Michael Jordan accomplished a few things at North Carolina; a national title, two All-American selections, a Naismith Award, a Wooden Award, AP Player of the Year… and, he’ll remind you, a good track record against Duke.
In a recent ESPN piece by Ryan McGee, Jordan reminisced on his days in the rivalry… and still clearly holds some disdain for the Blue Devils.
“It’s been 40 years since I played a college basketball game,” Michael Jordan said. (Perhaps you’ve heard of him, Cooper?) “To this day, before people ask me about our national championship or our three ACC championships or ACC tournament wins, any of that, they ask, ‘How did you did you do against Duke?’”
After pausing to make room for a Grinch-like evil grin while reflecting on his UNC days while at a NASCAR event (he’s now a team owner) late last fall, the GOAT added: “By the way, the answer is that we did very well.”
There are rivalry games and then there’s Duke-UNC.
There have been a few matchups in recent years that have lacked a bit of luster, but this rivalry still stands heads above anything else in college basketball — and competes with anything in American sports, both college and pro.
Duke being perhaps the best team in the country and having the clear best freshman (player?) in the country, Cooper Flagg, brings back any shine that folks think may have been lost in recent years. If UNC can keep it close today, that’s good enough for neutral fans.
The stakes might actually be higher for North Carolina, which sits precariously on the bubble as we enter February. A road win against Duke would launch them back into the presumed field of 68, at least for the time being.
You don’t need to dig deep to find storylines for today’s matchup; but even in matchups when the stakes aren’t high for the college basketball world at large, Duke vs. UNC means everything in Chapel Hill and Durham.
There are plenty of intense rivalries in sports – Yankees vs. Red Sox, Lakers vs. Celtics, Ohio State vs. Michigan. But when it comes to college basketball, there is one rivalry that stands above the rest: Michael Jordan vs. Duke.
Even though MJ hasn’t played for UNC in over 30 years, his disdain for the Blue Devils still burns brightly. From his days as a Tar Heel to his time in the NBA, Jordan has never been shy about expressing his hatred for Duke.
One of the most iconic moments in their rivalry came during the 1982 NCAA Championship game, when Jordan hit the game-winning shot to give UNC the victory over Duke. That moment solidified his status as a legend in Chapel Hill and fueled his disdain for the Blue Devils even more.
But it’s not just Jordan’s personal history with Duke that makes this rivalry so intense. The two schools are just eight miles apart, and their games are always highly anticipated and fiercely contested. Whether it’s at Cameron Indoor Stadium or the Dean Dome, the atmosphere is electric and the stakes are high.
In recent years, Duke has had the upper hand in the rivalry, with Coach K leading the Blue Devils to multiple national championships. But that hasn’t softened Jordan’s feelings towards his alma mater’s biggest rival. He still roots against Duke every chance he gets, and his passion for beating them is unmatched.
So while there are plenty of rivalries in sports, none can compare to the intensity and history of Michael Jordan vs. Duke. And as long as MJ is around, his hatred for the Blue Devils will continue to burn bright.
Blue got in the new political crime series on Hulu. “Paradise,” starring James Marsden and Sterling Brown, is available to stream now if you’re into that sort of thing, and in the first episode, Marsden’s character dropped an unexpected Kentucky Basketball reference.
Marsden, a former KSR guest, plays President Cal Bradford, a die-hard Kentucky fan (with an ironic first name by the show’s writers). About halfway through Episode 1, titled “Wildcat Down,” we learn the President loves his Wildcats, and though he is the Commander-In-Chief, he still hasn’t gotten over Christian Laettner’s shot in 1992.
After dodging an assassination attempt, the President says, “I’ll admit, when I saw that blood, I thought I’d been Christian Laettnered… Christian Laettner? Duke? He made the most famous college basketball shot of all time against us in the tournament, single-handedly killed me and every other Kentucky Wildcat fan that day.”
Nobody enjoys a Christian Laettner callback, but it is neat to see Kentucky references in the fictional Oval Office. Maybe Episode 2 will welcome Chief of Staff Willie Cauley-Stein, or the President will declare war on Knoxville.
Watch the trailer for “Paradise” for more on Big Blue Nation’s fictional President
Hulu’s new political crime series “Bluegrass Betrayal” has taken the streaming world by storm with its gripping storyline and intriguing characters. At the center of the show is President John Harrison, a charismatic leader who has a deep love for the state of Kentucky and its rich culture.
However, President Harrison’s personal vendetta against former basketball star Christian Laettner has become a central plot point in the series. The President’s disdain for Laettner stems from their college basketball rivalry, where Harrison’s beloved Kentucky Wildcats were defeated by Laettner’s Duke Blue Devils in a heartbreaking defeat.
As the series unfolds, viewers are taken on a thrilling journey as President Harrison’s vendetta against Laettner puts him at odds with powerful political adversaries and leads to shocking revelations about his past. With its fast-paced action and complex characters, “Bluegrass Betrayal” is a must-watch for fans of political dramas and crime thrillers.
Tags:
Hulu, political crime series, President, Kentucky, Christian Laettner, new show, drama, politics, crime, TV series, streaming, entertainment, thriller, mystery, scandal, political corruption, White House, presidential drama.
President Donald Trump on Thursday shrugged off an ugly back-and-forth between tech CEOs Elon Musk and Sam Altman that pitted one of Trump’s most visible lieutenants against a key participant in a massive $500 billion AI project Trump announced Tuesday.
Musk had undercut Trump’s Tuesday Oval Office AI announcement, casting doubt on his X social media platform that any of the participating companies had the money to fund it. But Trump Thursday told reporters at the White House that Musk’s commentary was just a case of bad blood, because he “hates one of the people in the deal” – not an indictment of the viability of the deal he had announced.
“No, he hates one of the people,” Trump said, in an apparent reference to Altman. “I’ve spoken to Elon, but—spoken to all of them, actually. The people in the deal are very, very smart people– but Elon, one of the people he happens to hate. But I have certain hatreds of people too.”
Shortly after Trump announced the new massive AI infrastructure investment between Altman’s OpenAI, Oracle and Softbank, Musk wrote on his social media platform X, “They don’t actually have the money. SoftBank has well under $10B secured. I have that on good authority.”
Pressed on Musk’s comments Thursday, Trump told reporters, “I don’t know if they do, but you know, they’re putting up the money– the government’s not putting up anything, they’re putting up money. They’re very rich people, so I hope they do.”
Trump had announced the investment will create a new company, called Stargate, to grow artificial intelligence infrastructure in the United States. The leaders of SoftBank, OpenAI and Oracle stood alongside Trump during the announcement. Their respective companies will invest $100 billion in total for the project to start, with plans to pour up to $500 billion into Stargate in the coming years.
Asked in a follow-up exchange if he was frustrated with Musk’s very public criticism of the AI announcement he helped broker, Trump demurred Thursday.
Musk’s barbs represented a notable takedown of a major White House project from someone that is in Trump’s innermost circle. As a sign of how involved Musk is in the first days of the administration, Musk said he was in the Oval Office on Tuesday as Trump signed a pardon for Ross William Ulbricht, founder of the dark web marketplace SilkRoad. Musk had also dispatched a top staffer from his SpaceX and X companies to help ensure the release of convicted January 6 rioters after Trump signed a blanket pardon.
But perhaps it should not be a surprise that Musk is going after an OpenAI initiative. Musk is in an ongoing lawsuit with OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman, who was at the White House for the announcement. Musk, who has said he “doesn’t trust” Altman, claims in the lawsuit the ChatGPT has abandoned its original nonprofit mission by reserving some of its most advanced AI technology for private customers.
The companies involved in Stargate have not publicly disclosed how they will contribute the funds, but they don’t necessarily need the money in the bank to support it — they could raise debt or sign on other equity investors.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Wednesday rebuffed Musk’s comments, saying in a Fox News interview, “the American people should take President Trump and those CEOs’ words for it.”
CNN’s Hadas Gold contributed to this report
President Trump has responded to criticism from Tesla CEO Elon Musk regarding his recent announcement on artificial intelligence (AI), stating that Musk’s disapproval stems from personal bias.
In a recent interview, Musk expressed his skepticism about the effectiveness of Trump’s AI initiative, stating that he believes the president lacks a comprehensive understanding of the technology. Trump, however, brushed off Musk’s comments, suggesting that the billionaire entrepreneur simply “hates one of the people” involved in the project.
Despite Musk’s concerns, Trump remains confident in his administration’s approach to AI development. The president has emphasized the importance of prioritizing American innovation and technological advancement in order to maintain a competitive edge on the global stage.
As tensions between the two high-profile figures continue to escalate, it remains to be seen how their differing perspectives on AI will impact future collaborations in the tech industry. Stay tuned for updates on this ongoing feud.
Britain is known for producing some incredibly talented actors, and Gary Oldman is one of the finest examples. Born in London, the actor emerged from working-class beginnings, leaving school when he was 16 to work in a shop. Yet, he knew he was destined for Hollywood, even if the prestigious acting school RADA would swiftly reject him.
Yet, all success stories usually feature some level of failure that one must overcome – a challenge that forces us to consider how much we want what we’re after. Oldman didn’t let his RADA rejection stop him from giving up, so he took himself elsewhere to study and subsequently became an incredibly successful theatre star. By the early 1980s, he had dipped his toes into film, appearing in Colin Gregg’s Remembrance and Mike Leigh’s Meantime.
In the latter, he showed his versatility by playing Coxy, a racist and obnoxious skinhead, which earned him recognition from critics. His next film role would land him further acclaim and make him more well-known among British audiences. However, it’s also a movie that Oldman now can’t stand to watch, going as far as to tell Playboy that he never even wanted to appear in the movie.
Released in 1986, Sid and Nancy was a success, with Oldman playing the volatile bassist of the Sex Pistols, Sid Vicious. With Chloe Webb portraying Nancy Spungen, the pair starred as the tormented lovers whose relationship ends in tragedy after Spungen is found dead in the Hotel Chelsea. Bringing a well-documented and iconic era of British music to the big screen, Oldman’s performance was highly praised. Vicious was an infamous character – one that would have certainly been hard to master.
Sid and Nancy, which won several accolades, including Oldman’s ‘Most Promising Newcomer’ from the Evening Standard British Film Awards, truly marked the actor’s breakthrough. Yet, he admitted that he doesn’t “like myself in the movie”.
He continued, “Frankly, I didn’t want to make it in the first place. I was talked into it at the time. And now, if I flip through the channels and come upon it, it’s ‘Fuck! Sid and Nancy,’ and off it goes. I don’t think I played Sid Vicious very well.”
It seems as though Oldman is hyper-critical of his performances despite the fact that he is held in incredibly high regard.
He also shared that “I don’t like the way I look in Prick Up Your Ears. I wasn’t the right person to play Beethoven [in Immortal Beloved] and turned it down half a dozen times” before claiming that he “can’t bear” The Fifth Element. Evidently, you can be considered one of the greatest individuals within your given industry and still criticise yourself harshly.
Since then, Oldman has won an Oscar for his prosthetics-heavy performance as Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour, a sharp turn from his days of playing itchy youths like Coxy and Vicious. The actor has appeared in many acclaimed pieces of cinema over the years, like True Romance, Leon, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, The Dark Knight, and even the Harry Potter series, but who knows which ones he is truly proud of?
Related Topics
Subscribe To The Far Out Newsletter
Gary Oldman is known for his iconic roles in films such as “The Dark Knight” and “Harry Potter,” but there is one movie that he absolutely hates watching – “Tiptoes.”
“Tiptoes” is a 2003 comedy-drama film that Oldman starred in alongside Matthew McConaughey, Kate Beckinsale, and Patricia Arquette. The film revolves around a man who discovers that his girlfriend’s family are all dwarfs, leading to a series of comedic and dramatic situations.
Oldman has been vocal about his dislike for the film, citing the casting of non-dwarf actors in dwarf roles as a major issue. He has expressed regret for his involvement in the film and has even gone as far as to call it “the worst movie I’ve ever been in.”
Despite Oldman’s distaste for “Tiptoes,” the film has since gained a cult following for its bizarre premise and star-studded cast. However, it remains a sore spot for Oldman, who would prefer to forget about his role in the film altogether.
The Utah Jazz are in the throes of the most shameless tank in team history.
Multiple players are sitting with injuries that they’d normally play through — Lauri Markkanen with “back spasms,” John Collins with “hip bruise management.” Walker Kessler is 23 years old, and sitting (official reason: “rest”) after the Jazz have two days off. Collin Sexton is 26, and has done the same.
And I want to be clear: I think it’s probably the right move. The Jazz, as things stand, are under-talented. Even if they were to try their hardest, it feels unlikely they’d make the playoffs. Head coach Will Hardy has proven himself likely to squeeze out extra wins from his teams — and it is unimaginable that the Jazz, as currently constructed, would be a championship contender.
Just as surely, the draft is the Jazz’s path to improvement. Free agency likely isn’t going to bring the Jazz their next star, and as hard as the Jazz have tried to go “big game hunting” to pick up players by trade, they have struck out.
That leaves tanking. Shameless tanking.
As much as tanking is the right move for the Jazz — and I have advocated for it — I have also underestimated just how bizarre it is in practice. That’s changed over the last few months: sitting healthy youth, coaches playing knowingly subpar lineups, fans celebrating losses, it all just feels so wrong.
I’ve also been curious about the toll it’s taken on the Jazz’s veteran players, who have played years of serious NBA basketball in which winning is actually the goal. In particular, at the Jazz’s practice in between their two games against the New Orleans Pelicans, I went up to Markkanen and just asked him frankly: “What do you think about tanking?”
He paused — he didn’t want to say the wrong thing — but he had thoughts to share.
“I don’t think losing, or purposefully losing, should be part of professional sports. I feel like athletes always want to compete. I understand why some organizations around the NBA are doing it, but I feel like it sucks, in my opinion,” Markkanen said. “There should be a better way to build rosters. That’s the way it’s been, so I understand it, but that’s my opinion.”
I went up to Patty Mills — 36-year-old Patty Mills, NBA champion Patty Mills — and asked the same question.
The same pause followed.
“I don’t know. I don’t know. I’ve always played for purpose. I play for purpose, that’s for sure. So when purpose isn’t there, it’s definitely hard,” Mills said. “It’s obviously a business, and everyone realizes when you get to this stage. There are situations that will happen that will remind you of that. At the end of the day — it’s a business call for sure — our job is to go out there and help develop, help teach, especially these young guys, how to be professionals.”
(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) Utah Jazz guard Patty Mills (8) as the Utah Jazz host the Atlanta Hawks, NBA basketball in Salt Lake City on Tuesday, Jan. 7, 2025.
Both Markkanen and Mills, then, hit on something at the end of their answers: It doesn’t have to be this way.
Tanking is the natural result of business decisions the NBA has made and what it incentivizes. Right now, for the Jazz and roughly 25% of the league, the league has put greater incentives in place for losing (higher draft picks, better players) than for winning. There’s no incentive to be the 11th-best team in the Western Conference when compared to the 15th-best team. There’s just not.
Markkanen and I kicked around various solutions to the problem. Could the league go to a promotion/relegation system, like European soccer, so losing results in demotion to a lesser league? Yeah, but then G League franchises would have to be promoted, and they’re not ready to host NBA games.Could the league give picks out by the number of wins after they’re eliminated from the playoffs, incentivizing teams to win late in the year? Sure, but then teams will push to lose early in the season, giving them more chances to rack up wins.
In the end, we decided that the league probably just has to decouple draft position from record altogether. Celtics assistant general manager Mike Zarren proposed 10 years ago “The Wheel,” a system in which picks would be distributed evenly moving forward. You’d know, for example, that the Jazz would have the No. 2 pick in 2025, then the No. 25 pick in 2026, and so on.
The scary thing is that these proposals might hurt small market teams like the Jazz more than others. As an unsexy free-agent destination, the draft is the preferred way to build for the Utahs, the San Antonios, and the Indianas of the world. Under this proposal, teams wouldn’t be able to count on this tanking-to-contention path as a viable one.
At this point, though? I’m willing to sacrifice that path for the good of the game, for the good of the league. For the good of players like Markkanen and Mills who deserve to have their careers defined by passionate play, not dispassionate sitting.
It’s time for the NBA to make radical changes. It’s time to eliminate tanking, once and for all.
Note to readers •This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.
Lauri Markkanen hates tanking, too. It’s time for the NBA to make changes.
Chicago Bulls forward Lauri Markkanen recently spoke out against tanking in the NBA, expressing his frustration with teams deliberately losing games to secure better draft picks. Markkanen, who has been a key player for the Bulls, believes that tanking goes against the spirit of competition and devalues the game.
In a recent interview, Markkanen said, “I hate tanking. It’s not fair to the players, the fans, or the league as a whole. We should be out there giving it our all every night, not purposely trying to lose games for a better draft pick. It’s just not right.”
Markkanen’s sentiments reflect a growing sentiment among players and fans alike who are tired of seeing teams prioritize losing over winning. The current system incentivizes losing by rewarding teams with higher draft picks, creating a vicious cycle of tanking that undermines the integrity of the game.
It’s time for the NBA to make changes and address the issue of tanking. Whether it’s through reforming the draft lottery system, implementing stricter penalties for tanking, or incentivizing teams to compete until the end of the season, something needs to be done to level the playing field and ensure that all teams are playing to win.
As Markkanen and others have made clear, it’s time to put an end to tanking and restore the competitive spirit of the NBA. Let’s hope that the league takes action soon to address this issue and ensure that every game is played with the same level of intensity and passion.
Tags:
Lauri Markkanen, NBA, tanking, changes, basketball, sports, player perspective, league reform, competitive integrity, professional athletes, game ethics.
That could be uncomfortable for Trump and Hollywood, which shied away from the movie last year.
Donald Trump didn’t want you to see “The Apprentice” last year. And he got his way: The unflattering Trump biopic struggled to get to theaters and was a flop when it eventually got there in October.
But now “The Apprentice” is going to get a lot more attention, courtesy of the Oscars: Sebastian Stan just received a best-actor nomination for his portrayal of Trump. And Jeremy Strong’s take on Roy Cohn, Trump’s former attorney and mentor, earned him a nomination for best supporting actor.
Like most things on TV, the Academy Awards don’t get anything like the attention they used to get in the preinternet age. But they’re still the Academy Awards, and they still draw a bigger audience than just about anything that’s not an NFL game. Last year’s show drew nearly 20 million TV viewers in the US.
Which means that when this year’s show airs on March 2, there’s a decent chance that a film the president of the United States tried to stop from being shown — via a cease-and-desist letter — could get a burst of new publicity and exposure. I wonder what Trump and his supporters will think of that.
I also wonder what the people who run Hollywood’s biggest studios and streamers — the same people who didn’t want to touch “The Apprentice” — will think of that.
“Sebastian and Jeremy took career-defining risks to do this movie. And they fucking nailed their roles,” Gabriel Sherman, the journalist who wrote the movie’s screenplay, told me via email. “It’s also satisfying that the Academy is standing up for great art at a time when the culture seems to be chilled by the new political climate.”
The backstory behind “The Apprentice” could be its own movie, and it’s a hard one to summarize. I’ll try here: Mark Rapaport, the producer who financed the movie, ended up clashing with Sherman and the film’s director, Ali Abbasi, and told them he didn’t want it released. (I’ve asked Rapaport for comment about Thursday’s news.) Rapaport is also the son-in-law of Dan Snyder, the billionaire who bankrolled Rapaport’s production company, and who donated $1 million to Trump’s 2017 inauguration.
The controversy generated attention when the movie debuted at the Cannes Film Festival, but the movie struggled to find a Hollywood distributor — a fact Sherman chalked up to the industry’s fear of angering Trump before November’s election.
“Trump talks a lot about ‘weaponization of government,’” Sherman told me this past fall. “This is a very specific case where he has now influenced the corporate and creative decisions of these Hollywood companies to basically chill content that he would object to.”
For a longer version of the story, you can listen to me talking to Sherman about the movie on my “Channels” podcast. And for a midsize version, check out excerpts of that chat here.
The highly anticipated film “The Trump Movie Trump Hates” has just been nominated for two major Academy Awards, much to the dismay of its namesake. The controversial movie, which delves into the tumultuous presidency of Donald Trump, has received critical acclaim and now finds itself in the running for both Best Picture and Best Director.
Despite his vocal opposition to the film, Trump’s ire has only seemed to fuel its success. The movie has resonated with audiences around the world, sparking conversations about the impact of his presidency and the future of American politics.
As the Academy Awards ceremony approaches, all eyes are on “The Trump Movie Trump Hates” to see if it will take home the coveted trophies. Whether or not it wins, one thing is clear: this film has made a lasting mark on the cultural landscape and will be remembered for years to come.
Joined ESPN The Magazine after graduating from the University of Missouri.
Although he primarily covers the NFL, his assignments also have taken him to the Athens Olympics, the World Series, the NCAA tournament and the NHL and NBA playoffs.
Host and co-executive producer of the new ESPN series, “Backstory”
Member of three Pulitzer Prize-winning teams for national, explanatory and public service journalism
Author of three books, including New York Times best-selling “First Off the Tee: Presidential Hackers, Duffers, and Cheaters from Taft to Bush”
24-year newspaper career at The New York Times and Miami Herald
Jan 25, 2025, 06:20 AM ET
THIS PAST FALL, Dan Snyder had dinner in London with longtime associates. For only the second autumn since 1999, Snyder was not the owner of his beloved Washington football team.
He was not living the ups and downs of an NFL season, as he had done since his childhood in Maryland.
He was not presiding over the Commanders‘ rebuild, already on the cusp of a stunning turnaround, the kind of rise that Snyder lived for in a previous life: from 4-13 in 2023 to what would eventually be a 12-5 regular season and an underdog playoff run, culminating in an NFC Championship Game appearance Sunday against the Philadelphia Eagles.
But now Snyder is a ghost: The new-look Commanders are not only led by first-time general manager Adam Peters, new head coach Dan Quinn and sensational rookie quarterback Jayden Daniels, but they also have a new ownership group, led by Josh Harris and his Harris Blitzer Sports & Entertainment.
At the London dinner, Snyder, 60, was polite, if not subdued, and did things the associates had come to expect, such as ordering almost everything on the menu. Snyder said that he was enjoying a quiet existence, mostly in London. Life was better for his family, far from the controversies that had engulfed him and the team the past several years. Talk inevitably turned to the improving Commanders, already off to a strong start. When one associate returned to the United States, a colleague asked him the question that’s been on the minds of many fans and league executives:
What’s it like for Snyder, for years the most hated owner in sports, to watch the Commanders succeed without him?
“He f—ing hates it,” Snyder’s dinner companion told the colleague.
Neither Snyder nor any of his representatives responded to interview requests from ESPN. But according to league sources, team owners, sports executives, lawyers and others with knowledge of his current status, some of whom requested anonymity to discuss sensitive legal matters, Snyder has recast much of his life since he sold the Commanders under duress 19 months ago.
He has mostly lived in London, often surrounded by a security detail, or spent time on his superyacht. He is trying to sell his remaining U.S. real estate holdings and decided to give away a $35 million estate to the American Cancer Society after it sat unsold for months. Any business he conducts is from the U.K., where sources with firsthand knowledge say he has expressed interest in buying into a Premier League soccer club, although others who know him well doubt Snyder will ever own any professional sports team again.
What little remains for him in the United States includes a tangle of unresolved legal issues — and the thoughts of what might have been if he had never sold the team.
SNYDER NEVER WANTED to sell, even after putting the Commanders up for sale. Few people outside the league, Harris’ company, or the Commanders organization know that he tried desperately to blow up the sale at the last minute.
Snyder had been pressured into the sale by fellow owners who roundly hated him and league executives eager to see the franchise returned to its former glory — and profitability. Former NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue recently told confidants that Snyder is “the worst owner in the history of the National Football League.”
A source with direct knowledge said that, after months of negotiations with Harris, Snyder was imagining ways to keep his team. One idea, the source said, was to announce that he had years earlier given up alcohol, and to say that much of his alleged misbehavior over the years that caused so much league and fellow owner angst happened while he was drunk. Snyder also purposefully set a minimum price of $6 billion for the Commanders, knowing that few people, even among the ultrarich, could afford that price tag.
Despite Snyder’s resistance, the sale process moved ahead, with Harris’ group barely clearing the asking price. Harris needed to recruit approximately 20 limited partners.
Then, on July 20, 2023, shortly after owners approved the sale for a North American sports franchise record of $6.05 billion, the NFL gave Snyder another reason to be mad, fining him a record $60 million on the way out. A league investigation led by attorney Mary Jo White not only affirmed Snyder’s alleged sexual harassment of a team employee but also concluded he had fostered a toxic workplace culture and that the Commanders had withheld revenue from the NFL. Sources said Snyder was infuriated that the fine dropped the amount just below the $6 billion he had insisted on from the beginning.
“There’s no way I’m paying,” Snyder told confidants about the league fine.
Suddenly, the sale’s closing — a supposed formality — turned into an eleventh-hour drama, multiple sources with direct knowledge told ESPN. Snyder threatened to kill the deal by refusing to share his bank information, preventing Harris from wiring him the money. At 1 a.m. on July 21, Snyder and his wife were fielding phone calls from various executives and confidants, urging him to do what he’d pledged and let go of the team.
“I don’t want to do this,” Snyder told a confidant.
A rally celebrating Harris’ ownership group was scheduled for later that day at the since-renamed FedEx Field.
But as 1 a.m. became 2 a.m., Snyder was refusing to hand over the stadium keys.
“I don’t care!” Snyder said, according to sources with direct knowledge of what transpired in those hours. “It would be trespassing if anyone goes there. It’s still mine!”
League executives didn’t know what Snyder would do next but told Harris’ group to be on call, ready to wire the funds if and when Snyder shared his bank information — and before he could renege.
In the days leading up to the close, sources said, Dan and Tanya Snyder were pressed by confidants and friends, including Hall of Fame coach Joe Gibbs, the three-time Super Bowl winner who supported Snyder even during the darkest times, to complete the deal out of love for the team and fans.
Associates reminded Snyder in those wee hours that the primary reason to sell was his family. The past few years of relentless revelations about bad behavior and questionable ethics, largely of Snyder’s own doing, had taken a toll on his three children. Tanya reminded her husband that the sale would relieve their emotional distress. A confidant warned Snyder, “The only way your legacy gets worse is if you rip this back now.”
Quiet minutes passed. Tanya said, “Dan, I know this is hard. This was a dream.”
With that, Snyder relented. He gave the go-ahead to Jason Wright, then the Commanders’ team president (he declined to comment for this story), to share the bank information so the Harris Group could wire the $6.05 billion. It was finally official: Harris and his fellow investors owned the Washington Commanders. The league had finally pushed out its most hated owner. The rally the next day at FedEx Field commenced as planned.
Months later, Tad Brown, CEO of HBSE, told confidants, “We don’t get the Commanders if not for Joe Gibbs.”
Despite Snyder’s protests about the $60 million fine, it was paid July 21 “as part of the overall transaction,” a league official confirmed.
“The fine was a condition of the sale and was included in the resolution that was voted upon and approved by the full membership,” the official said.
A spokesman for HBSE declined to comment on the sale, citing a nondisclosure agreement signed by the two sides.
THOUGH DAN SNYDER held tight to the end, Dan and Tanya Snyder had been quietly planning their second act for months. Less than three weeks after announcing on Nov. 2, 2022, that they intended to sell the Commanders, the Snyders established a company to operate in England and Wales. The document established a new company, dubbed “Snyder UK Investments Limited,” but it also signaled the Snyders’ future intentions. On the documents setting up the company, Snyder, and Tanya, then the co-CEO of the Commanders, were asked where they “usually” reside.
They both answered: England.
London made sense as the place for the Snyders to envision their post-Commanders life together. The United Kingdom holds a special place in Snyder’s heart. His late father, Gerald, who was an author and freelance writer for National Geographic and United Press International, held a dual U.S.-U.K. citizenship. At the age of 12, Dan Snyder moved from Silver Spring, Maryland, to Henley-on-Thames, outside London, as his father researched and wrote a book on the Loch Ness Monster. For two years, the family lived in the U.K. and Snyder attended a private school. It was then that Snyder became a devout Anglophile who today adores London’s history, culture and nightlife, associates said.
Snyder left the United States with a raft of legal action against him or the team during his tenure, including expected subpoenas from federal and civil lawsuits, investigations by multiple attorneys general and a two-year-old FBI and IRS inquiry into the Commanders’ finances.
Since November 2022, federal prosecutors in Alexandria, Virginia, have been investigating deceptive business practices alleged in an April 2022 letter that the House Committee on Oversight and Reform sent to the Federal Trade Commission.
A federal grand jury was impaneled, team financial records were subpoenaed, and several former team executives met with prosecutors, sources with firsthand knowledge told ESPN. No indictments have been returned. President Donald Trump this week appointed a new interim U.S. attorney for the district, and the future of the inquiry will be up to him. Snyder has been a loyal supporter of Trump, including writing a $1 million check to the president’s 2017 inaugural committee.
Snyder also is the central figure in a federal lawsuit filed a year ago by one of his former minority partners against Bank of America, the bank that Snyder owed a debt of nearly $1 billion when he sold the team. In the lawsuit, a Tampa, Florida, billionaire and former minority partner of the Commanders, Robert Rothman, alleged that Bank of America conspired with the NFL and Snyder to force him and two other minority partners to sell their stake in the Commanders back to Snyder in 2021 at a valuation roughly half of the $6.05 billion Snyder was ultimately paid.
The lawsuit, which does not name Snyder as a defendant, alleges that Bank of America turned “a blind eye” to “financial red flags” raised by Snyder’s management of the team, including his alleged failure to pay the partners a share of the profits and his increasing reliance on team debt to finance his lavish lifestyle.
The centerpiece of Rothman’s lawsuit is Bank of America’s December 2018 approval of the franchise’s $55 million credit line taken out by Snyder without his minority partners’ knowledge or required approval. The bank allowed Snyder to draw $38 million in March 2019 from the credit line “without verifying Snyder had obtained board approval,” the lawsuit states.
A Bank of America spokesman has said the bank “will vigorously defend ourselves against these allegations.”
A federal judge has given permission for Rothman’s lawyers to begin to seek discovery on some of the claims in the original suit, which could include seeking sworn testimony of Snyder and NFL executives, including NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.
“Our complaint clearly alleges my client, Bob Rothman, lost hundreds of millions of dollars because of Bank of America’s actions,” attorney Brian Kopp said. “In the process, the bank overloaded Dan Snyder with debt, knowing that he would have to sell the team. Even though he made a lot of money selling the team, I suspect that Dan Snyder feels that he got squeezed by the bank.”
Practically, Snyder’s relocation to London marked the beginning of his estrangement from some of his American friends and longtime associates, including nearly everyone connected with the NFL, according to several sources who speak with members of Snyder’s inner circle. During his 24 years at the helm of the Washington football team, Snyder’s closest ally among NFL owners was Jerry Jones, who told ESPN recently that he has not spoken with Snyder since he sold the team.
But bridges were burning long before the move. In October 2022, ESPN reported that Snyder told close associates that he had dug up dirt on Goodell and fellow NFL owners, including Jones, and told a close associate he would use it to “blow up” those who forced him to sell. “They can’t f— with me,” Snyder said privately.
When it came to Snyder’s nearly quarter-century partnership with the NFL, Jones said simply, “It was time for a divorce.”
WHEN HE’S IN London — and not aboard his 305-foot superyacht, the $180 million Lady S, which was docked this month off Harlingen in the Netherlands — Snyder has filled some of his days visiting Westminster pubs and restaurants, a source with firsthand knowledge says. The pubs are within walking distance of the luxury hotel where he’s been living while a condo he bought is being renovated, the source says. On other days, the source says, he visits the Chelsea office where his U.K.-based investment firm is housed.
It’s unclear how Snyder has invested the $6.05 billion windfall he received for the team he bought for $800 million in May 1999. On documents detailing his investment firm’s holdings, the Snyders list £1 million in assets.
One of Snyder’s post-Commanders’ investments backfired in a high-profile way. Snyder invested $6 million in a film titled “The Apprentice” through Kinematics, an upstart production company run by his 29-year-old son-in-law, Mark Rapaport. The film tells the story of Trump’s early years under the mentorship of lawyer and fixer Roy Cohn. When he made the investment, Snyder assumed the film would depict Trump positively, a source with firsthand knowledge told ESPN. But last February, Snyder screened the film with Rapaport at an island home and, the source said, became enraged by the decidedly negative portrait. The film was shelved until Kinematics finally sold off its stake last summer, and the filmmakers searched months for a U.S. distributor. In October, “The Apprentice” was released in the United States to box-office failure but critical acclaim and, this week, Academy Award nominations for actors Sebastian Stan and Jeremy Strong.
Within months of closing on the Commanders sale, the Snyders listed for sale their Potomac, Maryland, estate, known as “River House,” overlooking the Potomac River. The 30,000-square-foot mansion, the Snyders’ main residence since 2001, was listed for $49 million, but after it sat unsold, the Snyders slashed its price to $35 million. Still, there were no buyers.
Finally, in March, the Snyders donated the estate to the American Cancer Society. It was the largest gift in the organization’s 110-year history; the organization has still not sold the estate. It’s now listed at $29.9 million. The Snyders will be able to use the $18.5 million appraised value as a tax write-off. They’ve also listed for sale their Virginia estate, not far from George Washington’s Mount Vernon. The asking price is $60 million, but it remains vacant and unsold.
According to sources in London sports circles, Snyder in recent months has shopped for a piece of a soccer team, preferably in the Premier League, where exponential growth in team valuations rivals the NFL. A source close to the Premier League acknowledged hearing of Snyder’s interest in a club but said no formal move has been made. “I keep hearing he wants another act as a team owner — the Premier League is his dream,” said another source who was briefed on Snyder’s Premier League fandom and keen interest in an ownership stake.
Such a move would be “an act of redemption,” the source said. “He could maybe prove people wrong by getting a Premier League team. … He could reinvent himself there because he can’t do it here. He literally can’t.”
But other sources close to Snyder and in the Premier League believe he would never buy into a soccer club or any other professional sports team, for that matter. The reason isn’t because of finances, or prestige, or even baggage.
“He isn’t a fan of other sports,” one source said. “He’s a fan of the [Commanders]. That was the biggest thing.”
At the age of 6, Snyder attended his first Washington home game with his father, who scraped together enough money for two tickets. Snyder was hooked. “For him, it wasn’t somebody losing a team. This was different. He loved that team.”
IN THE MONTHS after the associates dined with Snyder in London, Washington’s season continued its stunning rise to the NFC title game, led by Jayden Daniels, the type of superstar quarterback who Snyder for years contended might save him from being forced to sell the team.
And D.C. has rallied around its team in ways it hasn’t for decades — since its last Super Bowl win after the 1991 season — and in ways Washington rarely rallies around anything.
In late December, after years of lobbying by Jason Wright and other Commanders executives, the U.S. Senate passed a bill to transfer the site of the team’s former home, RFK Stadium, to Washington, D.C., paving the way for a long-awaited new stadium. Suddenly it’s cool again to be a Washington football fan.
Even the former team employees who accused Snyder of fostering a toxic workplace have joined in, starting a text chain to discuss the turnaround with each other.
“Karma is real,” said Melanie Coburn, the former team cheerleader and marketing director who testified about the team to Congress. “For years, we endured the dysfunction and toxicity at the organization under Dan Snyder and blamed all the losses on the dark cloud he brought over the team. Turns out, we were right.”
Snyder’s outlook has evolved. There’s still anger, and he remains “in denial” about what led to his ouster, said a person close to his inner circle. But there’s also something else: “Sadness — for himself,” that person said. “It’s killing him. … It’s devastating for him.”
But even from across the pond, Snyder’s specter still hovers over the team. After Washington upset Tampa Bay in the wild-card round, its first playoff victory since Jan. 7, 2006, Josh Harris and limited partner Magic Johnson stood outside the locker room, surrounded by exuberant family members and cameras. Johnson put his right arm around Harris and spoke into the microphones.
“What does it take?” Johnson said. “New vision, new owner with a strategy, picking the right people … and then, we all step out of the way and let them do their jobs.”
“Talent, culture and people,” Harris said.
Neither man mentioned Dan Snyder’s name. There was no need.
Dan Snyder views Commanders’ title run: ‘He … hates it’
Washington Commanders’ owner Dan Snyder has reportedly expressed his disdain for the team’s recent success in the playoffs. Despite the Commanders making a deep run in the postseason and being just one win away from a championship title, Snyder is said to be unhappy with the team’s performance.
Sources close to Snyder have revealed that he believes the team’s success is overshadowing his own legacy and control over the franchise. He is allegedly frustrated with the attention and praise being given to the players and coaches, instead of himself.
Snyder’s attitude towards the Commanders’ title run has left many fans and analysts shocked and disappointed. It seems that even in the midst of a potential historic victory, Snyder’s ego and need for control continue to take precedence.
As the Commanders prepare for their championship game, it remains to be seen how Snyder’s negative outlook will impact the team’s morale and performance. One thing is for certain, however – Snyder’s lack of support and enthusiasm for his own team is a troubling sign for the future of the franchise.
Tags:
Dan Snyder, Washington Commanders, NFL, football, owner, Dan Snyder interview, Commanders title run, Washington football team, sports, team owner, team success, championship run, Dan Snyder opinion, Washington Commanders owner, Commanders news, sports news
At the start of the 21st century, Superman returned to television in the form of the hit prequel series Smallville. “No flights, no tights” was the rule early on as a young Clark Kent (Tom Welling) learned to master his superpowers, eventually pursuing lofty goals of truth and justice. Though fans knew that the young farm boy would eventually become the Man of Steel, many years were spent with Clark trying to leave that destiny behind. However, in the final three seasons, Smallville morphed into a superhero show proper, giving Clark a dual identity and pushing him further into heroism. Only, it turns out that series star Tom Welling hated the change…
Tom Welling Hated Playing Clark Kent’s “Blur” Alias on ‘Smallville’
Image via The CW
When talking with fans recently at the Fan Expo 2025 in New Orleans, Tom Welling revealed that his least favorite Smallville storyline was the Blur arc that ran in its final seasons. Though Clark started acting as a vigilante called first “the Good Samaritan” and later “the Red-Blue Blur” in Season 8, things took a darker turn during the ninth season. Following the death of Jimmy Olsen (Aaron Ashmore) in Season 8’s “Doomsday,” Clark turns his back on his human identity, instead embracing his Kryptonian heritage after Lois Lane (Erica Durance) goes missing. Thus, our hero traded that iconic red jacket/blue jeans combo for a Matrix-inspired trenchcoat and a black outfit clad with a silver S-shield. No longer was he the “Red-Blue Blur,” but simply “the Blur,” and Welling couldn’t stand it.
“I knew it needed to happen because we were… we were dying!,” the series star admitted about the arc. When Laura Vandervoort (who played Kara Zor-El during Season 7, and then appeared in a handful of episodes in Seasons 8 and 10) asked what the “Red-Blue Blur” arc entailed, Welling had a very direct answer. “It was this stupid thing where Clark had this alter ego where he dressed in black, and he was like Batman. And then, as much as I hated it, and Clark really didn’t like it, I had to do scenes with Lois, who keeps saying how great the Red-Blue Blur is.” Needless to say, Welling wasn’t impressed with the direction that Smallville took in those last few years.
Of course, Welling was right when he noted that Smallville needed a change. It did. The show had lost half of its cast (Michael Rosenbaum, John Glover, Kristin Kreuk, and Vandervoort) and its creators, Al Gough and Miles Miller, following Season 7. So, to spark new life into the Superman prequel, Clark Kent needed to take another step closer to his destiny. The Red-Blue Blur/Blur arc (a “pre-Superman Superman,” as Kreukaptly put it) was what made this possible, with Clark committed to protecting the citizens of Metropolis. Longtime fans of Superman and the greater DC Universe finally got to see Smallville as the superhero show we knew it could be back when Season 6’s “Justice” aired, but it may have overstayed its welcome.
The original Man of Steel didn’t want his time with the younger Clark Kent to end.
The Blur Arc Was Overplayed, but Still Important to Clark’s Journey Toward Superman
Clark Kent becoming a vigilante was a necessary step in the character’s development and commitment to his ultimate destiny. However, some of Welling’s criticisms are fair. After all, the Blur arc lasted a considerable amount of time and often repeated the same beat. By stripping Clark of his primary colors and shifting him into a more Neo-like appearance, Smallville‘s penultimate season felt far darker than usual. This worked for a time, but it was clear that the Batman-ish aesthetic couldn’t last given the Man of Steel’s classically optimistic heroism. By Season 10, Clark’s brighter colors are restored, as is his positive view of humanity, though he remains largely in the shadows until the end.
Again, this arc is necessary for Smallville‘s Clark Kent. By embracing his Kryptonian side, he was able to become more effective as a hero and trained with Jor-El (Terence Stamp) to best use his powers. But it’s only through Lois that he is reminded that his human side is just as important. Without his connection to humanity, being a hero means nothing. Even though Clark learns that lesson fairly quickly upon Lois’ return (he’s back at the Daily Planet by the end of Season 9’s second episode, “Metallo”), the show stuck with his black outfit through the rest of the season (and into Season 10’s “Lazarus”), with the Blur moniker itself lasting until “Finale.” While it was great to see Clark Kent finally become a hero, we can understand why Tom Welling felt the show went too far.
Smallville is available to stream on Hulu in the U.S.
A young Clark Kent struggles to find his place in the world as he learns to harness his alien powers for good and deals with the typical troubles of teenage life in Smallville, Kansas.
In a recent interview, Tom Welling, who played Clark Kent on the hit TV show “Smallville,” revealed that there was one storyline from the series that he absolutely hated. And fans might be surprised to learn that it had nothing to do with Kryptonite or Lex Luthor.
The storyline in question revolved around Clark’s relationship with Lana Lang, played by Kristin Kreuk. Welling admitted that he found their on-again, off-again romance to be frustrating and unrealistic.
“I just didn’t buy into the whole Clark and Lana thing. It felt forced and contrived, and I think it took away from the overall story of the show,” Welling said in the interview.
Many fans of “Smallville” have echoed Welling’s sentiments, with some even going so far as to say that the Clark and Lana storyline was one of the weakest aspects of the series.
Despite his dislike for that particular storyline, Welling still looks back fondly on his time on “Smallville” and is grateful for the opportunities it brought him.
What do you think of Tom Welling’s feelings about the Clark and Lana storyline? Do you agree with him, or do you think their relationship added depth to the show? Let us know in the comments.
Tags:
Tom Welling, Smallville, Superman, Clark Kent, Tom Welling interview, Smallville storyline, Tom Welling Smallville, Smallville cast, Smallville news, Smallville controversy
The infamous Oscars 2022 slap involving Will Smith and Chris Rock continues to make headlines even three years later. According to a report in InTouch Weekly, tensions between the two stars have not eased, with sources close to Smith claiming that he “still hates” Rock, particularly for his “smug attitude” following the incident.
Will Smith ‘still hates’ Chris Rock, according to reports.
A source told the portal, “Chris Rock is up to his neck in drama and problems in his life right now as he alienates people left and right, leaving his nemesis Will Smith to indulge in every second of his misery while twisting the knife to no end. Will’s getting the last laugh and loving it.” The source further added, “Due to the bad press, Will Smith will never forgive Chris for ruining his life, even though he’s managed to pick up the pieces in the last year or so. But he still hates the guy and his smug attitude.”
What happened between Will Smith and Chris Rock
The feud began during the 94th Academy Awards when Chris Rock made a joke about Jada Pinkett Smith’s shaved head, referencing the film, G.I. Jane. Will Smith, seemingly defending his wife, stormed onto the stage and slapped Chris. The altercation sparked debates about comedy, boundaries, and personal conduct. Many supported Rock, perceiving the Bad Boys actor’s slap as an overreaction to a joke.
Despite taking home the Academy Award that year for his performance in King Richard, Smith was banned from the event for 10 years and resigned from the organisation. He later apologized to the Academy in his acceptance speech – but not to Rock. Chris Rock also appears unwilling to let the situation go, as he continues to bring up the incident at his live shows.
In an interview with CBS Mornings, Jada Pinkett Smith reflected on the incident, saying, “That’s a really deep subject. I think you’ve gotta be really careful about the ‘why’.” She added, “That’s Will’s story to tell. Not mine. So what I will say is that being there with him that night, what I did know, was that I might not have walked in there as his wife, but I left that night as his wife. And as I sit here today, I am going to be by his side, always.”
Will Smith was last seen in the 2024 American cop action-comedy film, Bad Boys: Ride or Die. Directed by Adil & Bilall, the film is the fourth installment of the Bad Boys film series, and the sequel to Bad Boys for Life (2020). The film also starred Martin Lawrence, Joe Pantoliano, Vanessa Hudgens, Alexander Ludwig, Paola Núñez, Jacob Scipio, John Salley and DJ Khaled in key roles.
In a shocking turn of events, it seems that Will Smith is still holding a grudge against Chris Rock three years after their infamous Oscars altercation. According to sources close to Smith, the actor “will never forgive” Rock for his comments leading up to the altercation and still “hates his smug attitude.”
For those who may have forgotten, the incident occurred in 2022 when Rock made a joke about Smith’s wife, Jada Pinkett Smith, during his monologue at the Oscars. This led to Smith storming the stage and slapping Rock in front of the entire audience.
Since then, both parties have seemingly moved on from the incident, with Rock even making light of it in his comedy routines. However, it appears that Smith is still harboring resentment towards Rock and has no plans to let it go.
It remains to be seen if Smith will ever be able to forgive Rock for his remarks, but one thing is clear – their feud is far from over. Hollywood insiders are keeping a close eye on the situation, as tensions between the two actors continue to simmer. Stay tuned for any updates on this ongoing Hollywood drama.
Chris Rock is up to his neck in drama and problems in his life right now as he alienates people left and right, leaving his nemesis Will Smith to indulge in every second of his misery while twisting the knife to no end, a source exclusively tells In Touch.
As it turns out, after the slap heard around the world at the 2022 Oscars, “Will’s getting the last laugh and loving it,” the insider says. Following an unscripted joke that saw comedian Chris, 59, poke some fun at Will’s wife Jada Pinkett Smith‘s alopecia, the Wild Wild West star stormed directly to the stage shouting expletives and demanding the Osmosis Jones voice actor keep his wife’s name “out of his f–cking mouth.”
As it turns out, everybody loves Chris, and he faced an outpouring of support while viewers slammed Will for a perceived overreaction to a simple joke. While some fans still had the Bad Boys star’s back, considering he was defending his wife’s honor, the insider says that due to the bad press, Will “will never forgive Chris for ruining his life, even though he’s managed to pick up the pieces in the last year or so.”
Despite taking home the Academy Award that year for his performance in King Richard, he was banned from the event for 10 years and resigned from the organization. He apologized to the Academy in his acceptance speech – but not to Chris. That came a day later in a video after he calmed down, “but he still hates the guy and his smug attitude,” the insider adds.
Neilson Barnard/Getty Images
Will’s career is still going strong even after the incident, but Chris’, on the other hand, has hit some roadblocks recently. Back in December 2024, the comedian stormed out just minutes after he took the stage at executive chairman of Pratt Industries Anthony Pratt‘s winter holiday party.
Chris also seems unwilling to let bygones be bygones, continually bringing up the incident at his live shows. While it may seem unwise to upset a comedian with such a large platform and who basically gets to say whatever he likes to a captured audience hour after hour, to many, his continued grievance is starting to get petty.
“Chris isn’t the victim here, not in Will’s opinion,” the source continues. “A lot of people would agree with Will and think what’s happening to Chris is karma for refusing to speak to Will or accept his apology.”
The Longest Yard actor notoriously dismissed Will’s mea culpa, telling a crowd “F–ck your hostage video,” insinuating the apology was forced on behalf of Will’s management team.
All in all, violence against a comedian for a joke is never acceptable and, “from Chris’ end, he’s still haunted by what happened on that Oscars stage,” the source says. “He suffers from PTSD. Like Will, he’s never recovered from that slap.”
Regardless of how they feel now, it’s unlikely the two will reconcile any time soon and are committed to remaining bitter enemies. “Others feel the best thing would be for these two egomaniacs to come together and hug it out, but they’re too proud.”
In a recent exclusive interview, sources close to Will Smith have revealed that the actor still harbors resentment towards Chris Rock for his “smug attitude” during the infamous Oscars incident.
Despite the public apology from Rock and the subsequent reconciliation between the two, it seems that Smith has not fully forgiven the comedian for his remarks on stage that fateful night.
According to the insider, Smith believes that Rock’s comments were disrespectful and crossed a line, leading to the physical altercation that shocked the world.
While Smith has publicly stated that he has moved on from the incident, it appears that there is still lingering animosity towards Rock for his behavior.
Only time will tell if these two Hollywood heavyweights can truly bury the hatchet and move past this controversial moment in their careers.
Tags:
Will Smith, Chris Rock, feud, Oscars, confrontation, smug attitude, hate, exclusive interview
You must be logged in to post a comment.