HawaiianTime Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 meh, if Bidwell can do it, anyone can.I'm not a Snyder fan at all- actually not sure how anyone could be unless he signs your checks. But to say we'll never have success is a bit overboard Please don't compare him to Bidwell. It wasn't until his son took over that the Cardinals have gotten as far as they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 So here's a hypothetical - and I stress HYPOTHETICAL - question: what do you do if the owner is simply not qualified to understand the technical aspects of the plan? This assumes that efforts to educate the owner are unsuccessful. Let's use a real example of how insufficient knowledge can be a problem. When Dan and Vinny embraced the Joe Gibbs plan to build a winner by trading away draft picks, Bill Belichick or Jim Schwartz, whose degrees are in Economics, might have explained to them using basic math, the basic economic principles that would doom their plan in today's NFL. Then, once understood, they could have taken that new knowledge on a different course. Instead, we were lucky that the plan failed quickly and only three draft years (2004-2006) were wasted. Insufficient knowledge is less of a problem when more people are involved in the decision-making. In a flat structure, with three or four people directly under him with limited authority, the owner can cut ties and shift direction with a failing manager without starting over from square one with the whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 A small correction to your revisionist history Oldfan. Gibbs 2.0 was not the beginning of trading draft picks for vets. Snyderatto decided after the Smith/Sanders etc. fiasco that younger F.A. vets were the way to go. That was the offseason of Coles and the safety from GB (can't remember his name) who was a flop....both were RFAs IIRC who cost us draft picks. Sorry but Gibbs' preference for vets over draft picks was a continuation of Snyderatto's strategy, not the beginning of it as you suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 ...but hey, it only took him 10 years to figure out the importance of the draft and the lines (we hope :paranoid: ) so at this rate I guess we should expect he'll have it all figured out in another 30 years or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwasm Posted February 24, 2009 Author Share Posted February 24, 2009 I think Danny wants to win. However, his massive ego has compromised any chances the Redskins have of winning anything of significance. He wants to do things on his own terms and call all the shots, even though his football knowledge could fit inside a bee's you-know-what! And we all know Vinny couldn't get a job anywhere else in this league if he tried. What did it for me concerning this man was during the press conference when the Redskins were searching for a head coach. When asked about bringing in a general manager, he arrogantly stated, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Explain to me how a sub-500 record and just 2 playoff wins in 10 years shows that "it ain't broke." He has poisoned this franchise and we as fans will continue to see a mediocre-at-best on-field unless he (A) brings in knowledgeable, football-savvy people, gets out of the way and lets them do their jobs or ( sells the team. Of course, we all know that neither will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 A small correction to your revisionist history Oldfan. Gibbs 2.0 was not the beginning of trading draft picks for vets. Quote me, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 Danny will get it right. He will win a Superbowl. It isn't faith I have in him either. Its just rational projection on my part. D. Snyder is a winner. Look at his track record and seat in life right now. He may not win instantly, but he will win, and Ill be damned if he isn't loyal to a fault. Look at his loyalty to Cerrato. This loyalty is what will need to break before he does win a championship, but once he lets go of that security blanket and turns the keys over to a real GM.... watch out because this thing will roll. Snyder has ponied up whatever it takes to get quality players, but he has been led by Vincent Cerrato, and this is what I think the break down is. We are seeing Vincents moves transparently this offseason, and I for one have reservations. Keeping Jason Taylor at his current 8 million per year salary is not a great way to start. I go back and forth with my stance on Snyder a lot, but Im pretty solid with this view on him now. I have confidence that once Vinny is gone, as long as Snyder brings in a competent GM, we will be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwasm Posted February 24, 2009 Author Share Posted February 24, 2009 Danny will get it right. He will win a Superbowl. It isn't faith I have in him either. Its just rational projection on my part. D. Snyder is a winner. Look at his track record and seat in life right now. He may not win instantly, but he will win, and Ill be damned if he isn't loyal to a fault. Look at his loyalty to Cerrato. This loyalty is what will need to break before he does win a championship, but once he lets go of that security blanket and turns the keys over to a real GM.... watch out because this thing will roll. Snyder has ponied up whatever it takes to get quality players, but he has been led by Vincent Cerrato, and this is what I think the break down is.We are seeing Vincents moves transparently this offseason, and I for one have reservations. Keeping Jason Taylor at his current 8 million per year salary is not a great way to start. I go back and forth with my stance on Snyder a lot, but Im pretty solid with this view on him now. I have confidence that once Vinny is gone, as long as Snyder brings in a competent GM, we will be good. He's run Six Flags and other busineses into the ground. The Redskins are his cash cow. He's making money off them, but it's coming at the expense of the on-field product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 He's run Six Flags and other busineses into the ground. The Redskins are his cash cow. He's making money off them, but it's coming at the expense of the on-field product. Six Flags was on its way out before Snyder purchased it, that's why he got it on the cheap from what i remember reading. It started when Paramount built up steam and started purchasing parks in the 90's. In this economy though, I can see why it would be hard to rebound something like an amusement park. I guess Id need to see an example of the "other busineses" he has supposedly "run into the ground" before I could comment on that. With your comment about the onfield product, again I think he just has a bad decision maker in the GM seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 Quote me, please. See below, emphasis added. BTW, my comment about revisionist history wasn't intended as a dig, just a gentle correction. Let's use a real example of how insufficient knowledge can be a problem.When Dan and Vinny embraced the Joe Gibbs plan to build a winner by trading away draft picks, Bill Belichick or Jim Schwartz, whose degrees are in Economics, might have explained to them using basic math, the basic economic principles that would doom their plan in today's NFL. Then, once understood, they could have taken that new knowledge on a different course. Instead, we were lucky that the plan failed quickly and only three draft years (2004-2006) were wasted. Insufficient knowledge is less of a problem when more people are involved in the decision-making. In a flat structure, with three or four people directly under him with limited authority, the owner can cut ties and shift direction with a failing manager without starting over from square one with the whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins PR Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 A small correction to your revisionist history Oldfan. Gibbs 2.0 was not the beginning of trading draft picks for vets. Snyderatto decided after the Smith/Sanders etc. fiasco that younger F.A. vets were the way to go. That was the offseason of Coles and the safety from GB (can't remember his name) who was a flop....both were RFAs IIRC who cost us draft picks. Sorry but Gibbs' preference for vets over draft picks was a continuation of Snyderatto's strategy, not the beginning of it as you suggest. Very true. Let's also not forget that we only have 4 picks in this year's draft and have already traded away a pick in the 2010 draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins PR Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 I'm going to bump the "Snyder is a (expletive)" thread from a few months ago at kickoff of the first regular season game. I have a feeling that it will go strong throughout the 2009 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 Lately, I'm reading in post after post, how Vinny and Dan blew it on the trade for Jason Taylor. I think the criticism is valid, but what gripes me is that, when it happened, 89% of the posters polled on this site favored the move. I debated the trade with some who were claiming that Taylor would be solely responsible for two or three more wins. FWIW, I was crucified for my opposition to the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 FWIW, I was crucified for my opposition to the trade. ...and I was the thief on the next crucifix over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 See below, emphasis added. BTW, my comment about revisionist history wasn't intended as a dig, just a gentle correction. I'm not taking offense, but I'm trying to understand what gave you the idea that I was claiming that trading picks had never been done before Gibbs Two or that my reference to trading picks away was limited to trading picks for vets. Part of Joe's plan included trading up which cost multiple picks. To shun the draft as the primary source of building a roster had not been done before to the extent that Joe took it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.