it's going to
Speaker 1: be a matter of opinion. It's going to be subjective
Speaker 1: rather than objective. So I think you know, these are
Speaker 1: are significant issues, they're problematic issues, they're complex issues, and
Speaker 1: it's we don't know what the name is going to
Speaker 1: be yet. Well wait to see what the name is,
Speaker 1: and then we'll say, you know, is this still okay
Speaker 1: with people? And I don't know that it will be
Speaker 1: in everyone's case? All right, what about the quarterback position?
Speaker 1: You're still paying Alex Smith? He thinks he wants to
Speaker 1: play football. I don't know if that's possible. It's amazing
Speaker 1: that he's even walking and has a leg. I mean,
Speaker 1: like he's a remarkable dude. Dwayne Haskins obviously, you know,
Speaker 1: it feels like he's grown up in the off season.
Speaker 1: But that's all talk. And then I think what's amazing
Speaker 1: is Ron Rivera coached Cam Newton. Cam Newton could have
Speaker 1: been had for you know, for pennies and obviously they
Speaker 1: had already you know, made a trade for his backup
Speaker 1: in Kyle Allen Roder very even said I wouldn't bet
Speaker 1: against Cam Newton, except he actually did bet against Cam Newton. Um,
Speaker 1: what what what's your you know this organization as well
Speaker 1: or better than anybody. What's your best guest for how
Speaker 1: the quarterback thing put plays out. You know, I think
Speaker 1: for all the reasons of what you just said, it
Speaker 1: speaks to the fact that it's you know, it's going
Speaker 1: to be make or break with Dwayne Askins, because otherwise,
Speaker 1: if it wasn't going to be make or break with Haskins,
Speaker 1: then you would go get Cam Newton, and particularly for
Speaker 1: what the numbers ended up being, for what Cam Newton
Speaker 1: signed with with the Patriots, you know, a very minimal deal,
Speaker 1: in fact, a minimum deal that that can that can
Speaker 1: go up to seven a half million through incentives. But
Speaker 1: you know, if you could have done that deal with
Speaker 1: the Redskins, then maybe you couldn't have At the time
Speaker 1: that the Redskins we were contemplating this and deciding what
Speaker 1: to do because Cam Newton had to come to the
Speaker 1: realization that there wasn't something being better out there. But
Speaker 1: just just say the Redskins could have done that that
Speaker 1: deal with Cam Newton, Well, then the only reason not
Speaker 1: to do it is because you don't want to have
Speaker 1: Cam Newton here to impede Dwayne Haskins and to even
Speaker 1: if Dwayne asking the starter, with Cam Newton as the backup,
Speaker 1: you don't want him looking over his shoulder in that way.
Speaker 1: So I think everything that we've seen speaks to the
Speaker 1: fact that this is going to be Dwayne Haskins. Team
Speaker 1: is going to be make or break. It's going to
Speaker 1: be sink or swim. He's the guy, and whether they
Speaker 1: become a successful team in the short and medium term
Speaker 1: depends on whether he develops into the quarterback he was
Speaker 1: drafted to be. You can fall him on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Mark Maski. That is at Mark Maski, NFL reporter for
Speaker 1: the Washington Post. Mark, thanks so much for taking some
Speaker 1: time out with us this morning. We'll talk to you
Speaker 1: down the road. Take it easy and join it. Thanks guys. Okay, so, Jason,
Speaker 1: here's this is an honest question. Okay, is the president wrong?
Speaker 1: I mean, look, we all know his tone, how his
Speaker 1: tone is right, like, he just has no bedside manner.
Speaker 1: So even when he says something you might agree with you,
Speaker 1: like yeah, the way he says he's just such, he
Speaker 1: just I just it just not not I guess what
Speaker 1: you're used to or what my level of expectations for
Speaker 1: the office would be. But is he is he wrong
Speaker 1: in that Indians redskins were uh, they weren't meant to
Speaker 1: mock in any way Native American cultures, like when you're
Speaker 1: talking about sport, it's somebody's strong, virile. I mean, even
Speaker 1: like you know the warrior image by the way warriors.
Speaker 1: The problem with that, it's like Marquette changed their name
Speaker 1: nickname in ninety four because it was deemed as offensive
Speaker 1: to Native Americans in the area, which I don't I
Speaker 1: don't know how being a warrior is a bad thing,
Speaker 1: but I guess it is deemed to be a bad thing.
