WP/WISE: The Coldest Shoulder

[sens11]

...and just when MW had put together a series of gem editorials throughout the last part of this season when the ST rally (4-0) took place...he puts this out there.

Weak way to support GW and make the owner appear more cold blooded than he already is.

Oh well, the overreaction to GW not getting the job continues. Cheapshots and all...:doh:

[Om]

None of us where in the room with GW and Snyder. We do not know what transpired. Maybe GW is not the man for the job. But, a couple of things: the ST death certainly plays into what this team does at this point because it is a part of their history (I know you said nothing about this but others have), Snyder talking about continuity in a press conference is a joke, and the process is exceptionally flawed- how Snyder handles people like GW and hiring OC and promoting DC before putting HC into place. Promoting Vinny is another serious flaw- Snyder and Vinny are of the same opinion and share 1 brain when it comes to making personnel decisions for this organzation.

This keeps getting lost when I try to say it, but I'll try again ... what we're left with out here in fanland is having to decide, based on wildly incomplete information, whether or not Snyder, in the interest of the highly subjective term "continuity, " should have given the job to GW despite the fact he clearly did not feel GW was the best man for the job.

My take on that is no, absolutely not. You can't hire a guy to be the face of your franchise if you don't believe in him. It would be suicide.

Please understand that does NOT mean I necessarily think he made the RIGHT decision on whether GW was the best man for the job. What it means it that, given he DID make that decision, he would have been making an even bigger mistake by hiring him anyway.

Maybe that point seems irrelevant to some. It certainly hasn't gotten much play around here. To me though, it's the central point in all of this.

[chet06]

the redskins will never win a super bowl with snyder....he is a total p$$ck

[chet06]

This keeps getting lost when I try to say it, but I'll try again ... what we're left with out here in fanland is having to decide, based on wildly incomplete information, whether or not Snyder, in the interest of the highly subjective term "continuity, " should have given the job to GW despite the fact he clearly did not feel GW was the best man for the job.

My take on that is no, absolutely not. You can't hire a guy to be the face of your franchise if you don't believe in him. It would be suicide.

Please understand that does NOT mean I necessarily think he made the RIGHT decision on whether GW was the best man for the job. What it means it that, given he DID make that decision, he would have been making an even bigger mistake by hiring him anyway.

Maybe that point seems irrelevant to some. It certainly hasn't gotten much play around here. To me though, it's the central point in all of this.

I think everyone here knows they dont have all the facts and are not saying snyder to should hire williams if he thinks williams is not his guy....the issue here if you havent figured it out yet is even more baffling than snyder is that snyder does not know how to pick talent...other than picking gibbs. (even a blind squirrel can gather a few nuts)

[fansince62]

You're assuming that's what he thinks. He didn't say that. Just that UnWise Mike is the one doing the assuming about Snyder's decision.

Not to speak for Om or anything... just that your putting words in his keyboard.

with all due respect....the "you don't know what they are thinking cuz you don't have a seat at the table" response not only gets tiring/repetitive...year after year...but gives one pause to worry about how you get through life when addressing problems being discussed at all the other tables you don't have your knees under. you really don't have opinions...say...on Rumsfeld or the latest Fed moves? How can you have an opinion on Scooter Libby if you "weren't there"? You have no position on Gates and the empire he built or the products he sells?

I remember the same logic being applied when many of us complained about the lack of real time practice with the new offense two off-seasons ago. STFU many were basically told..."there's a plan"..."you don't know what the coaches are thinking"...."They don't want to tip their hands". All the while common sense and an open mind suggested otherwise. you my not always be wrong with the "you don't know the details" nostrum. but you are not always right either.

seems to me you are setting up a strawman yourself.

[JLU44]

Greg Williams may not have been the best man for the job, but he certainly deserved more of a chance than Jim Fassel.

[ntotoro]

I think everyone here knows they dont have all the facts and are not saying snyder to should hire williams if he thinks williams is not his guy....the issue here if you havent figured it out yet is even more baffling than snyder is that snyder does not know how to pick talent...other than picking gibbs. (even a blind squirrel can gather a few nuts)

There's also Snyder's track record, which isn't exactly exemplary.

There's nothing in this process which had occurred which truly demonstrates he has learned a thing about being a leader or even a decent human being. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, when we keep hearing "there's a plan" for the last four years and have nothing ultimately come of it, isn't something he's deserving.

[Om]

I think everyone here knows they dont have all the facts and are not saying snyder to should hire williams if he thinks williams is not his guy....the issue here if you havent figured it out yet is even more baffling than snyder is that snyder does not know how to pick talent...other than picking gibbs. (even a blind squirrel can gather a few nuts)

No chet, I haven't "figured it out" yet. Guess I'm just not as plugged in as you are.

[Om]

with all due respect....the "you don't know what they are thinking cuz you don't have a seat at the table" response not only gets tiring/repetitive...year after year...but gives one pause to worry about how you get through life when addressing problems being discussed at all the other tables you don't have your knees under. you really don't have opinions...say...on Rumsfeld or the latest Fed moves? How can you have an opinion on Scooter Libby if you "weren't there"? You have no position on Gates and the empire he built or the products he sells?

I remember the same logic being applied when many of us complained about the lack of real time practice with the new offense two off-seasons ago. STFU many were basically told..."there's a plan"..."you don't know what the coaches are thinking"...."They don't want to tip their hands". All the while common sense and an open mind suggested otherwise. you my not always be wrong with the "you don't know the details" nostrum. but you are not always right either.

seems to me you are setting up a strawman yourself.

Now I'm confused. Which is your real take, this one or the one in private yesterday where we were obviously on the same page?

I don't much care for games, Al.

[fansince62]

This keeps getting lost when I try to say it, but I'll try again ... what we're left with out here in fanland is having to decide, based on wildly incomplete information, whether or not Snyder, in the interest of the highly subjective term "continuity, " should have given the job to GW despite the fact he clearly did not feel GW was the best man for the job.

My take on that is no, absolutely not. You can't hire a guy to be the face of your franchise if you don't believe in him. It would be suicide.

Please understand that does NOT mean I necessarily think he made the RIGHT decision on whether GW was the best man for the job. What it means it that, given he DID make that decision, he would have been making an even bigger mistake by hiring him anyway.

Maybe that point seems irrelevant to some. It certainly hasn't gotten much play around here. To me though, it's the central point in all of this.

so...you are essentailly saying that DS made a decision based on his own logic and needs and wasn't willing to compromise that to placate Williams or some vocal fans. Ok. I can buy that and why you think that has value relative to the alternative. I agree.

but it doesn't mean he knows what the H he is doing or that his reasons were the right ones.

[TK]

The mod's are defacto employees of the Redskins, ergo they act accordingly. And that's cool with me, somebody's gotta pay the bandwidth bills, but their track record is one of boosterism.

We are? Really??

****.

Where's MY $nyder check at then? I gotta pay some bills.

[Om]

so...you are essentailly saying that DS made a decision based on his own logic and needs and wasn't willing to compromise that to placate Williams or some vocal fans. Ok. I can buy that and why you think that has value relative to the alternative. I agree.

but it doesn't mean he knows what the H he is doing or that his reasons were the right ones.

That's pretty much exactly what I said.

[fansince62]

Now I'm confused. Which is your real take, this one or the one in private yesterday where we were obviously on the same page?

I don't much care for games, Al.

not playing games. as I have said elsewhere.....this will play out in due course and the Skins as an organization will move somewhere on the roadmap. Coaching staffs come and go....sound and fury....in the end signifying nothing.....and all that.

My view is focused on the sort of man DS is...drawn from 10 years of exposure to our Redskin capo di capo. On that one I think I am on to something.

so yea.....at the end of the day a decision will be made...we will have a HC....and, after a week of wrist wringing, we will press to the draft. but the Dan will be there in all his rarified glory. he is the lone constant in all of this. he is someone who bears deeper inspection and analysis - a wonderful book for some investigative, intrepid journalist IMO........let's find out some more about the boss and what really goes on; what sort of man he really is.

tell me a book that has its foundation in interviews with WIlliams, COles, Arrington, Gibbs, Norval, Robiski, Schotty, SS, heck...Vinny......former Redskin employess...his early business partners and competitors...fellow students at UMd...wouldn't be fascinating? The "unapproved" version would even be useful. problem would be to find the right investigative journalist.

[PCS]

Non-homer Translation:

I am going to blindly follow this ownership like a sheep to its herd because they pay my bills.

Better. :doh:

The mod's are defacto employees of the Redskins, ergo they act accordingly. And that's cool with me, somebody's gotta pay the bandwidth bills, but their track record is one of boosterism.

They say that ignorance is bliss.If that's the case, those are 2 of the most cheerful posts I have ever seen. I know this may be a bit of a tough thing to ask, but how about you 2 happy people get some facts straight before posting stuff like that, (sarcasm noted by the way).

[redman]

For all of you attacking this piece or asserting that GW should not have been made the head coach, do you agree or disagree with this segment of it?

But why not tell Williams those things a week ago? At the very least, Williams deserved the loser's ritual in every coaching search, the opportunity to withdraw from consideration and save face. Instead, Williams's departure was announced via news release.

Then there's the matter of the "smear," as Williams's agent Marvin Demoff, royalty among NFL agents, put it. Three media outlets, in a span of about eight hours, credited team sources in reporting Williams was out as a candidate because he had been disrespectful to Gibbs. This came at about the same time Blache was signing on to replace Williams, a fact few outside the team knew.

[Om]

not playing games. as I have said elsewhere.....this will play out in due course and the Skins as an organization will move somewhere on the roadmap. Coaching staffs come and go....sound and fury....in the end signifying nothing.....and all that.

My view is focused on the sort of man DS is...drawn from 10 years of exposure to our Redskin capo di capo. On that one I think I am on to something.

so yea.....at the end of the day a decision will be made...we will have a HC....and, after a week of wrist wringing, we will press to the draft. but the Dan will be there in all his rarified glory. he is the lone constant in all of this. he is someone who bears deeper inspection and analysis - a wonderful book for some investigative, intrepid journalist IMO........let's find out some more about the boss and what really goes on; what sort of man he really is.

tell me a book that has its foundation in interviews with WIlliams, COles, Arrington, Gibbs, Norval, Robiski, Schotty, SS, heck...Vinny......former Redskin employess...his early business partners and competitors...fellow students at UMd...wouldn't be fascinating? The "unapproved" version would even be useful. problem would be to find the right investigative journalist.

So you don't like Snyder or think he's a leader. I get that. I've never hidden the fact that I dont much care for what I think I know about him either.

I'm just not quite as personally outraged as you and so many others by what I think I might know about another man, based solely on what today's rabid sports media has to say about him and endless streams of angry hearsay invective. Which is all we basically have ever had to go on.

So by all means, study the man and write that book. If you can actually base it on anything substantive, I'll even buy a copy. I'm all about learning when there's actually something substantive to study on a subject.

Just promise me you'll sign it "To Om, who just didn't get it."

[Om]

For all of you attacking this piece or asserting that GW should not have been made the head coach, do you agree or disagree with this segment of it?

I guess I have to be included in your category of those "asserting that GW should not have been made the head coach." Though I'll repeat yet again that my reason for saying that is NOT that i personally don't think he was the right choice, but that since SNYDER did not, he made the only choice he could.

As to whether it was handled poorly, yeah, based on what I know, which ain't much, it seems pretty tacky.

[TK]

Then there's the matter of the "smear," as Williams's agent Marvin Demoff, royalty among NFL agents, put it. Three media outlets, in a span of about eight hours, credited team sources in reporting Williams was out as a candidate because he had been disrespectful to Gibbs. This came at about the same time Blache was signing on to replace Williams, a fact few outside the team knew.

I spoke to several team officials yesterday, trying to ferret out the leak, asking why things had to get this ugly. I got a lot of angry denials, including from Vinny Cerrato, whom Snyder recently named the team's executive vice president.

"I would go to Gregg's son's games every Friday night," Cerrato said. "Me and him talked about that today, how we were both upset that there was a story out there that we didn't like each other. I didn't talk to Mort [Chris Mortensen of ESPN] or anyone. I don't know what happened there, but that's not how I feel about him."

Interesting.

We don't know who to believe.

One thing is certain: This unseemly drama cost Snyder some of the goodwill he had gained after Taylor's death. He was seen as a galvanizing force for the generosity he showed after Taylor was shot and at his funeral. He showed strong leadership in a time of genuine crisis.

For a franchise always accused of never grasping the significance of how to behave at an important moment -- public perception changed in a matter of months. With how Williams's firing was handled, it took less than two weeks to undo all the unifying feelings that emerged from the Taylor tragedy.

In the end, everyone lost much more than a coaching job.

I think that sums it up rather nicely.

[Oldfan]

For all of you attacking this piece or asserting that GW should not have been made the head coach, do you agree or disagree with this segment of it?

The quote you clipped from the article is deceptive. The line "But why not tell Williams those things a week ago?" referred to Wise's take on rumors which might not be true. And, if you continue a few lines down from the quoted section, the denial of the "smear campaign" is right there.

[redman]

The quote you clipped from the article is deceptive. The line "But why not tell Williams those things a week ago?" referred to Wise's take on rumors which might not be true. And, if you continue a few lines down from the quoted section, the denial of the "smear campaign" is right there.

This is amusing to me.

First of all, we know the reports came out about Williams disparaging Gibbs- that's not in dispute. We also know that they came from "team sources" (and I'm sure that that vague term is accurate, at least as far as it goes), and the necessarily didn't come from GW himself, and he's denied them anyway.

So who do you believe planted these stories with the media, whether they're true or false?

[Om]

The quote you clipped from the article is deceptive. The line "But why not tell Williams those things a week ago?" referred to Wise's take on rumors which might not be true. And, if you continue a few lines down from the quoted section, the denial of the "smear campaign" is right there.

Glad you pointed this out.

For the record, in my reply to redman a few posts up, my "tacky" comment was in reference to the appearance of GW being left hanging, not the part about the supposed smear campaign.

[interplanet_funksmanship]

Daniel Snyder: You dumb*****! I used to call you "the George Steinbrenner of the NFL."

I don't anymore. Steinbrenner, at least WON championships! You are just a meddlesome know-it-all who doesn't know shiite from shinola.

It's bad enough I have to live around all these Dallass Cowboys fans, but having some moron like you running the team into the ground does not make it easy to wear the burgundy and gold down here in enemy territory.

Thanks for nothing, schmuck.

[Oldfan]

So who do you believe planted these stories with the media, whether they're true or false?

Don't know and don't care.

It was reported that Gregg and his agent met with Dan and Vinny, cleared the air on that rumor, and left on good terms. I'm glad.

[redman]

Glad you pointed this out.

For the record, in my reply to redman a few posts up, my "tacky" comment was in reference to the appearance of GW being left hanging, not the part about the supposed smear campaign.

Om, where do you think this smear campaign came from?

First of all, we know the reports came out about Williams disparaging Gibbs- that's not in dispute. We also know that they came from "team sources" (and I'm sure that that vague term is accurate, at least as far as it goes), and the necessarily didn't come from GW himself, and he's denied them anyway.

I happen to believe that the media - despite the paranoid and uniformly critical way in which it tends to be discussed here (barring praise, of course) - can be trusted with enough integrity here so believe that the story was in fact transmitted to them from a source associated with the team. I also believe that the source had to have been credible enough as a source of information about communications made by GW during his presumably private interviews with Snyder and Cerrato for the media outlets to have decided to run with the story unattributed. This clearly wasn't a janitor at Redskins Park who dropped a dime here. That doesn't leave many options.

So who do you believe planted these stories with the media, whether they're true or false?

[redman]

Don't know and don't care.

It was reported that Gregg and his agent met with Dan and Vinny, cleared the air on that rumor, and left on good terms. I'm glad.

See my post below yours (and above this one) for my reasoning as to where this came from.

If I'm right and that it did in fact come from someone high up in the team (who remains with the organization of course), how can you not care about something as sleazy as a smear campaign against a four-year coach who the team doesn't want to hire in the face of fan and player popularity, in order to justify not hiring him?