skins_warrior

Daniel Snyder ...Dare We Say Maturing....as a competent owner

Recommended Posts

On 5/22/2018 at 12:00 PM, Reaper Skins said:

Dan is way too reactionary to be successful.

 

Even when he does make a good decision, its usually done years too late or done only as a last resort to put out a PR fire.

 

 

 

I don't disagree with some of what you wrote, but the first two points seem very contradictory...he's reactionary but doesn't react quickly enough at times (I'm paraphrasing). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HOF44 said:

Reminds me of the tale of the Scorpion and the Frog.  Dan is what he is.  He has no people skills whatsoever, runs and organization that thrives on fear and rumors. Telemarketer to NFL owner and it shows.  I honestly believe this team will never be consistently good with him as the owner.  

 

Funniest part of it all is that HE WASNT EVEN THE ONE that was successful as a telemarketer. I KNOW WHO WAS. And it wasnt him. I will leave it at that.

 

First and foremost I am a Skins fan. Period. I was actually somewhat excited when Dan first took over the team. The guy is a fan himself and he definitely wants to win. He showed right away that he would spend TONS of money to bring in talent on the field. But with each horrifyingly bad decision the happiness declined to disgust then anger and now apathy. I will always root for the Skins. But my LOVE of the team is gone. And it is because of ONE MAN. 

 

I will also add that I think the Skins drafts have actually been decent under Allen. We have hit as well as anyone else in the league with starters. And the team has been better and more consistent over the past 3 seasons. But we have gone from consistently horrid to consistently mediocre. And this isnt a Super Bowl roster again this year. I actually think we COULD be better with Smith. But in a draft with IMMENSE talent at the QB position, we decided to trade away a 3rd rounder and one of the best young slot corners in the league for a 34 year old QB. Another HORRIBLE decision IMO. It was a desperation move. We would have been much better off drafting one of the guys this year and letting him take his lumps this season. But whatever....APATHY.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

 

If he goes on to win anything with the Vikings, once again the narrative will find a way to make this organization look dumb.  It will be "The Redskins had this guy and couldn't build a team around him to win"  Whether that is a fair statement or not, you know that will be all the media has to say on the issue, and it won't even matter that most media also at the same time think Cousins got overpaid by the Vikings.  If they win, no one will talk about the money anymore, and I am saying this as a guy who does think he got overpaid, personally.

 

Winning cures all.  This franchise doesn't win.....consistently.  Unfortunately.

 

 

If Cousins wins a championship in Minnesota, which I fervently hope he does, of course, Snyder is going to look like a bonehead and be harshly criticized.  I think everyone already knows Snyder is a bonehead but he will be considered the HOF dumbass owner of all time in the NFL.  The moron who traded Babe Ruth has the professional sports franchise owner Idiot Owner of All Team award in perpetuity but in NFL Snyder I think will hold the blue ribbon.

 

Let's recap,  Snyder, paid a king's ransom, 3 first round and 1 second round picks for Griffin a flashy college option QB in the league that doesn't play defense.  Big 12 scores are like high school basketball scores.  Griffin has no aptitude for running an NFL offense and lasts as long as a fruit fly running his college offense in the NFL.  Snyder forces the coaches to play Griffin for two more seasons, whenever he is healthy enough to suit up.  Meanwhile, the real QB talent that the first coach/GM drafted 4th as trade bait but probably insurance because he knew Griffin would flop stews on the bench.

 

Finally, in year 4 the second head coach who is desperate not to see is head coaching career go down the tubes with Griffin argues and gets permission to start Cousins, the real talent, and he enables the Skins that had played .200 to .250 to play .500 ball for three seasons.  Even after he emerges with top 5-10 performances the Skins fail to embrace him, they need to see him do it again.  The goods are there right under their noses and they didn't see it and make him feel appreciated so after being franchised tagged twice he is allowed to break free and sign with Minnesota.  If Kirk wins a championship, of course, Snyder and his franchise are going to be criticized for not securing Cousins and building around him and we here will be the most vocal. 