Speaker 1: So my question is, like, I get you don't like
Speaker 1: the message. People don't like the messenger and maybe the
Speaker 1: tone of the message, But is he wrong that we
Speaker 1: have changed our political correctness has changed to where now
Speaker 1: Indians and Redskins are deemed politically incorrect. I could I
Speaker 1: could see that point if I thought the President was
Speaker 1: doing this for because he disagreed with this on on
Speaker 1: some kind of level. That is about how he feels
Speaker 1: about these teams in sports. But as you can see,
Speaker 1: everything he does is is politically Like what's he done
Speaker 1: the past few days? He is he has decided I'm
Speaker 1: going to rally my base, and there's many people that
Speaker 1: don't like, you know, the fact that we're changing everything.
Speaker 1: We're changing the Washington's nickname in the Indians. All this
Speaker 1: this is political, Like he decides to get involved in
Speaker 1: the Bubba Wallas situation on money and no question, but
Speaker 1: that's this is election politics. I get it. Yeah, but
Speaker 1: I don't without getting deep into the weeds of it.
Speaker 1: Is he right for what he's saying that they do
Speaker 1: name teams out of strength, Yeah, he's he's right about that.
Speaker 1: But what he what he doesn't get into is that
Speaker 1: over time, certain situations evolve, and that just because something
Speaker 1: was a good idea and it was accepted for a
Speaker 1: long time doesn't mean that after a while and new
Speaker 1: information for things have come to light, it now suddenly
Speaker 1: is a bad idea. You know, the Confederate flag was
Speaker 1: accepted for so long and okay, well we have to
Speaker 1: Confederate flag. It was it was Southern heritage, and it
Speaker 1: was about us, you know, becoming becoming one and and
Speaker 1: and I get that, but then I went when I know,
Speaker 1: but I would I would disagree with you on Southern
Speaker 1: on you know, I don't think the Confederate flag was
Speaker 1: what from the from the moment of that you ever
Speaker 1: saw it at a Southern football game or a NASCAR track,
Speaker 1: it it meant different things to different people. You know.
Speaker 1: I look, do I agree with you on that language evolves?
Speaker 1: I do, I do, um, I just I don't. My
Speaker 1: issue is that for red like redskins, for example, was
Speaker 1: never it wasn't deemed to be a slur by Native
Speaker 1: Americans for the longest time. And it's almost like White
Speaker 1: America's convinced them, no, it's a slur, like if it
Speaker 1: was the and we'll get into why. You know, like
Speaker 1: if the Washington Jews, right, well, like being a Jewish,
Speaker 1: that's not a slur. It's actually not you know how
Speaker 1: how you make the mascot look could make it into
Speaker 1: a slur like if it was or if it was
Speaker 1: the Maccabee's right, which if you know the story of
Speaker 1: Dave and the Maccabees, they they took back Jerusalem, they
Speaker 1: came down from the from the hills of Jerusalem and
Speaker 1: took it back I think from the Romans, right, like
Speaker 1: if you built this big, strong, proud warrior, that that's
Speaker 1: that's the image of strength. And I that's the argument there,
Speaker 1: and so what I'm what my point is like the
Speaker 1: argument hasn't actually changed, and I guess language has evolved.
Speaker 1: But again, that that kind of goes into my point
Speaker 1: of yesterday, which is no one uses redskin as a slur.
Speaker 1: It's just not Um is it could be seen as
Speaker 1: a negative identification of a Native American person. Yeah, yes,
Speaker 1: I guess it could, but that would be loaded in
Speaker 1: with whatever preconceived notion you have of who a Native
Speaker 1: American is. And when you represent them with the image
Speaker 1: of a proud warrior and leader, you know, of of
Speaker 1: a football team, I think you're you're reaching for something
Speaker 1: that might not be there. And look, I don't I
Speaker 1: don't want a football team to be called the the
Speaker 1: dirty Jews or something, right, but that's not what the
Speaker 1: Redskins are. They're the Redskins. It's hailed to the Redskins.
Speaker 1: So while I can disagree with his politics and with
Speaker 1: his tone, and I agree with you that this is
Speaker 1: this is politically this is you know, election year politics,
Speaker 1: picking out thing. This is you know, classic Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: This is what he does. And um, I actually think
Speaker 1: in terms of this message, he's not wrong. The question
Speaker 1: is are we being politically correct to be politically correct
Speaker 1: or were being politically correct because Native Americans are actually
Speaker 1: super offended and want it changed. There's something that I
Speaker 1: that over the course of my career, I understand more
Speaker 1: than I did when I was younger. And that's the
Speaker 1: phrase perception is reality, A right. I never I didn't
Speaker 1: really understand that when I was younger, but I kind
Speaker 1: of really get that now. Where you know, for anybody
Speaker 1: like you or I could be thinking, hey, we're doing
Speaker 1: a great job. You know here at Fox Sports Radio.
