Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Dan Snyder one of Best Owners?

tkatz

By tkatz
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Art

Art

Posted
Posted

Kingfish,

What job do I love? I don't work for the Redskins or Dan Snyder. If it makes you feel better to assume I can appreciate what a fine owner he is and so doing must mean I work for him, that's your fatal flaw, not mine. At no point did I suggest he has been a perfect owner. No owner is perfect. He is, however, the best owner there is because he embodies EXACTLY what an owner should be.

He provides for his organization at a level no one else can compete with -- or more, that no one else has chosen to compete with.

Now, I don't hold it against him he fired people who couldn't use a computer when he came on board in 1999. In fact, I'm pretty sure all of us would have walked in to Redskins Park back then and been astounded that there were two computers in the building and the organization was in such a shambles.

Snyder fixed that, making Redskins Park a technological marvel and hiring the types of people qualified to do that. That's good ownership, even if it hurts a few people he fired. On top of that, many of these people in very key positions had a DIRECT line to the press. You can trace the lineage of some of our problems with the media to the initial termination of just about every close contact developed by reporters at the Park over the years.

The free agency period of 2000 is most routinely used to diminish Snyder in some way, largely because people are factually inaccurate about how they portray it. Like you here. The 6-2 Redskins of 2000 didn't appear to be splintered, right? The defense that ranked 30th the year before improved to fourth in 2000 as a direct reflection of the offseason, yet, you'd consider this a flaw? Only when we had injuries on offense and some guys turned out to have had CAREER years the previous year on offense did we begin to fail. The moves themselves were very successful in doing exactly what they were supposed to do.

The reason Marty was let go was the public, joint statement that he wouldn't relinquish his GM duties, but, since Marty didn't actually HAVE GM duties, he merely assumed them and Snyder allowed it for a year, tells you the real reason was Jimmy Raye and terrible coaching by Marty. Had Marty agreed to hire a competent offensive mind he'd probably STILL be here. That Marty ONLY got that team to respond to him by largely uniting it behind a hatred of him also was a poor reflection on the future. That team would have had to be destroyed to ultimately succeed for Marty because most of them hated him and instead of breaking them, he caved to them and played to that hatred.

Ultimately though, an owner is judged by the intelligence behind his decisions at the time they are made. Spurrier was a great hire that would have been made by any owner. Marty was a good hire. Gibbs was a good hire. If Gibbs fails, it won't be because Snyder made a mistake. It'll be because Gibbs was unable to get the job done. And, if Gibbs is successful, it will be because Gibbs was successful.

All the owner can do within that is to provide for his football people and give them what they tell him they need. Snyder does that like NO other. We get EXACTLY what we want. If there's a mistake in what we want, the blame is on the people making the decision as to who we want, not on the owner who allows the money to make such moves happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drowland

drowland

Posted
Posted

From a personel stand point, the Patroits and Steelers are the two best run teams in the NFL. They're smart and savvy when it comes to the draft and FA. The Skins tend to over reach. They can get away with it because of Snyder's cash flow, but at some point I'd like to see the Skins buckle down and get smarter. Gibbs gives away draft picks like it's Halloween candy. The next big hire Snyder makes should be a savvy GM, which will probably happen once Gibbs retires again. Lord help us if Snyder lets Cerrato call all the shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ikaros

Ikaros

Posted
Posted

i dont think Gibbs would have come back if it werent for danny boy spendin his money left and right his 1st couple years as an owner. Gibbs knew 2 things about Snyder before he came back, 1: hes willing to spend the cash needed to build a super bowl team, and 2: hes spending it in the wrong places. now that Gibbs is directing traffic, everyone wants to be a redskin. just look at our 2 coordinators and our free agents, then try not to cry when you realize your team is 30mil below the cap because your owner is cheap, and scared of being criticised. Snyder aint scurred, and neither are we. bring home the trophies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kingfish50

kingfish50

Posted
Posted
Kingfish,

What job do I love? I don't work for the Redskins or Dan Snyder. If it makes you feel better to assume I can appreciate what a fine owner he is and so doing must mean I work for him, that's your fatal flaw, not mine. At no point did I suggest he has been a perfect owner. No owner is perfect. He is, however, the best owner there is because he embodies EXACTLY what an owner should be.