Edited by Veryoldschool
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giphy.gif

 

No, I'd say the first time there was ever even a sign of any 'maturing' is when he hired SM. Then again he quickly fired him, but Allen has done well the last couple of years with the draft, so yeah, sorta getting away from his earlier "I'm going to fix this team" and handing over the personnel operations and decisions to those of a better football mindset. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How..can we put together in a room everyone who has been employed by Snyder..from front office big wigs down to coaches and ask them what they think of him..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

If Cousins wins a championship in Minnesota, for me it would be easier to be excited about because he's still in the NFC and in the North.. seeing's how my wife is a Bears fan I automatically get to watch him twice a year..just my two cents haha

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snyder is so disliked that the Vegas hockey team is going to send a Dan Snyder lookalike out onto the ice to represent DC for the knight to vanquish during the pregame show before the Caps play the VGK.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I don't disagree with some of what you wrote, but the first two points seem very contradictory...he's reactionary but doesn't react quickly enough at times (I'm paraphrasing). 

Reactionary instead of proactive.

 

He waits for something to become a big problem for the team before he addresses it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Kyle Smith turns out to be as good at player evaluation as his father was...and better at picking coaches, then we may have lucked into a solid FO. If he gets hired away someplace else with a promotion to GM, like I dunno...L.A., then we're back at square one. Will the Dan figure out a way to keep Smith, especially if politics get messy between him, Cousin Brucie, and Doug Williams? That still remains to be seen.

 

Gruden is to Snyder what Marvin Lewis is to Paul Brown Jr - an average guy who looks great compared to previous disasters because he will consistently produce 9-7 seasons... without winning any playoff games.

 

And for the love of heaven, can we please please STOP believing Schotferbrains had any business lasting here. His draft in 2001 was putrid, even by Vinny standards, but he refused to cede control over personnel. Norv freaking Turner won more playoff games in SD after replacing Schothead than Schotferbrains won in the previous decade as a HC. Marty sucked, period. And Jimmy Raye as OC.  Blech. 

And in case anyone has forgotten, Schnotnose accepted the two conditions for being hired at SD that he refused to agree to to remain in DC - no control over personnel, and he was not allowed to hire Jimmy Raye.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 1:48 AM, Renegade7 said:

 

You need to accept the fact he's not going to sell the team and not at and not standing pat with us being an embarrassment with these moves.  Otherwise your going to stay miserable on this topic, he's not going anywhere.

apologies but i fail to see where anything in my response to you would lead to me needing to accept snyder not selling the team. 

 

this organization has caused me to reach apathy. hurts less but is infinitely sadder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, onedrop said:

apologies but i fail to see where anything in my response to you would lead to me needing to accept snyder not selling the team. 

 

this organization has caused me to reach apathy. hurts less but is infinitely sadder.

You don't have to, that's your call, and my goal wasn't to convince you of anything, just reiterate that he's not going anyway, life is too short, is what it is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Snyder "matured" a while ago.  Just because he hasn't gotten the desired results doesn't mean he's continued to make the same bone headed rookie type mistakes he was earlier.  I'd say the last really immature move I really remember him making was the Zorn tenure as coach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the organization is getting marginally better at football.

 

What will actually tell me Dan has matured is when we stop hearing from people who have a close view of the organization that it is "toxic" and "dysfunctional." I can think of a few ESers with access to the team who've said those things (or their equivalent) in the recent past.

 

I'd love it if that stopped.

 

HTTR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/23/2018 at 8:56 AM, NoCalMike said:

The entire GMSM debacle was the last straw for a lot of people.  Whether the organization just didn't do their due diligence to make sure the guy was sober in the first place, or floating the idea that he had relapsed as a cover for why he was fired so quickly. Either way, it was just the latest in #Redskins that offered up low hanging fruit for local & national media to mock this franchise.

 

Also, the Cousins situation doesn't look good either.  Now this is regardless of whether you think he should be here or not.  If he goes on to win anything with the Vikings, once again the narrative will find a way to make this organization look dumb.  It will be "The Redskins had this guy and couldn't build a team around him to win"  Whether that is a fair statement or not, you know that will be all the media has to say on the issue, and it won't even matter that most media also at the same time think Cousins got overpaid by the Vikings.  If they win, no one will talk about the money anymore, and I am saying this as a guy who does think he got overpaid, personally.

 

Winning cures all.  This franchise doesn't win.....consistently.  Unfortunately.

 

I was extremely critical of how the organization handled the SM thing.  But looking back now I realize he was fired from his last 2 jobs for drinking. It's not unreasonable to assume this happened again here.  So if he showed up drunk for work they really didn't have a choice.   They tried to high road it but when criticism came out they let it slip out. Um..the same thing happened out of San Francisco and Seattle. They obviously let it slip out too or we would not even know of his issues there.  Did anyone criticize those organization for letting it out?

Edited by Darrell Green Fan
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

If Kyle Smith turns out to be as good at player evaluation as his father was...and better at picking coaches, then we may have lucked into a solid FO. If he gets hired away someplace else with a promotion to GM, like I dunno...L.A., then we're back at square one. Will the Dan figure out a way to keep Smith, especially if politics get messy between him, Cousin Brucie, and Doug Williams? That still remains to be seen.

 

Gruden is to Snyder what Marvin Lewis is to Paul Brown Jr - an average guy who looks great compared to previous disasters because he will consistently produce 9-7 seasons... without winning any playoff games.

 

And for the love of heaven, can we please please STOP believing Schotferbrains had any business lasting here. His draft in 2001 was putrid, even by Vinny standards, but he refused to cede control over personnel. Norv freaking Turner won more playoff games in SD after replacing Schothead than Schotferbrains won in the previous decade as a HC. Marty sucked, period. And Jimmy Raye as OC.  Blech. 

And in case anyone has forgotten, Schnotnose accepted the two conditions for being hired at SD that he refused to agree to to remain in DC - no control over personnel, and he was not allowed to hire Jimmy Raye.

 

I feel like we only had two real coaching disasters under Snyder, Spurrier and Zorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

And for the love of heaven, can we please please STOP believing Schotferbrains had any business lasting here. His draft in 2001 was putrid, even by Vinny standards, but he refused to cede control over personnel.

Say what you want about Marty, but he wouldn't have flat out quit like Spurrier did, and Gibbs was just too old when he came back to have any staying power. As far as ceding control over personnel, again, according to Spurrier, Dan wanted Beathard to return, but Bobby refused to work with Marty. Then we fire Marty, don't wind up getting Bobby anyway, and bring back Vinny. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, carex said:

 

I feel like we only had two real coaching disasters under Snyder, Spurrier and Zorn

 

They were the obvious two.  Next question is which coaching hire under Snyder worked out well?  None of them and he is the common denominator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.. the thing is nothing will ever change some fans minds about all of this - and generally it is perception. We are not 18-0 every season winning championships by more than 50 points each season so everything MUST be rotten - rotten to the core 

 

I mean someone says we might have 'lucked' into Kyle Smith - Kyle has been with the team since 2011 (8 years)  - in fact A J Smith came onboard as an advisor after Kyle was already with the team so this is not helping a friend out kind of deal. Kyle has paid his dues and is now rightfully getting the attention he deserves. 

 

Another name to watch is Richard Mann (seriously guys if your surname is Mann and you have a son don't call him Richard (DICK) Mann ...  its just cruel - although apparently it is a running joke in his family because he is Dick man the third)... 

 

But these are the kind of guys you want to develop and allow to grow into their roles and when people were calling for us to grab a high profile name from outside the organization to bring in his own guys - these are often the guys who end up being washed out and picked up by other teams. 

 

People always say we never invest enough in scouting - which historically has been true - But again and it was an aim of Bruce Allen to boost the scouting department - (on redskins.com there are 9 guys who are listed as regional scouts... two scouting assistants plus the directors and assistant directors - (how good they are i am in no position to judge - but at least one of them may essentially spend all year just going to Alabama games)  . 

 

Going forward i think the franchise is actually being run by grown ups. From the outside it looks like a football organization - The next big thing for me is the new stadium deal - I mean just watching the cowboys on All in on amazon and their facilities are amazing - the new Rams facilities are going to be outstanding - The Redskins know they are going to have to do something - and maybe the Stadium is closer than people think with the apparent lack or slowing down  of investment at FedEX field - which was outdated as soon as the first shovel hit the ground in construction (and that is thanks to the Cook family - who tried to rush a cheep and quick monument to the great JKC - which ended up being anything but) 

 

I know people always say - if you do not learn from the mistakes of history then you are doomed to repeat them - But equally while the past is a nice place to visit from time to time, you don't want to live there. 

 

just a thought 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 3:41 PM, HOF44 said:

I honestly believe this team will never be consistently good with him as the owner.  

 

 

My head has been saying this ever since he fired Marty but my heart still hopes.  At least I got the Vikings on the side now so if the Skins go in the tank I'll still have some fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

 

Hmm.. the thing is nothing will ever change some fans minds about all of this - and generally it is perception. We are not 18-0 every season winning championships by more than 50 points each season so everything MUST be rotten - rotten to the core 

 

 

I’m sorry, brother, and I really do feel for you and what you think you’re trying to accomplish in terms of fighting negativity... but what kind of ridiculously unfair and irrational thinking has you say something like this? Honestly? You think the vast majority of criticism levied at Dan occurs because “we are not 18-0 every season winning championships by more than 50 points”? 

 

For God’s sake, our BEST season under Dan was a 10 win season with one wildcard playoff win that we just barely eked out. That, with the legendary Joe Gibbs on the sidelines!  

 

Enough with the hyperbolic misrepresentations that destroy any potential for a meaningful discussion or debate. I mean, man, that one really got to me. Come on now. :/ 

 

19 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

People always say we never invest enough in scouting - which historically has been true - But again and it was an aim of Bruce Allen to boost the scouting department - (on redskins.com there are 9 guys who are listed as regional scouts... two scouting assistants plus the directors and assistant directors - (how good they are i am in no position to judge - but at least one of them may essentially spend all year just going to Alabama games)  . 

 

So you say “this has historically been true” without batting an eyelid, without questioning how long it’s taken, including with Bruce Allen at the helm, but then proceed to only speak about it finally changing now as if that’s the only  thing that matters? 

 

And if you think that it finally changing now is a good thing, aren’t you essentially agreeing with everyone you’ve constantly put down who’s criticized them for it in the past? 

 

I mean, if you’re approach was, “hey, you guys have been right all along, and it’s nice the organization seems to be getting what you’ve been saying about these things, so kudos to you and now let’s give kudos to them”... well, maybe your points here wouldn’t be so ridiculously incoherent and condescending. Alas, you aren’t saying that and, therefore, they are. 

 

Yeah, let’s just gloss over it all and immediately forgive Dan and his top executives for almost two decades of poor organizational structure and general management (or lack thereof really) because, hey, Bruce has boosted the scouting department about 8 years into his tenure, making them about on par with the average franchise. Yay, stop living in the past you aholes! 

 

19 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

 

I know people always say - if you do not learn from the mistakes of history then you are doomed to repeat them - But equally while the past is a nice place to visit from time to time, you don't want to live there

 

Learning from past mistakes is not the same as living in the past. I have no idea why you conflated the former with the latter here. 

 

I think you’re just trying to say that you want us all to forgive them for everything and trust them moving forward. As naive as that is, I can respect that if someone wants to do that. Heck, I try to tell myself that all the time. But it isn’t easy and there’s plenty of justification for that. Posts like this one certainly don’t help the cause. 

 

Dan has earned much of the criticism he gets. Yes, some of it is over the top and, yes, there have been improvements... but it doesn’t change the very real possibility of those improvements suddenly disintegrating (which has happened numerous times) and it doesn’t change the concern one should have when recognizing just how long it’s taken for even some of those most fundamental and basic organizational principles to be applied. 

 

19 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

I mean someone says we might have 'lucked' into Kyle Smith - Kyle has been with the team since 2011 (8 years)  - in fact A J Smith came onboard as an advisor after Kyle was already with the team so this is not helping a friend out kind of deal. Kyle has paid his dues and is now rightfully getting the attention he deserves.

 

1) I haven’t heard a single soul say they lucked into anything with him; 

 

2) The vast majority of people who criticize Dan/Bruce on this board like Kyle Smith and assume his good reputation has been earned, and finally; 

 

3) The only real concern anyone has is that he’d be another good personnel executive lost or not given the right title relative to the level of his expertise in the vein of a Schneider or a Thompson because Snyder/his top exec aren’t structuring the organization properly. 

 

Basically, Kyle Smith does not aid you in your quest to vilify those who legitimately criticize Dan and his top exec. Sorry. :) 

 

So, actually, the criticism has never been that they’ve got no one worthy within the building, it’s been the process and structure that leads to either losing those who are worthy, undermining them, and/or seeing them regress within a poor support system. 

 

I really wish people would understand this. 

