Washington Commanders owner Dan Snyder is inching toward a world-record payday from the sale of a sports franchise.

But the process has been shrouded in mystery due to confidentiality agreements between the serious contenders, which include Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Philadelphia 76ers and New Jersey Devils owner Josh Harris, and Houston Rockets owner Tilman Fertitta. 

And there’s been another process that is understandably even more opaque: the league’s second outside investigation, led by former SEC chief Mary Jo White. 

Sources told Front Office Sports that White had uncovered more financial concerns than have been reported to date.

While controlling owners can tap team revenues, sources told FOS Snyder is thought to be one of the few owners — maybe the only one — in the league to pay himself a salary. Snyder’s was $10 million before the start of the pandemic, which prompted him to forgo his salary. 

Last year, Snyder’s old salary was back along with what one source called a “substantial” raise. While that’s not against league rules, White is looking into whether any loans — including the $450 million the NFL approved in 2021 that allowed Snyder to buy out three co-owners — were used improperly.

A Commanders’ spokesperson called “the characterization of the White investigation 100% false.” The NFL declined to comment on this story.

Snyders Move Out

The Snyders have cleared out of the Commanders’ facility, according to a report from Pro Football Talk.

The move could signal an impending sale of the NFL franchise they have owned since 1999. Last November, Dan and Tanya Snyder announced the sale of the franchise and retained the services of Bank of America to facilitate the transaction.

The sale of Manchester United appears to be reaching its endgame.

On Thursday, representatives for Qatar’s Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani reportedly met with club officials at Old Trafford to discuss an improved bid to buy the club from the current owners, the Glazer family.

The Qatari royal was not there himself, but Nine Two Foundation president Shahzad Shahbaz and Fady Bakhos, the Sheikh’s most senior personal advisor, as well as representatives from Bank of America and lawyers from international firm Macfarlanes were in attendance.

Not to be outdone, British billionaire Jim Ratcliffe reportedly toured the stadium and met with club officials regarding his bid for the team on Friday. He was also accompanied by his closest advisors.

For several weeks, the consortiums led by Sheikh Jassim and Ratcliffe have been the two finalists to take over the club.

In late February, the two prospective owners submitted bids for Man United — but both were reportedly too low for the Glazers to consider, leading to this week’s meetings.

The Glazers are supposedly looking for bids in the range of $7.2 billion — a huge jump from the club’s $4.2 billion valuation from the New York Stock Exchange and $4.6 billion from Forbes.

However, the Qatari contingent has publicly said it will not overpay for the club.

Merchant bank Raine Group is overseeing the process.

On Thursday, 15-seed Princeton men’s basketball team pulled out a thrilling upset over No. 2 Arizona. 

The Tigers, who will advance to the Round of 32 on Saturday, are the only team in the men’s tournament without any players on athletic scholarship. Ivy League schools prohibit sports scholarships and only offer athletes “need-based” financial aid. 

As if March couldn’t get any madder, two basketball players filed a lawsuit against Ivy League schools over this policy just two weeks ago. 

• The lawsuit, which is seeking class certification, was filed by current Brown women’s basketball player Grace Kirk and former men’s player Tamenang Choh. 
• The players argued in a complaint that the policy violates the Sherman Antitrust Act by illegally price-fixing the value of athletes’ athletic competition. 
• While the suit acknowledges that players receive financial aid, it often doesn’t cover the cost of attendance — which an athletic scholarship might.

“The Ivy League Agreement, in short, has stymied competition that would have lowered, and would lower, the net cost of attendance,” the complaint read. “These injuries are particularly unfair given what is required of Ivy League Athletes and how their services benefit their schools and the Ivy League brand.”

The complaint also referenced two other recent antitrust cases related to college sports, O’Bannon v. NCAA and NCAA v. Alston — which both found that certain compensation restrictions in the NCAA were illegal.

“The Ivy League athletics model is built upon the foundational principle that student-athletes should be representative of the wider student body, including the opportunity to receive need-based financial aid,” the Ivy League said in a statement.