He provides for his organization at a level no one else can compete with -- or more, that no one else has chosen to compete with.

Now, I don't hold it against him he fired people who couldn't use a computer when he came on board in 1999. In fact, I'm pretty sure all of us would have walked in to Redskins Park back then and been astounded that there were two computers in the building and the organization was in such a shambles.

Snyder fixed that, making Redskins Park a technological marvel and hiring the types of people qualified to do that. That's good ownership, even if it hurts a few people he fired. On top of that, many of these people in very key positions had a DIRECT line to the press. You can trace the lineage of some of our problems with the media to the initial termination of just about every close contact developed by reporters at the Park over the years.

The free agency period of 2000 is most routinely used to diminish Snyder in some way, largely because people are factually inaccurate about how they portray it. Like you here. The 6-2 Redskins of 2000 didn't appear to be splintered, right? The defense that ranked 30th the year before improved to fourth in 2000 as a direct reflection of the offseason, yet, you'd consider this a flaw? Only when we had injuries on offense and some guys turned out to have had CAREER years the previous year on offense did we begin to fail. The moves themselves were very successful in doing exactly what they were supposed to do.

The reason Marty was let go was the public, joint statement that he wouldn't relinquish his GM duties, but, since Marty didn't actually HAVE GM duties, he merely assumed them and Snyder allowed it for a year, tells you the real reason was Jimmy Raye and terrible coaching by Marty. Had Marty agreed to hire a competent offensive mind he'd probably STILL be here. That Marty ONLY got that team to respond to him by largely uniting it behind a hatred of him also was a poor reflection on the future. That team would have had to be destroyed to ultimately succeed for Marty because most of them hated him and instead of breaking them, he caved to them and played to that hatred.

Ultimately though, an owner is judged by the intelligence behind his decisions at the time they are made. Spurrier was a great hire that would have been made by any owner. Marty was a good hire. Gibbs was a good hire. If Gibbs fails, it won't be because Snyder made a mistake. It'll be because Gibbs was unable to get the job done. And, if Gibbs is successful, it will be because Gibbs was successful.

All the owner can do within that is to provide for his football people and give them what they tell him they need. Snyder does that like NO other. We get EXACTLY what we want. If there's a mistake in what we want, the blame is on the people making the decision as to who we want, not on the owner who allows the money to make such moves happen.

Well said Art. You should have stated that the first go around. You made the man sound flawless. I think he's turned out to be a great owner after going thru his apprentiship. I still think a lot of mistakes were made by him (for the good of the team), but like I said, he's gone thru that learning curve and I do believe he's one of, if not, the best owners in the NFL. Oh, and about the, like your job bit, just a little sarcasm. I actually respect your work and think you do a fine job here. We are all (well, most of us) Redskin fans here. Enjoy the day, Art.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redskins4VT

Redskins4VT

Posted
Posted

I completely disagree, I think the only good thing he has done thus far was to hire Gibbs (which was big), but part of the reason that the Gibbs hire was so good was because it would take more of the power out of snyder's hands and allow Gibbs to decide who was and wasn't on the team. You might disagree, but I think we could've signed most of our FA's for far less than we ended up paying. And after going to the playoffs for one year, my 2 LL season tickets have gone from around $1500 to over $2000. How much will I be paying in 5 years...$3000? 4000?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jerrod6002

Jerrod6002

Posted
Posted
He does a good job taking advantage of the money he has, and he would be a horrible owner if he did otherwise. Fans from other teams despise Snyder, for the very reason that he is a good owner. If he wasn't, they wouldn't give a damn.

With the kind of businessman that Snyder is don't you honestly believe that if the Redskins were a low revenue team that he would opperate difinitely in regards to free agency and the way he spends money. I think Mr. Snyder is a an extremely bright man. He would make it work with what he had to work with. He just happens to have made the Reskins an extremely profitable team and is willing to spend the money accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AvesPKS

AvesPKS

Posted
Posted

I honestly see it as a case of him listening to Gibbs. That's one thing I like hearing about all the signings that have gone on in this offseason so far. With some teams, it's unclear what motivates a particular signing, whereas with the Redskins I see it as being Snyder listening to Gibbs, which means we only make moves we need to, but we do get to make those moves.

However...Snyder's still playing fantasy football, he's just hired a coach to tell him what he needs to do to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsDukes

SkinsDukes

Posted
Posted
i don't fault marty schottenheimer for anything. he was only here for one season. he couldn't have been expected to turn the whole franchise around from jump could he? even joe gibbs needed a year.

spurrier was just a dumb hire. everyone and their grandmothers could see that the QB needed protection, but he couldn't.

Not to rehash old subjects, but yes I can fault Schotty for something. The fact that he felt he could turn around Jeff George, and then had Tony Banks as a backup plan. I still think watching Banks play QB took several years off my life.:mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BlueTiki21

BlueTiki21

Posted
Posted

I'll start off by saying that I don't know much about Dan Snyder, and I'm sure most of you don't know much about the owners of the other 31 NFL teams. If this is the case, how can you honestly say he's the best?

Sure he's helped out the team and learned from his mistakes, but who's to say the other owners haven't? Any dedicated fan would proclaim their team's owner to be the best ( with possible exceptions to perennial losers).

In my personal opinion a great owner not only does what is best for his team, but also tries to do his best for the NFL as a whole. Prior to Wellington Mara's passing, I could have made a lengthy argument as to how he could be the best owner in the NFL. I may have been a little bit biased, but I'm pretty sure even non-Giants fans would agree that he was at least one of the best if they looked at the matter objectively.

Right now, I would probably have to tip my hat to the Rooney family up in Pittsburgh.

But once again, it's somewhat pointless to argue this point without having proper knowledge of all 32 owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mania

Mania

Posted
Posted

If I knew back when Snyder purchased the team that we would need to go through several losing seasons and lose a lot of respect and go through a coaching and players carousel, but in the end Joe Gibbs would come back to coach the Redskins for 5 years, i'd be all for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
LoudMouth12thMan

LoudMouth12thMan

Posted
Posted
How is he a better owner than Jerry Jones? He has no Super Bowl wins and he's made foolish mistakes during his tenure? He's known as the cash cow who is guaranteed to pay you far more than what your worth let alone what you're asking for?

Oh foolish ones:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/30/Revenues_1.html

Read above link!

Give Daniel Snyder a chance to establish his mark with regard to Super Bowl victories (yes that is plural). By the way Cowgirl fan, no one gets anything for being THIRD PLACE.:laugh: Besides what has Jerry done lately?...hire a coach who lost twice to their biggest rival in the same season. Among other shortcomings, this is of course the most notable for Skin's fans. :silly: What an accomplishment :applause:

HAIL TO THE #1 FRANCHISE IN FOOTBALL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4skins23

4skins23

Posted
Posted
How is he a better owner than Jerry Jones? He has no Super Bowl wins and he's made foolish mistakes during his tenure? He's known as the cash cow who is guaranteed to pay you far more than what your worth let alone what you're asking for?

I'm sure Jerry Jones has made a few mistakes along his way.And on the flip side we could have a money hungry owner that won't spend diddly on players.(see Da Bears) You may have a point about not having a bowl win,but I believe 1 will be forthcoming.The real question is can we keep them coming? Are we making wise business decisions for our future? Do we have the makings of a franchise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...