What has Snyder done for us?

[JimboDaMan]

The erratic and disruptive changes of the Snyder era indicates that a plan of some sort has never been created, adopted or, at least, executed.

That's simply not true. Snyder's intention, from the first day he bought the franchise, was to hire Steve Spurrier as his head coach. Nobody gave him a snowball's chance of making that happen, but Snyder planned and persisted until he achieved his goal.

I don't understand this 'blueprint' thing. Every team has roughly the same blueprint: pay a few stars, find a few diamonds in the rough, get a top-notch staff to evaluate talent and another to coach the team. Some do this better than others, but everybody has the same goal.

Before we fawn at the altar of Andy Reid, consider that the Redskins just went 1-1 with their star offensive player out. The Eagles just got absolutely humiliated with their offense largely intact. Wanna bet how many games they'll win if McNabb goes down? As far as blueprint, they just signed the farm over to a QB who was enormously average against one of the NFL's lesser defenses.

And now, a handful of games into the first season with Snyder's coach of choice, fans are already beginning to vent their frustration. I find it amusing that so many fans who accuse Snyder of impatience and impulsiveness are so quick to give up two months into Spurrier's regime.

[Die Hard]

Originally posted by OaktonSkinsFan

The fact that we, the public, are not presented with a blueprint does necessarily indicate the absence of one or the fact that one is required. All successful organizations have some type of blueprint or formalized plan for success. Businesses, for instance, have a business plan. I can't imagine that, say, the Eagles or the Rams didn't begin their rebuilding programs a few years ago without some sort of plan, blueprint or whatever appellation you wish to designate. The erratic and disruptive changes of the Snyder era indicates that a plan of some sort has never been created, adopted or, at least, executed.

Oakton, the business plan of every single NFL franchise is a day-to-day exercise. It's improving the conditions of the football day in any given way... and those variables change every day. It could be an injury which causes a strength to become a sudden weakness. It could be a coach who moves to another team to take a promotion. It could be a great player who unexpectedly is available to teams.

The only thing stable in the world is change.

You think the 7-2 Bucs had a blueprint when they fired Dungy? How many plans did they go through before they ended up with plan Z. And wasn't their plan to hire a coach with an "offensive" background. How has Gruden's influence been on the Bucs offense this year? Yet, you don't hear much grumbling in Tampa about the Bucs this year do you? What's the blueprint in Tampa?

How about the Eagles? Andy Reid was brought into the Eagles organization as a West Coast offense guru. Yet, it was Modrak that wanted Donovan McNabb. And McNabb is the only thing that keeps their offense afloat... and it's not because he's got the West Coast offense humming. Are they winning in Philly because of the Head Coach's playcalling ability? Or are they consistently relying on the strength of Jimmy Johnson's defense? What's the blueprint in Philly?

What about the Saints? What was their blueprint? Was it to sign Jeff Blake to a large free agent contract... yet have a young unheralded backup turn out to be a franchise QB when Blake goes down to injury? Or was it to spend a 1st round pick on McAllister after spending an entire draft to acquire a franchise RB - who is just beginning to entire his prime - just years before? Maybe it was to spend the #13 overall draft pick on a WR (ie. Stallworth) to be a complimentary reciever to Joe Horn; of course only after having signed Albert Connell to a significant free agent contract. And lest we forget that the Saints also had one of the most feared and costly offensive lines in football just 2 years ago. Take a look at that unit now. Those aren't the same faces. Where's the blueprint?

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Originally posted by JimboDaMan

That's simply not true. Snyder's intention, from the first day he bought the franchise, was to hire Steve Spurrier as his head coach. Nobody gave him a snowball's chance of making that happen, but Snyder planned and persisted until he achieved his goal.

I don't understand this 'blueprint' thing. Every team has roughly the same blueprint: pay a few stars, find a few diamonds in the rough, get a top-notch staff to evaluate talent and another to coach the team. Some do this better than others, but everybody has the same goal.

Before we fawn at the altar of Andy Reid, consider that the Redskins just went 1-1 with their star offensive player out. The Eagles just got absolutely humiliated with their offense largely intact. Wanna bet how many games they'll win if McNabb goes down? As far as blueprint, they just signed the farm over to a QB who was enormously average against one of the NFL's lesser defenses.

And now, a handful of games into the first season with Snyder's coach of choice, fans are already beginning to vent their frustration. I find it amusing that so many fans who accuse Snyder of impatience and impulsiveness are so quick to give up two months into Spurrier's regime.

Please pay attention. I am a fan of SOS and like what he is trying to do. I am critical of the selection of Marvin Lewis primarily due to his desire to leave soon as a HC somewhere else. And knowing that in advance, it doesn't seem very sound to hire him.

I don't think that shooting in the dark, so to speak, is what succesful NFL teams do. They plan for the long term.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Originally posted by Die Hard

Oakton, the business plan of every single NFL franchise is a day-to-day exercise. It's improving the conditions of the football day in any given way... and those variables change every day. It could be an injury which causes a strength to become a sudden weakness. It could be a coach who moves to another team to take a promotion. It could be a great player who unexpectedly is available to teams.

The only thing stable in the world is change.

You think the 7-2 Bucs had a blueprint when they fired Dungy? How many plans did they go through before they ended up with plan Z. And wasn't their plan to hire a coach with an "offensive" background. How has Gruden's influence been on the Bucs offense this year? Yet, you don't hear much grumbling in Tampa about the Bucs this year do you? What's the blueprint in Tampa?

How about the Eagles? Andy Reid was brought into the Eagles organization as a West Coast offense guru. Yet, it was Modrak that wanted Donovan McNabb. And McNabb is the only thing that keeps their offense afloat... and it's not because he's got the West Coast offense humming. Are they winning in Philly because of the Head Coach's playcalling ability? Or are they consistently relying on the strength of Jimmy Johnson's defense? What's the blueprint in Philly?

What about the Saints? What was their blueprint? Was it to sign Jeff Blake to a large free agent contract... yet have a young unheralded backup turn out to be a franchise QB when Blake goes down to injury? Or was it to spend a 1st round pick on McAllister after spending an entire draft to acquire a franchise RB - who is just beginning to entire his prime - just years before? Maybe it was to spend the #13 overall draft pick on a WR (ie. Stallworth) to be a complimentary reciever to Joe Horn; of course only after having signed Albert Connell to a significant free agent contract. And lest we forget that the Saints also had one of the most feared and costly offensive lines in football just 2 years ago. Take a look at that unit now. Those aren't the same faces. Where's the blueprint?

The strategy in Philly is establishing a long term core coaching staff with a system that works and then getting your foundation players. After that, you tweak as needed.

Tampa is starting fresh. They didn't like the Dungy plan and so they abandoned it.

Teams that plan for the long term and introduce consistency and stability are the teams that experience success.

[bulldog]

the big mistake was in hiring Marty and giving him all executive power and then deciding less than a year later he couldn't live with that arrangement.

mature owners who have been around the block a couple of times and are more stable and less impulsive would not have given away that much power to an individual in their organization.

Cooke delegated significant authority to Beathard and Gibbs but the final decision on major moves such as the Lachey trade and the signing of Wilber Marshall rested with JKC himself after they were proposed.

That quick decision to hire Marty amid the criticism from around the league for firing Norv during the season cost this team an entire year. The direction Marty took this team in and a number of the players he brought in were all moves that had to be undone with the Spurrier hire.

Now we are headed in the opposite direction.

But to tell the truth, I don't see much of a difference between Marty's ex-Chiefs and Spurrier's ex-Gators.

Donnell Bennett was a bust. Lockett was a bust. Barker was average. Only Szott performed at a solid level.

Of the ex-Gators, they performed as most NFL observers thought they would: they have contributed little.

While the Redskins were bringing in bargain basement talent on offense they were busy constructing a defense that was going to be ready to contend this year.

Lewis was hired even though it was fairly clear he wasn't a long term hire.

My question is, why make all those impact investments on defense and then go into the season with an offensive team without the talent to be competitive?

What is the point of doing that?

It seems to me that finishing #10 last year in defense the unit needed a couple of moves in the offseason to fill in at LDE and OLB, but that the majority of work needed to be done on offense rebuilding at quarterback, receiver, tight end and the interior line.

Instead those spots got little in the way of veteran or capable help.

We had 10 picks in the draft but only see Rock Cartwright among those players getting significant time on the field with the regulars.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that most teams that finish 8-8 and then turn over a large percentage of the roster often end up with more than one draft pick making an impact

That is not the result of any scientific investigation on my part.

But I see #2 and #3 and #4 draft choices around the league that have stepped up to fill in at key spots as starters or major contributors, but not here for some reason.

[Die Hard]

Originally posted by OaktonSkinsFan

Teams that plan for the long term and introduce consistency and stability are the teams that experience success.

That's simply not true. And as a Redskin fan who suffered under Turner you should now better. As should the Seahawk fans now know after 4 years with Holmgren.

Stability ONLY comes after winning.

And there's just too many examples of coaches who turned around a franchise in their first year. Ask Haslett and Sherman.

[JimboDaMan]

Part of that 'some reason' is injury. You would certainly have seen contributions from Robert Royal had he remained healthy. The way things are going at WR I expect Cliff Russell would have seen the field some also.

Actually, the way things are going at QB you will probably see more of Ramsey before the year is out.

I think in the long term this will be judged a good draft, but I aggree that its immediate impact is nil.

[Larry Brown #43]

Here's my main beef. I hear people around here all the time bashing Marty, bashing Cerrato, bashing Mendes. What we seem to overlook is the source. Who hired these people that we moan about? Who gave Marty too much control? Who RE-HIRED Vinny? Complaining about these guys is like a Cowboy fan complaining about Coach Campo. Campo is not the Cowboys' problem. He may not be a great coach, but that organization's problems run much deeper than Campo. Why do we not put blame on the guy who HIRED the people who have created this mess? Why do we not blame the guy for masterminding (I use that term loosely) The Great Deion Disaster? That mistake set this program WAY back, and most Redskins fans were screaming for Snyder not to do it. I can still hear Danny saying: "Now the most dangerous weapon in football is on our side." Dangerous weapon indeed, if you're talking in terms of destroying our salary cap structure.

When Snyder first bought the Skins, he said some complimentary things about the way JJ runs the Cowboys. That scared the hell out of me at the time, but I chose to ignore it. Now it seems that instead of learning from JJ's mistakes, Snyder seems determined to repeat them.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Originally posted by Die Hard

That's simply not true. And as a Redskin fan who suffered under Turner you should now better. As should the Seahawk fans now know after 4 years with Holmgren.

Stability ONLY comes after winning.

And there's just too many examples of coaches who turned around a franchise in their first year. Ask Haslett and Sherman.

Cute theory. I suppose we'll just keep experimenting every season - new coaches, new systems, new players, new management types, etc. until one of these groups gets it right their FIRST season. My advice: Better get some scuba gear.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Originally posted by Larry Brown #43

Here's my main beef. I hear people around here all the time bashing Marty, bashing Cerrato, bashing Mendes. What we seem to overlook is the source. Who hired these people that we moan about? Who gave Marty too much control? Who RE-HIRED Vinny? Complaining about these guys is like a Cowboy fan complaining about Coach Campo. Campo is not the Cowboys' problem. He may not be a great coach, but that organization's problems run much deeper than Campo. Why do we not put blame on the guy who HIRED the people who have created this mess? Why do we not blame the guy for masterminding (I use that term loosely) The Great Deion Disaster? That mistake set this program WAY back, and most Redskins fans were screaming for Snyder not to do it. I can still hear Danny saying: "Now the most dangerous weapon in football is on our side." Dangerous weapon indeed, if you're talking in terms of destroying our salary cap structure.

When Snyder first bought the Skins, he said some complimentary things about the way JJ runs the Cowboys. That scared the hell out of me at the time, but I chose to ignore it. Now it seems that instead of learning from JJ's mistakes, Snyder seems determined to repeat them.

LB -

I've always pointed to Snyder as the source of many of our ills. Ask Art and some others on this board who have scorned me for doing so.

[Larry Brown #43]

Well you and I seem to be in agreement, Oakton. I'm referring to the Snyder apologists. I still think Snyder can turn this thing around if he learns from his mistakes, but I do hold him accountable for the mess he's made.

[gridironmike]

Laying no blame for on-the-field problems, I'll say this. I want a winner. I shell out for season tickets, pay mega-dollars for Sunday Ticket, pay for parking (which I think is crappy), pay for Warpath, and pay when we lose! I get calls every Sunday from a Cowboy fan when we lose. If we are destined for another 8-8 season, two of those wins had better be against Dallas. If Spurrier ends the streak, he was worth every penny of the $5 mil. I really though Marty would improve us in that area. We need wins against Dallas (2), Philly (1), and the Giants (at least 1). We should beat the Texans. That is nine wins and doable. The Rams at home, who knows?

[hail2skins]

Mike, in my mind the losing streak against the Cowboys will only officially end if we beat them in a meaningful game. A Turkey Day win would count, but a victory in a meaningless last game of the season will not.

[tex]

- He did NOT blow up the cap. We have never had as many cap problems as anyone suggests, Marty or no Marty.

Murilo Bustamante,

Snyder bears the ultimate responsibility for the teams cap troubles. He is the man that loaded the team with aging veteran stars spending around $92 million in 2000 when the salary-cap was $62 million. He got under the cap by postponing the cap hits. If the win now at any cost scheme worked the Skins are Super Bowl bound. Super Bowl or not, the team gets bogged down in the middle of the pack for a long time, if they are lucky, because they must pay the toll by going to cap-hell. Marty addressed the issue last year and SOS is facing it this year. SOS was telegraphing his thoughts on cap-hell with his "cheap and available" statements.

So instead of building a team with inexpensive youth through the draft that could have success for an extended period of time Snyder went for the whole ball of wax at once. What he ended up with was an 8-8 team of under achievers, several years of cap-hell, and long-term mediocrity.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

The bottom line is that Snyder is a marketing and advertising drone, albeit a very good one, but knows NOTHING about the NFL and how to create a winning franchise. What he needs to do is select a GM with accolades galore and proven experience - then just sit back and enjoy the ride.

My worst fear is that Snyder will continue his pattern of failure due to his own hubris and we will foreever be relegated to the purgatory of 8-8, at best. We've seen many of his trademark moves this year that resemble miserable failures of years past.

:puke:

[Die Hard]

Originally posted by OaktonSkinsFan

Really. How telling is it that:

1) In 2000, Snyder masterminded, along with that yes man, rubber stamper, clone and drone Cerrato, a run at it by just getting big name, aging FA's.

2) Claims he learned something from that experience, but does the something very similar this year w/ Marvin Lewis. Where's the wisdom in getting a DC who tells you up front that he won't be here for the long run because he wants to be a head coach sooner rather than later? He went for a big name now at the expense of the team's future.

I like Snyder for his passion and aggressiveness, but he needs to be balanced by a very seasoned and successful GM far and away more qualified to devise a long term strategy and blueprint for this team's future success.

Really. How telling is it that:

(1) In 2002, Spurrier masterminded a run of former Florida Gators at the expense of better talent?

(2) Spurrier claimed he understood a few weeks ago that perhaps the team was built more along the lines of a running team. Where's the wisdom in dismissing everything you've learned because it's a good night to "pitch and catch"?

No doubt you like Spurrier for his honesty and aggressiveness but he needs to be more balanced in his playcalling. He really needs to devise a long-term strategy and blueprint this team's future success.

Does he really want to win in the NFL by adjusting his playcalling to the talent he has at hand? Or does he want to show the NFL that the FnG can work in this league?

[Larry Brown #43]

Originally posted by Die Hard

Really. How telling is it that:

(1) In 2002, Spurrier masterminded a run of former Florida Gators at the expense of better talent?

(2) Spurrier claimed he understood a few weeks ago that perhaps the team was built more along the lines of a running team. Where's the wisdom in dismissing everything you've learned because it's a good night to "pitch and catch"?

No doubt you like Spurrier for his honesty and aggressiveness but he needs to be more balanced in his playcalling. He really needs to devise a long-term strategy and blueprint this team's future success.

Does he really want to win in the NFL by adjusting his playcalling to the talent he has at hand? Or does he want to show the NFL that the FnG can work in this league?

Yeah, really. Who hired this clown anyway? Oh wait...never mind. :laugh: