Who would you rather owned the Redskins?

[NewCliche21]

Are you serious? I just stated that none of us truly know what his motivations are. And my 'dull criticism' can be backed up with more evidence that your 'he is not in it for the money' argument.

My side: He makes a lot of money, wins less games than he loses.

That is a fact, based on actual results.

Your side: He could make more money doing something else.

Sure, it's probable, but he could also make less. No business is a guarantee. Look at Six Flags. Besides, this doesn't go towards proving anything on your side of the argument.

So, who wins? Since this is a discussion based on personal feelings, I would guess no one. My feelings will stay the same until his team starts winning on a consistent basis. What will change yours? I guess 8 years just isn't enough time for ya...

Don't even bother. Again, you never consulted Wikipedia, addressed opportunity costs, or mentioned any other of his irrelevant businesses that only serve to make him more money so that the Redskins can be his money-making hobby. Therefore, you'll only get the same, brilliant response from Smoot Point Really.

Amazing how he can have a really creative name but be such a broken record.

[Parlett316]

Me. I would like myself to own the team.

[Smoot Point Really]

Don't even bother. Again, you never consulted Wikipedia, addressed opportunity costs, or mentioned any other of his irrelevant businesses that only serve to make him more money so that the Redskins can be his money-making hobby. Therefore, you'll only get the same, brilliant response from Smoot Point Really.

Amazing how he can have a really creative name but be such a broken record.

I told you what responses I would listen to... You and ttr77 didn't have evidence to support your claim other than he makes money and he loses. As if he is content with that? Why hire Joe Gibbs, Al Saunders and Gregg Williams if you are content with losing? There is no cap on coaches, and he tries to do the one thing he can to make a winner out of this team and that is "buy wins"... He paid Schottenheimer $5M per year and made him the highest paid NFL coach, then he turned around and did the same to Spurrier, then he did the same for Gibbs... If you care more about money than wins you get the has-beens, not-yet-beens or the never-will-be-beens (think Al Davis) and you pay them peanuts and if they ever turn your team around you pat them on the back and let them walk for a higher salary to another team.

A guy who cares first about money has no motive to buy an NFL franchise in this era. NFL owners make money, but it's a limited investment. Many of the other owners in this league bought their franchises before it cost $800M to buy a franchise and stadium. Many of those owners get cities to build stadiums for them. Many of those owners own 100% of their franchise. The only reason to buy an NFL franchise is if you love football and have always dreamed about it. I believe all the new NFL owners are exactly like that. The "old" NFL owners or the ones who have inherited their teams have no real initial investment and don't have to share revenue with partners. Some of those owners want Dan Snyder to share Redskins' revenue with them.

BTW, what's wrong with dialing up Wikipedia for a quick fact to put in an ExtremeSkins post? You still haven't told me anything that was wrong about the facts I've raised. I've heard that those who don't have facts of their own often attack the sources of others.

I believe I've made a pretty damn good intelligent argument here that will likely get wasted because I'm the only one who is giving your arguments any respect by responding to them.

Anyway, thanks for noticing my name and complimenting me on it. I've tried to refrain from mentioning your name, but since you mentioned mine: "NewCliche" is an oxymoron... I know it was probably your intent, but I've been dying to point it out for about 2 days. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. It's a good name... especially if you wanted it to be oxymoronic.

[flock53]

I am surprised nobody has mentioned Jack Kent Cooke! There is 1 owner right there that has done a better job throughout the life of his ownership!

JKC brought us Joe Gibbs and Super Bowls. Of course he has passed away but JKC was a great owner. For now Snyder is fine that he has backed off on every decision being made. JKC did a great job while he was our owner, its too bad he passed away when he did. But for now, i woulnt want any other owner than Snyder, the Learners and that knuckle head that tried to buy the team after JKC passed away were morons.

I wish his son had gotten the team. Like father like son.

[Chris Worthy]

Danny's clone.

[smalex41]

And why? Give me one example of an owner of a team in the NFL that has done a better job than Dan Snyder. And I dont mean an owner that has done a better job recently. I mean throughout the life of thier ownership.

Other than maybe Bob Kraft, I just dont see an owner that has an awesome record. I see Tom Brady making Bob Kraft and Bill Belichick look pretty smart. Considering Belichick and Bledsoe led the patriots to a stellar 5-11 season the year before Brady stepped in.

And during his head coaching tenure in Cleveland, Belichick compiled a less than impressive 36-44 record.

TOP 10 REASONS WHY I CAN'T STAND THE GIANTS:

1. I grew up in the NYC suburbs in Connecticut SURROUNDED by obnoxious Giants fans who never credited the talent of the 1980s Skins.

2. I have attended three Redskins games at Giants Stadium. It's a toilet.

3. Giants fans who attend games have no diversity. They are nothing but a bunch of drunken overweight white men from upstate New York. Period.

4. These fans put more energy into abusing fans of the opposing team than they do cheering for their own.

5. They were horrible to Saints fans at the Saints "home game" at Giants Stadium following Hurricane Katrina -- "Hope you brought your swimmies!"

6. Lawrence Taylor... nuff said.

7. Big Blue Wrecking Crew... what a dumb name.

8. LaVar Arrington left to play for them.

9. Seeing the Cowboys win over the Skins has almost become routine. Seeing the Giants win... you never get used to it.

10. They play in Jersey.

I've always despised the Cowboys, but it's so cliche, the emotion has somewhat worn off. BUT I PASSIONATELY HATE THE GIANTS!

Will be at FedEx on 9/23 to see Big Blue get Skinned.

Beyond any doubt, Dan Snyder is my choice. Dan is just like a "kid" when the team wins and he suffers the same angst as we do when we lose.

Free agency has disrupted the continuity of all teams and in most cases, you do not see the willingness to compromise for the best interest of the team.

Players are looking for that big offer to secure their lives, as in all businesses, teams are looking to cut cost and improve effienciency. The "winner" succeeds" and the "loser" has to sustain its losses.

If you notice, the success of teams follows a cycle. "Patience is a virture" and I truly believe that Mr. Snyder will insure that the SKINS will return "ATOP THE ARC" ! :)

[ttr77]

I believe I've made a pretty damn good intelligent argument here that will likely get wasted because I'm the only one who is giving your arguments any respect by responding to them.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. And for the record, I hope you are right and I am wrong. And if I am, please feel free to call me out.

[Horatio]

Are you serious? I just stated that none of us truly know what his motivations are. And my 'dull criticism' can be backed up with more evidence that your 'he is not in it for the money' argument.

My side: He makes a lot of money, wins less games than he loses.

That is a fact, based on actual results.

Your side: He could make more money doing something else.

Sure, it's probable, but he could also make less. No business is a guarantee. Look at Six Flags. Besides, this doesn't go towards proving anything on your side of the argument.

So, who wins? Since this is a discussion based on personal feelings, I would guess no one. My feelings will stay the same until his team starts winning on a consistent basis. What will change yours? I guess 8 years just isn't enough time for ya...

And maybe Snyder bought the Redskins just to make it easier for him to get into other business dealings like Six Flags, Dick Clark Productions, etc.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Trying to think of an owner who came in and lit the league up right away.......

There is this owner in Dallas named Jerry Jones. You may have read about him in the news.

(I'm not arguing that Jerry Jones would be a better owner than Dan. I think he technically is, but I still don't want him involved with my team. But I am saying that it is not unheard of to join the league and start winning).

[NewCliche21]

I told you what responses I would listen to... You and ttr77 didn't have evidence to support your claim other than he makes money and he loses. As if he is content with that? Why hire Joe Gibbs, Al Saunders and Gregg Williams if you are content with losing? There is no cap on coaches, and he tries to do the one thing he can to make a winner out of this team and that is "buy wins"... He paid Schottenheimer $5M per year and made him the highest paid NFL coach, then he turned around and did the same to Spurrier, then he did the same for Gibbs... If you care more about money than wins you get the has-beens, not-yet-beens or the never-will-be-beens (think Al Davis) and you pay them peanuts and if they ever turn your team around you pat them on the back and let them walk for a higher salary to another team.

A guy who cares first about money has no motive to buy an NFL franchise in this era. NFL owners make money, but it's a limited investment. Many of the other owners in this league bought their franchises before it cost $800M to buy a franchise and stadium. Many of those owners get cities to build stadiums for them. Many of those owners own 100% of their franchise. The only reason to buy an NFL franchise is if you love football and have always dreamed about it. I believe all the new NFL owners are exactly like that. The "old" NFL owners or the ones who have inherited their teams have no real initial investment and don't have to share revenue with partners. Some of those owners want Dan Snyder to share Redskins' revenue with them.

BTW, what's wrong with dialing up Wikipedia for a quick fact to put in an ExtremeSkins post? You still haven't told me anything that was wrong about the facts I've raised. I've heard that those who don't have facts of their own often attack the sources of others.

I believe I've made a pretty damn good intelligent argument here that will likely get wasted because I'm the only one who is giving your arguments any respect by responding to them.

Anyway, thanks for noticing my name and complimenting me on it. I've tried to refrain from mentioning your name, but since you mentioned mine: "NewCliche" is an oxymoron... I know it was probably your intent, but I've been dying to point it out for about 2 days. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. It's a good name... especially if you wanted it to be oxymoronic.

Jesus, man. What do you not understand? I'm saying that he DOES like the Redskins. While he owns them, he'd like to make as much money as possible from it. If it came down to a win on any given Sunday or money, then I think that he will take the money. I'm not saying that he's a bad guy. I'm not saying that making money off of something that you busted your ass for is a bad thing. I'm just saying that the Redskins as a team is a HOBBY off of which Snyder likes to make money. He's a businessman. If he can make a dollar, then he will.

He wants the team to win. He wants money more. If he were satisfied with the amount that he was making from his other ventures, then why would he buy Dick Clark Productions? The NFL is a business first and a sports league second.

As for Wikipedia, do you know how hard it is to edit it? Not very. Sean Taylor's page used to read "SEAN TAYLOR IS BETTER TAHN REEEEEEEED AND DAWKINS THEY SUCKKKKKKK!" or something along those lines. It's just not credible. I'm not saying that it's always wrong, but I'd rather see something from Forbes or the Wall STreet Journal if it's gonna be about finances.

[Siven]

Cliche.

Dan Snyder, if he actually liked money more then the Redskins......

Wouldn't have bought the Redskins, and even still, he would be giving out these massive contracts, he'd just hire sucky players to make a sucky squad.

[Westbrook36]

Cliche.

Dan Snyder, if he actually liked money more then the Redskins......

Wouldn't have bought the Redskins, and even still, he would be giving out these massive contracts, he'd just hire sucky players to make a sucky squad.

Then he wouldn't be able to lull Joe Everyfan into season tickets on the promise of overpaid name players...

[NewCliche21]

Cliche.

Dan Snyder, if he actually liked money more then the Redskins......

Wouldn't have bought the Redskins, and even still, he would be giving out these massive contracts, he'd just hire sucky players to make a sucky squad.

Siven.

Please read my posts before you respond to them. You can like two things at the same time. Snyder likes the Redskins maybe a seven or eight. He likes money a ten. He'd like the team to win, but he'd rather charge ridiculous prices for everything, ever. He does do things that are for the team that aren't that profitable, like making this board official, Beach Blitz, and other things, but he makes up for them with things like "Dream Seats", seven-dollar beers, packing in as many seats, regardless of their actual usefulness, as possible, and selling tickets on Stubhub (Yes, he does get a pretty nice slice of that pie).

Again: Snyder likes the Redskins, maybe even a lot; he likes money more.

[skinfan31]

ME! It's all smoke and mirrors with Dan while Gibbs is here. As soon as Joe leaves he'll go back to his fantasy football ways. He refuses to get rid of the sick to my stomach yes man Cerratto. We need a competent GM who will tell Snyder what is a good move and what is not.

As far as other owners. The Steelers have a pretty good history and are a class organization.