Speaker 1: Everything is great. We're doing great, and the shows are
Speaker 1: doing well. And then you meet with your managers or
Speaker 1: your bosses. This is anybody that does anything for a living,
Speaker 1: and you think, okay, this is gonna be a great meeting.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna ask for a raise, and all this stuff
Speaker 1: is going on, and then you get told, well, here's
Speaker 1: the things you know the past few months, there's this,
Speaker 1: there's this, there's this. You know, maybe you haven't sounded
Speaker 1: as energetic on the air, you haven't done and you're
Speaker 1: saying to yourself, what the hell are you talking about? Well,
Speaker 1: I don't understand all of this. Where is this coming from?
Speaker 1: And then you can disagree and walk out at meeting
Speaker 1: go well, they're crazy, I'm just gonna go do my thing,
Speaker 1: or you can sit back and say, wait a minute. Okay,
Speaker 1: if the perception is that I'm not doing a good job,
Speaker 1: then the reality at work is that I'm not doing
Speaker 1: a good job. Regardless as to what I think, the
Speaker 1: perception is that I'm not doing good job. So that's
Speaker 1: my reality, is that my bosses don't think I'm doing
Speaker 1: a good job. They don't think I'm doing this. Their
Speaker 1: perception now because of more information that has come to
Speaker 1: light is hey, there is there is there is there
Speaker 1: is more evidence that the nicknames are more racial than
Speaker 1: we're first thought. So if you agree or disagree on it,
Speaker 1: the reality is there are many people now that think
Speaker 1: this is the case. And so if many people think
Speaker 1: something is is racist, well guess what, that's going to
Speaker 1: be pushed as racist and people are going to see
Speaker 1: it that way because if you, even if you can't
Speaker 1: see it that way, many other people can, and that
Speaker 1: this is this is why we have things, why we
Speaker 1: have these kind of checks and balances going on in society,
Speaker 1: because other people can see something and maybe it opens
Speaker 1: you up to that. And while this may have been
Speaker 1: the case, because I agreed that in the beginning they
Speaker 1: didn't mean anything by by the way they name they
Speaker 1: name the teams. You have to evolve at some point
Speaker 1: and realize it, Okay, maybe this isn't the best idea,
Speaker 1: and let's let's try to figure out a way forward
Speaker 1: from here instead of well, you know, as you and
Speaker 1: I had the conversation on the show yesterday, you know,
Speaker 1: we had conversations with different viewpoints. It was the way
Speaker 1: conversations are supposed to be without it devolving into yelling
Speaker 1: and who's wrong and who's this and who's that. That's
Speaker 1: kind of where this conversation needs to go. I don't
Speaker 1: think President Trump's gonna take it in that way. I
Speaker 1: don't think many people want to push it in that way.
Speaker 1: It needs to be okay, So where does a conversation
Speaker 1: go from here? It has to be something more than
Speaker 1: than well, we believe a we believe be and you
Speaker 1: can't meet anywhere in the middle. Yeah, I mean, I
Speaker 1: just think that the big, one, big takeaway should be
Speaker 1: d This just to me is like I do think.
Speaker 1: And again, if Sneyder is he's not Trump, but there's
Speaker 1: a Trump way about him where he's just so abrupt
Speaker 1: and my way or the highway, I don't know if
Speaker 1: the nickname would have stood if it was any other owner.
Speaker 1: But I do think that he hurt the how how
Speaker 1: this is going down is a lot because of Dan Sneyder.
Speaker 1: On the other hand, I'll defend him from the standpoint like, look,
Speaker 1: when you're working with the information that a man, We've
Speaker 1: done studies, we've asked, we've talked with Native American leaders,
Speaker 1: and they see it as a point of pride. That's
Speaker 1: what's most important, and that's who the nickname should or
Speaker 1: should not have any effect on. And so I do
Speaker 1: think that now if that has changed, well then okay,
Speaker 1: now you as you said, things evolve over time. But
Speaker 1: for people who are you know, they woke up, they're like, man,
Speaker 1: this is racist. It's always been racist. Like okay, maybe
Speaker 1: that's how you feel, but that's not how the important
Speaker 1: people felt for a long time. Twitter at how about
Speaker 1: a Fresca Doug at Gottlieb Show Jason Smith Doug Gottlieb
Speaker 1: in for Dan Patrick. Today, we'll have more NFL on
Speaker 1: the way. But coming up next is one sport ready
Speaker 1: to come back and play, already in trouble for trying
Speaker 1: to come back and play. We got that. This is Fox.
Speaker 1: Fox Sports Radio has the best sports talk lineup in
Speaker 1: the nation. Catch all of our shows at Fox Sports
Speaker 1: Radio dot com and within the iHeartRadio app. Search FSR
Speaker 1: to listen live Fox Sports Radio, The Dan Patrick Show,
Speaker 1: Jason Smith and Doug Gottlieb in for Dan, and The
Speaker 1: Dan That's Today. Coming up in ten minutes. We have
Speaker 1: a big story out of the National Football League revolving
Speaker 1: around something DeShawn Jackson put out on social media recently,
Speaker 1: so we have that coming up in a few minutes.
Speaker 1: But last night we saw what was supposed to be
Speaker 1: and hopefully it was going to be a big night
Speaker 1: for Major League Baseball as they had their schedule reveal.
Speaker 1: Everybody got to see where their teams are going to
Speaker 1: be playing mostly regionalized games against teams in your division
Speaker 1: and teams that geographically align with teams in your division.
Speaker 1: For example, the NL East and the AL East will
Speaker 1: play teams in their division, they will play against each other. However,
Speaker 1: on the backdrop of this, we're teams closing their camps
Speaker 1: yesterday because COVID nineteen test results weren't back, and a
Speaker 1: general sense of unease about Major League Baseball in their
Speaker 1: attempts to come back and play during the coronavirus pandemic. Now, Doug,
Speaker 1: this is still early and it's you know, we're just
Speaker 1: getting teams coming back now, so there is a lot
Speaker 1: to unfold and this time to get past. Do you
Speaker 1: see at all any trouble Baseball is in, you know,
Speaker 1: trying to hit the ground running, and here they are
Speaker 1: supposed to have some big days where everybody's back in
Speaker 1: its pageantry and now here's a schedule lease and still
Speaker 1: the undertone is that things are not going well enough
Speaker 1: from a lot of teams perspectives, that MLB's got to
Speaker 1: step up more. No, I think I think it's gonna
Speaker 1: be fine. You know, I actually believe what Major League
Speaker 1: Baseball said. It was like, look, some of this testing
Speaker 1: stuff wasn't done over the weekend fourth of July, like
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, And I thought it was funny.
Speaker 1: Apparently some of the Angels took their own tests because
Speaker 1: the testers didn't show up. But No, I also the
Speaker 1: way in which the game is played, I think you
Speaker 1: can space people out, and the way in which baseball instruction,
Speaker 1: which there are stars, but there's just so many players
Speaker 1: that if a guy unlike the NBA playoffs, and I
Speaker 1: want to get to this upcoming just a thought I have.
Speaker 1: It's a bit of conspiracy theorist in me on the
Speaker 1: NBA playoffs and what I think is very very likely
Speaker 1: to stop happening once we get deep. But for a
Speaker 1: Major League Baseball I look, I think there's a lot
Speaker 1: of good that's going to come from this. Um. I actually,
Speaker 1: I actually don't like the DH, but there's been a
Speaker 1: long push for for having note for having a DH
Speaker 1: across both the division. Both leagues gonna have that, And
Speaker 1: I like the idea of playing teams close to you.
Speaker 1: Why don't we do this more often? You know, you
Speaker 1: want to get people in the stands. Dodgers and Angels,
Speaker 1: uh A's and Giants, Mets and Yankees should play each
Speaker 1: other more often, not less often, that the leagues are.
Speaker 1: I get the history of it, but it's a little
Speaker 1: bit dated for me in terms of just not just
Speaker 1: cost to travel, but reason to reason to cheer for
Speaker 1: a team. You know, I just sorry, I don't care
Speaker 1: about the Astros against the Angels. I would care much
Speaker 1: more about the Dodgers versus the Angels. That's just me.
Speaker 1: You know, if you wonder if this is something that
Speaker 1: if this works, the NFL might try to pick it up.
Speaker 1: We have to change our schedule a bit or college football.
Speaker 1: We got to just play close the NFL across country
Speaker 1: like the NFL. I mean, the Ramsen Chargers should play
Speaker 1: each other twice a year, the Jetson Giants should play
Speaker 1: each other twice a year every year. That the challenge
Speaker 1: in the new century at post quarantine is going to
Speaker 1: be getting people into stadiums. The best way to get
Speaker 1: people into stadiums is to play somebody who's either in
Speaker 1: our trival or a close and proximity rival. I think
Speaker 1: those work for me. Twitter At how about a Fresca
Speaker 1: Doug at Gottlieb Show Jason Smith Doug Gottlieb in for
Speaker 1: Dan and the dan Nets. Coming up next, a big
Speaker 1: developing story out of the National Football League. This is
Speaker 1: Fox Sports Radio.