 

Hopefully that doesn’t happen in this case, either way. We’re all rooting for that. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As for the post from Sub above spot on for me.  The thing with Dan as the perception game that IMO sometimes gets lost in the weeds is this:

 

The organization isn't perceived as classy.  Among other things when some prominent person leaves the organization -- they are kicked out the door in an ugly way.  And from what I've observed that is the lynchpin for why many in the national media doesn't like the team.    

 

Maybe there is something to the name issue as part of the soup.  But it doesn't help that the perception is Dan isn't a good guy.  Do I think if people perceived Dan as a likable guy who is known for class and doing the right thing -- would that change some of the media depiction of the team?  IMO, heck yeah.

 

Has that drill turned over a total new leaf recently? Not at all.  It's same old same old.  The only difference is some impute the ugliness to Bruce over Dan considering Dan's fingerprints aren't directly on it.   I was listening to Brewer recently and he was saying that Bruce's antagonistic relationship with the local media does indeed color the coverage of the team.   People react to people's personality -- its human nature. 

 

I get the media is perceived by many as evil and I've had my own issues with them in my profession so I have no blanket love for the profession -- but from my own personal experience I've found that if the typical media folk likes you and you treat them with respect -- you get MUCH better coverage. 

 

So in short, IMO the bad media coverage of the team is a direct correlation with Dan/Bruce's personality and inability or unwillingness to manage that side of things.  So I don't feel even a little sorry for them on that front.  They've made their bed.   Some people for example complain about why did the media take Kirk's side in the contract dispute -- I think there are multiple reasons for it but one key one is they liked Kirk. 

 

Some downplay the power of likability as some superficial throwaway quality.  But the bottom line is that this quality matters big time in most professions.  So when some people whine that the people who take digs at Dan/Bruce are some dupes who just swallow whatever the media feeds them -- that's silly because we have specific reasons about what we like or don't like about the FO that have nothing to do with what the media thinks of the organization.  However, in my view, the fact that the media just pummels this organization is a direct product of their mis-management.   

 

Why does the media like Jay, Kirk, Scot, etc.  But not Dan, Bruce?  Some sort of odd random coincidence?  No there is a reason.   

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 6:55 AM, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

You act as if we form our opinions based on newspaper articles.  No actually we have based our opinion on the facts, and the facts show this team has not even been close to contending since Daniel Snyder  took over.  They have been a team other fans laughed at and we've had far more bad seasons than good.  A good season around here used to be a ring, now it's defined as 9-7 and a first round playoff exit.

 

As mentioned above it's not just the lack of on the field results.  The owner of the Washington Redskins is just a bad guy who treats everyone around him like crap.  

 

You mentioned the word Facts....and they are?

game-of-thrones-confused-gif.gif.832e86c3d7819c9897e5ea395432555e.gif

 

If you're alluding to the record, you can say the same for a number of teams in the NFL. There are only 4 maybe five teams in the NFL that have had real consistent success over the past 20 years (Patriots, Steelers, add your other two or three). But that's the game of football. Its a game that takes place on the field. There's injuries, luck and heartache.

 

But I'm really curious about the facts that lead you to believe Dan Snyder is this bad guy. You don't know him yourself, do you? I would assume not. Fact is, I don't know him either. But again, I refuse to allow narratives to alter my own common sense. For me, common sense says this: narratives are not facts; facts are proven - simple as that. Ya see, common sense is fairly simple. Narratives, on the other hand, is extremely (pun intended) complicated. The word complicated is fairly close to the word chaos. Chaos is fairly close to insane or extreme. 

 

Just provide some real facts is all I'm asking. Show me a video of him doing something heinous. Let me hear a audio of him saying he hates this area and wants his team to lose every ****ing game. Show me a news clip quoting Dan Snyder himself saying **** the Redskins, hehehe (in his best Brain impression while Bruce "Pinky" Allen stands in the background)

Oh I get, you're talking about bad football decisions. Picking bad players and stuff like that, right? OK, I get it. But I'll say this.....bad decisions means you're making one. It means you're a leader and not a follower. Bad decision are only considered bad after they've been made. Think back to the splash FA signings over the years. Just about everyone of those signings blew this forum up with positive feedback about the upcoming season. When it didn't work out, the sheep came out to pasture yelling baaahh hate, baaahh hate. Its the haters that are critical of decisions after the fact. To me, those are the bad guys. But then I thought to myself, haters really would never have the ca hones to make those decisions, they're sheep.

Facts

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.