This is your morning commute. More links after the jump.
Daniel Snyder is the head of a mutli-million dollar industry that has many interests, not the least important of which is the Washington Redskins. Is that lawsuit worth all the negative press that he has been receiving over it? And should we even be considering it that way? It's a pretty complex issue, but I'll try to get into it the best I could.
The first thing we have to do is evaluate the part of the article that Snyder took umbrage with.
That's the Dan Snyder who got caught forging names as a telemarketer with Snyder Communications
When it comes down to it, the grounds for Snyder's lawsuit are completely dependent on whether or not the statement is accurate. That's something I don't know. But my opinion about whether or not Snyder should have filed the lawsuit doesn't depend on that.
I know that this isn't part of the legal process, but I don't think Snyder should be suing the Paper over something this trivial while his reputation is so low in the City. At this point, he represents everything that is wrong with sports ownership; poor management and selfishness. This lawsuit, however justified it may be, only serves to reinforce that notion.
Daniel Snyder does not need the $2 million. In fact, I bet he'd gladly spend $2 million to raise build his reputation among the fans of the team he owns.
I'm not saying his lawsuit is not justified. As far as I know, it is. But that doesn't mean it's something he should be pursuing. Daniel Snyder doesn't need the money and he doesn't need the attention. Even if he is completely right, he doesn't need people to think of him in this light. It's just bad business.
Must reads from around the SB Nation network: