Andyman sighting!

[TK]

That doesn't change the fact that its needed right now for a different reason.

I know.

Just sayin, for those late to party n all.

[@DCGoldPants]

and TK, not that my opinion means squat. But I think the idea of needing a certain amount of posts before having the right to start threads, OR a limit to how many threads a poster can start in a day/week, should be seriously considered. It might actually force folks to use the search function more.

[Chants]

"8. The end of the Bush Admin style of information manipulation. Cut ties with Extremeskins, get out of the bad signal radio biz. Just run the damn team. The fans know what you're doing. Your shows on XXX just stink. Riggins is decent, but the rest is awful."

These types of loaded statements really irk me. First of all it operates on the borderline moonbat assumption that Bush engages in an untowared degree of media manipulation. Second, and most importantly, just what kind of spoiled brat upbringing did this person experience which would enable him write such sentitments laden with an exaggerated sense of self-entitlement?

Look. The Redskins Organization is not a governmental entity. Like all corporations, it is not a democracy. It was created to make money for its shareholders. That's its number one obligation. You see, about 80 some years ago, someone got the idea that some money could be made off of guys playing football. The NFL was formed, and this someone was right. A lot of money could be made. So if Danny thinks he can turn a greater profit by controlling information, then so be it.

If this guy does not like the the way he handles the teams public affairs, then he should flippin shut his piehole, buy a team, and see what sort of profits can be made with more transparency. Good luck with that, too. The Redskins are the number one money maker in sports.

[timdaley73]

and TK, not that my opinion means squat. But I think the idea of needing a certain amount of posts before having the right to start threads, OR a limit to how many threads a poster can start in a day/week, should be seriously considered. It might actually force folks to use the search function more.

I would hate the posting count be a criteria... As you can see by my posting count, I don't post as often or as many times as other people. Yet, all or most of my posts and threads have been of good nature... Maybe the member number?

[@DCGoldPants]

These types of loaded statements really irk me. First of all it operates on the borderline moonbat assumption that Bush engages in an untowared degree of media manipulation. Second, and most importantly, just what kind of spoiled brat upbringing did this person experience which would enable him write such sentitments laden with an exaggerated sense of self-entitlement?

Look. The Redskins Organization is not a governmental entity. Like all corporations, it is not a democracy. It was created to make money for its shareholders. That's its number one obligation. You see, about 80 some years ago, someone got the idea that some money could be made off of guys playing football. The NFL was formed, and this someone was right. A lot of money could be made. So if Danny thinks he can turn a greater profit by controlling information, then so be it.

If this guy does not like the the way he handles the teams public affairs, then he should flippin shut his piehole, buy a team, and see what sort of profits can be made with more transparency. Good luck with that, too. The Redskins are the number one money maker in sports.

I rest my case. The whining continues.

However, being the #1 moneymaker isn't exactly something for the "fans" to be proud.

[Chants]

I rest my case. The whining continues.

However, being the #1 moneymaker isn't exactly something for the "fans" to be proud.

Bufford:

For whatever reason, you missed the point of my post.

I have no real desire to defend exteremeskins or Dan Snyder. I do, however, have an interest in criticizing manipulative journalism.

The author apparently thinks Danny's fan base would be more loyal with more transparency. While I don't much care for Danny personally, it is a simple and plain fact of sports economics 101 that disloyal fans don't shell out the kind of money necessary to make the an organization, such as the Redskins, not only a good revenue generator, but the number one in sports.

Basically, the author is manipulating the reader by assuming as fact that there is widespread fan base dissatisfaction, then trots out Danny's supposed lack of transparency as a cause. Of course he doesn't explain why all the disloyal fans keep on shelling out all this money.

But if you and the other old-timers think that this sort of criticism is unwelcome here and compromises the the quality of this massage board, please let me know. I'll stop posting.

[HailSkinz1]

Oh, that's the same Andyman - he makes too much sense! Besides, he was "outed" in a different thread. Of course ES will try to conceal his identity, but several members figured out who he was before he was outed.

Hail,

H

[HailSkinz1]

I would hate the posting count be a criteria... As you can see by my posting count, I don't post as often or as many times as other people. Yet, all or most of my posts and threads have been of good nature... Maybe the member number?

I agree. If it went by post count, then we'd have even more of the meaningless one or two-word posts with a smiley (i.e. "Whatever :doh: "). There's too much of that as it is.

Hail,

H

[Tarhog]

La Canfora disappoints me, since I've said a lot of nice things about him over the years, and meant them. I have to wonder if he's not bitter that there are threads here that get more readers than some of the stuff the Post writers put out there about our Redskins? Ironic that he craps all over our site in the 'blog' the Post created to try and compete with us :laugh:

Get busy living, or get busy dying Washington Post.

[Huly]

La Canfora disappoints me, since I've said a lot of nice things about him over the years, and meant them. I have to wonder if he's not bitter that there are threads here that get more readers than some of the stuff the Post writers put out there about our Redskins? Ironic that he craps all over our site in the 'blog' the Post created to try and compete with us :laugh:

Get busy living, or get busy dying Washington Post.

Actually I will fess up! After seeing that blog today I called Jason out for it in an email. It was not his blog. Every Friday they post a guest blog. It was not written by Jason.

[Tarhog]

I keep hearing that - if not him, then who wrote it? If you're going to throw nastiness around, you have a responsibility to attach your name to it. And really, whether it was Jason or some other disgruntled media type, the criticism is valid. If you find the medium beneath dignity, stop trying to imitate it.

[Huly]

I keep hearing that - if not him, then who wrote it? If you're going to throw nastiness around, you have a responsibility to attach your name to it. And really, whether it was Jason or some other disgruntled media type, the criticism is valid. If you find the medium beneath dignity, stop trying to imitate it.

T,

He told me who wrote it but I can not remember I have it my email on my work computer. I can post his response tomorrow if y'all want. I am just repeating what he told me. I agree with everything you are saying and that is why I went straight to the source. You and I both know this is not the first time I have called him out for something negative he wrote in his blog.

[Blondie]

I just don't see why there is a responsiblity to say LISTEN UP.....I WROTE THE NASTINESS. Most people do not put their name to vile rantings. They rant....and rave.......and go on. It does what they want it to do.........garner attention.

Who wrote is really is of no consequence. Andyman or not Andyman. It is an opinion. If not Andyman, I am thinking he might take care of the libel of his name.

It is an opinion.

PERIOD.

It is NOT law..........it is NOT gospel.

It is what one person thinks.

And..........as we know here.......opinion will be given........over and over again.

Some are very intelligent opinions and some are not.

And this.........is just............another opinion.

Blondie

[Tarhog]

T,

He told me who wrote it but I can not remember I have it my email on my work computer. I can post his response tomorrow if y'all want. I am just repeating what he told me. I agree with everything you are saying and that is why I went straight to the source. You and I both know this is not the first time I have called him out for something negative he wrote in his blog.

Thats cool - not directed at you. And ultimately, its true, who really cares whats said. Its pretty apparent to me that these guys, contrary to what they write, aren't concerned about the integrity of the site and whether or not folks are free to criticize the team here. Its pretty obvious to anyone really looking that you won't find a place anywhere where more scathing criticism of the team occurs. And on a site Daniel Snyder himself foots the bill for. I've personally written a lot of things critical of the Daniel Snyder era - but I think he deserves to be immune from criticism about the objectivity of this website. These guys just keep repeating the mantra. I guess they figure if they say it enough, it'll become accepted as fact. And its apparently an effective strategy.

They're concerned about one thing - we're taking away readership. Period. Maybe if they upped their game, they'd have less to worry about.

[Tarhog]

I just don't see why there is a responsiblity to say LISTEN UP.....I WROTE THE NASTINESS. Most people do not put their name to vile rantings. They rant....and rave.......and go on. It does what they want it to do.........garner attention.

Who wrote is really is of no consequence. Andyman or not Andyman. It is an opinion. If not Andyman, I am thinking he might take care of the libel of his name.

It is an opinion.

PERIOD.

It is NOT law..........it is NOT gospel.

It is what one person thinks.

And..........as we know here.......opinion will be given........over and over again.

Some are very intelligent opinions and some are not.

And this.........is just............another opinion.

Blondie

Yeah, but your opinion just seems sexier than all the others.

[Blondie]

Yeah, but your opinion just seems sexier than all the others.

You silver tongue devil, you!!!

And THAT IS NOT an opinion, THAT IS A FACT!!

Blondie

[TomE]

Bufford:

For whatever reason, you missed the point of my post.......(snip)

But if you and the other old-timers think that this sort of criticism is unwelcome here and compromises the the quality of this massage board, please let me know. I'll stop posting.

Not an "old timer" here, but I did not see the relationship between your's and Bufford's comments either.

I agree, a point does seem to have been missed.

[BuryYourDuke]

These types of loaded statements really irk me. First of all it operates on the borderline moonbat assumption that Bush engages in an untowared degree of media manipulation. Second, and most importantly, just what kind of spoiled brat upbringing did this person experience which would enable him write such sentitments laden with an exaggerated sense of self-entitlement?

Look. The Redskins Organization is not a governmental entity. Like all corporations, it is not a democracy. It was created to make money for its shareholders. That's its number one obligation. You see, about 80 some years ago, someone got the idea that some money could be made off of guys playing football. The NFL was formed, and this someone was right. A lot of money could be made. So if Danny thinks he can turn a greater profit by controlling information, then so be it.

If this guy does not like the the way he handles the teams public affairs, then he should flippin shut his piehole, buy a team, and see what sort of profits can be made with more transparency. Good luck with that, too. The Redskins are the number one money maker in sports.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Someone with half a brain's worth of common sense posted a coherent thought about the way things are done with this organization and all businesses. Man crush awarded.

[rictus58]

A lot of the points in the blog were right on the spot.

-Like the firing of Larry Michael.

-The non-stop bombardment of ads. both on the website and at the stadium.

needing a fulltime GM

-The trimming of Fat from the Roster. The Human Sieve Fauria and Turnstyle Holdman.

-The need for a REAL GM.

But I guess since it appears on the posts website that makes it ok to attack 1 point of the blog without addressing the rest of the body. Regardless of whether the post, or someone not affiliated with the Washington post wrote it.

[Gary@Redskins.com]

The question I have pertaining to Jason's guest column is this: Does Redskins.com really bombard users "non-stop" with ads?

Because I don't see it. Am I missing something?

I see Redskins.com making an investment in providing content for the team's web site--certainly more than some other NFL teams.

I see some ads in the right rail of the site. The Redskins Online Store ad is noticeable at the top right side. As it should be, right? I mean, it's the Redskins Online Store. Should we not promote this on the site? Come on...

I see five small logos at the bottom of the home page. On inside pages, I see two relatively small banner ads in the left rail. The site banned pop-up ads a long, long time ago.

There are some Special Offers & Promotions that are tied in with products, but they are all Redskins related. Some of them offer some cool prizes...

OK, I see the Lexus spots (and other commercials) at the beginning of many videos. I don't see that as intrusive, but I guess others might.

This is all "non-stop"? Huh? Someone explain to me what I am missing.

[Blondie]

The question I have pertaining to Jason's guest column is this: Does Redskins.com really bombard users "non-stop" with ads?

Because I don't see it. Am I missing something?

I see Redskins.com making an investment in providing content for the team's web site--certainly more than some other NFL teams.

I see some ads in the right rail of the site. The Redskins Online Store ad is noticeable at the top right side. As it should be, right? I mean, it's the Redskins Online Store. Should we not promote this on the site? Come on...

I see five small logos at the bottom of the home page. On inside pages, I see two relatively small banner ads in the left rail. The site banned pop-up ads a long, long time ago.

There are some Special Offers & Promotions that are tied in with products, but they are all Redskins related. Some of them offer some cool prizes...

OK, I see the Lexus spots (and other commercials) at the beginning of many videos. I don't see that as intrusive, but I guess others might.

This is all "non-stop"? Huh? Someone explain to me what I am missing.

One thing to remember Gary.

You can not reason with irrational people.

They bring you down to their level and beat you up with experience.

I DO move the cursor forward to skip the Lexus ads......but I dont find that to be intrusive. It IS a REDSKIN site........duh.......so REDSKIN ads SHOULD be on there.

That person got his 15 mintues.

Oh, and HAPPY HOLIDAYS.

Blondie

[rictus58]

Take a look at Redskins.com. I counted 12 seperate Ads/sponserships.

Go to Baltimoreravens.com. I counted 4.

There is quite a difference there huh? It's not just the website either. It happens at the stadium. in between just about every play. Even the Funky Four is an ad for FedEx.

It's no secret how DS made his money. But come-on. Isn't it just a little too much? especially for what amounts to a captive audience at FedEx field.

[Blondie]

Take a look at Redskins.com. I counted 12 seperate Ads/sponserships.

Go to Baltimoreravens.com. I counted 4.

There is quite a difference there huh? It's not just the website either. It happens at the stadium. in between just about every play. Even the Funky Four is an ad for FedEx.

It's no secret how DS made his money. But come-on. Isn't it just a little too much? especially for what amounts to a captive audience at FedEx field.

12?

I just looked at it again.

I didnt see 12.

Can you help me?

Blondie

[rictus58]

Blondie,

1. 25% off Ad

2.xxx radio

3.Redskins Digital Gameday

4.official autographed redskins merchandise

5. Lexus Ad

6.Remax

7. Fedex

8.Sprint

9.XM

10.Stubhub

11. Bestbuy

12. 2007 "Premium" Season tickets

yes..some are "related" to redskins. But it still a way of asking for your money or information for even MORE marketing.

Edit: apparently the nature of the ad's change when you refresh the page.

[Gary@Redskins.com]

I understand there are plenty of ads and promotions on Redskins.com. But the site was carefully designed to emphasize content.

The usage of the words "non-stop" suggests that the team is bombarding users with ads and ruining the user experience. That's hardly the case, in my estimation.

Five of those ads you mentioned are sponsor logos at the very bottom of the home page. How are they intrusive to the user experience? Yes, the teams wants sponsors to have a presence on Redskins.com, but not at the expense of the user experience.

I think, for the most part, it's succeeded.

You mentioned the Ravens official site. No offense to the fine folks who run that site, but a more apt comparison would be the Dallas Cowboys' team site. Please go there and tell me how many banner ads, sponsorships and logos you can count on their home page.

I count more than 15...But again, I find it all non-intrusive. The Cowboys do a great job with their site, too.