SI's Best and Worst Owners

[Art]

The great thing about Danny is that if he ever gets someone in the FO that actually can evaluate talent then his spending will be a positive. When Danny goes after someone he usually gets him. Which could bode well for the Skins if he was advised about the proper players to go after.

Fortunately the examples of positive personnel decisions that have worked out far outnumber the negative, so you're simply being dumb.

[Thinking Skins]

I find it funny as well. People don't want him to intefere but when he makes a statement people like, they think its great, but if its something they dont want to hear, they get angry and say hes a horrible owner

Its not that. The annoying thing about Snyder (as opposed to Al Davis and Jerry Jones) is thay Snyder puts on this front of "I'm not the one making the decisions" and tries to act like he doesn't have involvement in these decisions. How much involvement? We don't know because we've never been able to get a clear answer. But that press conference at least showed that he has some involvement in this.

If Snyder's gonna be the GM of this team, then fine - just admit to it and let us know that HE's making the decisions. That way we can hold SOMEBODY accountable for the bad decisions made. But I've heard Vinny, Danny, Gibbs, Williams, and S. Campbell blamed for the Lloyd decisiosn, the Arch decision, the ARE decision, the Portis trade, the Brunell trade, the Duckett trade, etc. And while there's this lack of public accountability we (the fans) have nobody's head to call for, so we call for everybody's head, and while Snyder may not be the only person making that decision, he's in that room so we're caling for his head too.

[NewCliche21]

Why Snyder and not Vinny? I don't Snyder was talking to Parcells about the trade. Plus at the time, we had just lost 2 DEs on the first day of trainning camp.

That's ludicrous. Snyder had ZERO to do with the cost of the trade. When Daniels was down and the team met to discuss options, he told them to do whatever they needed to get whatever they felt they needed. He'd take care of any monetary costs. As a good owner, he gave his people authorization to make whatever move THEY wanted to get a weakness fixed leading into the season.

Do you actually think Snyder wast he one who traded that pick? This may well be something you can be legitimately upset with Cerrato over, but, that is unfair. When Daniels went down, having the ability to acquire an excellent player at that position that quickly was quite a positive event. If he'd been who he'd always been we'd have been quite pleased. Unfortuantely he suffered his first significant injury-plagued season. But, if Taylor was the guy he'd been the last 8 years really, he'd have been a boon.

When you make such a move you do so with the expectation a healthy, productive player won't suddenly become unhealthy. But that's a risk, as always.

It goes back to Snyder because Snyder has put Vinny in charge. You can't just hire someone who has demonstrated that he doesn't know what the hell to do with draft picks and not foot the blame for that. We have needed help on the lines for years and sending away a second-round pick for someone who said, "Sure, I might be here for an extra year" was the stupidest move this team has made in a long time.

Snyder hired Vinny. Vinny has been effing this up consistently. Snyder has not gotten rid of Vinny. Therefore, Snyder approves of Vinny, and Vinny's failures go back to Snyder.

Let's put this in football:

I'm the coach and I've stuck with a receivers who has consistently shown that he can't play. He may have a catch here or there, but this player has shown that, in relation to other receivers around the league, he is not cut out to be on the team. As coach, I don't care, because I've liked the guy. He's been on other teams and cut by said times. I even had a damned good receivers coach tell me, "NC, this guy is bad. I'm cutting him." That receivers coach was then fired because I didn't like what he had to say. I'm still sticking with this awful receiver.

It's not my fault, though, right?

[Art]

So the idea of Snyder being involved in the front office decisions is an example of a bad owner? I wasn't even gonna go that far because I figured you wouldn't accept that he wants to be involved.

I don't have a problem with ownership being involved. I can completely understand wanting to know any and everything about where I'm putting my money. But there's a cost of that. Just like Al Davis and Jerry Jones get criticized for the mistakes of their teams, Snyder should be criticized too. He may not be as involved as those owners, but we have records indicating his involvement.

Maybe his problem is that he keeps quiet at the wrong times and speaks up at the wrong times. Maybe he's too loyal to a guy like Vinny.

There are a lot of different ideas to be suggested on the subject. What I find interesting though is how you seem to have such a definitive viewpoint on this. I understand that you get more access than most here on this site, but is it really that hard for you to see why the media and some of the fans could think he's a bad owner? Even if you disagree, you act like its not even a logial possibility for soembody to think that.

No. I don't want an owner involved in football decisions for the team. I want him to provide money and the ability for his football people to do what they feel is necessary. Snyder does this. I want him to assure we acquire the things they tell him they need. Snyder does this. And IN this you have Snyder's real involvement. Other teams require agents to negotiate with people who then go to the owner for permission to spend the owner's money. We don't have that bother, which is why Redskins Park is Hotel California. If someone we want checks in, they never check out.

Jones and Davis are the personnel men for their teams. They evaluate and make the selections. They should be held to account for such mistakes. Snyder doesn't and shouldn't. Gibbs and Vinny should hold the credit and blame for successful and bad selections then. Zorn and Vinny, ultimately, should hold the blame and get the credit now.

The reason I act as if it's not logical to dislike Snyder for the reasons typically given in the media and repeated by fans is because it counts him as the decider in chief, which he's not. He doesn't have that role any more than Kraft or Lurie or Rooney do. He's solely more active in acquisitions than those three are and only once he's provided a priority sheet from his people.

We have no records of Snyder's involvement since 2000. There's ONE during the Spurrier years when Snyder told Spurrier that Spurrier got to decide if he wanted to keep Wuerffel or not, despite Vinny's extreme frustration at the concept and Spurrier said, "You guys do what you want." And they went ahead and did.

There's not a single instance of that under Gibbs. Not a single instance under Zorn. No one doubts Snyder was quite a bit more heavily involved in personnel decisions back in the day. He was. Openly so because he felt the team needed a leader and Norv wasn't. It's time to get over nine years ago and start addressing the now.

[MattFancy]

Let's put this in football:

I'm the coach and I've stuck with a receivers who has consistently shown that he can't play. He may have a catch here or there, but this player has shown that, in relation to other receivers around the league, he is not cut out to be on the team. As coach, I don't care, because I've liked the guy. He's been on other teams and cut by said times. I even had a damned good receivers coach tell me, "NC, this guy is bad. I'm cutting him." That receivers coach was then fired because I didn't like what he had to say. I'm still sticking with this awful receiver.

It's not my fault, though, right?

So would you fault a CEO if a regular employee got caught stealing from the company? I mean its the CEOs company so he should've known better...

[Art]

Its not that. The annoying thing about Snyder (as opposed to Al Davis and Jerry Jones) is thay Snyder puts on this front of "I'm not the one making the decisions" and tries to act like he doesn't have involvement in these decisions. How much involvement? We don't know because we've never been able to get a clear answer. But that press conference at least showed that he has some involvement in this.

If Snyder's gonna be the GM of this team, then fine - just admit to it and let us know that HE's making the decisions. That way we can hold SOMEBODY accountable for the bad decisions made. But I've heard Vinny, Danny, Gibbs, Williams, and S. Campbell blamed for the Lloyd decisiosn, the Arch decision, the ARE decision, the Portis trade, the Brunell trade, the Duckett trade, etc. And while there's this lack of public accountability we (the fans) have nobody's head to call for, so we call for everybody's head, and while Snyder may not be the only person making that decision, he's in that room so we're caling for his head too.

We have been given a clear answer. By Snyder directly on this site. You've just chosen to ignore it.

The simple fact of the matter is, we are a collaborative organization. Every voice contributes to our overall assessment of a player. One guy may think Lloyd is a loser, but 4 guys may rate him well. His overall grade determines where he falls on our priority list and the needs of the team help form that. Arch was a little different, because I believe his grade was low, at safety, but Williams was sold on him at a tweener position in a special role. In the end, the ultimate authority tends to be shared by many people in the organization as each adds a piece to the grade. Under Gibbs, in the end, he was the guy contractually authorized to make the final say. If you're concerned or happy about things that happened those four years, Gibbs is your area to direct it.

It was HIS organization.

[Art]

but again, this goes back to vinny being a moron. if vinny was a saavy football guy, he'd know that we should have had no problem putting demetric evans into that role (which is exactly what we ended up doing) and our defense was fine with him. evans played so well he got a contract to start for another team, and were definitely missing his depth right now. and we could have had a 2nd rounder this season to draft an oline or another dlineman, or possibly used it for trading purposes to draft sanchez *dodges tomatoes*.

again, poor management. im putting this on snyder because its his decision to keep vinny around making these calls. if he would hire a person who wasnt an idiot, we'd be much better off.

and the dolphins bent us over on that deal and everyone (hopefully) knows it. taylor is now playing for barely over the vet min with the team he left one year later. thats why parcells is a good football guy, and vinny is not.

Vinny wasn't the one worried about the defensive line. Blache was. Vinny, remember, isn't the guy who wanted Jason Taylor. When Daniels went down and Snyder saw the concern from his coaches, he told them to do whatever they needed to make it right. Cerrato doesn't really get to determine who plays. Coaching staffs do that. I'm not saying Cerrato felt Evans was the answer, but, he wasn't the one who had to come to that conclusion. Blache, ultimately, was.

When faced with the need to make something happen, a need that bubbled up from the people charged with coaching the team, Vinny hit the phones and made a deal for an elite level defensive end. He did it boldly and quickly. He did it with the support of his owner who took on the money when he didn't have to. He did it at the behest of his coaching staff who told him to do something.

In August, the defensive ends available were who?

[Thinking Skins]

The reason I act as if it's not logical to dislike Snyder for the reasons typically given in the media and repeated by fans is because it counts him as the decider in chief, which he's not. He doesn't have that role any more than Kraft or Lurie or Rooney do. He's solely more active in acquisitions than those three are and only once he's provided a priority sheet from his people.

But thats the thing thats pure speculation on both sides. You say that Snyder has no input, others say he does. You can say that we don't have any sources, but I don't see you clamoring with inside info either. So it results as opinion.

As far as I've heard Vinny discuss the front office decisions, they're all made with him, the coach, and Snyder all in the room going through each possible player, talking to scouts and coaches about their pros and cons and how they fit into the team. Its not a question of whether Snyder's present at those meetings. Is he just there listening making sure that Zorn and Vinny don't fight? Or is he offering input and choosing the direction for this team? We're not inside this room, so we may never know. But with some of the flip flops that I'm hearing Vinny and Zorn make, it leads me to believe that somebody with more power is causing them to change their minds - ala a Dan Snyder.

Snyder has his recipe for success. I don't like it. I feel like it has no accountability. Snyder was a fan of the Redskins through the 1990s when we had a situation when Norv and Casserly made a ton of bad decisions. Similarly, we didn't know who to blame because neither had the ultimate decision. Snyder came in and fired Casserly and kept Norv. He later admitted that he fired the wrong guy.

What we're seeing with the Vinny/Snyder duo is that we've made similar bad decisions and nobody (at least nobody on the outside) knows who to blame. Maybe Snyder has clean hands. Maybe its all on Vinny. Maybe its on Gibbs/Zorn/Williams, etc. But we (the fans) don't know. So just like Snyder went and blamed the wrong guy when he first became owner, we may be blaming the wrong guy right now. But thats the consequence of not having structure in the front office.

Look at the Wizards - we knew that once Polin hired Ernie, he had final say. Eddie Jordan could want a player but Ernie had final say. So we could complain to Ernie about overpaying for E. Thomas or for letting that SG go or for trading Hamilton or for a dozen other "bad" moves. We leave our problems with the coaching to Jordan.

With the Redskins, we'd like to blame Vinny for the Taylor trade. We'd like to blame him for the Arch move or for the Lloyd trade, but then we're told "the Redskins only made those moves because the coaches wanted them" - so are the coaches the GMs too? Does Vinny get no responsibility? If thats the case then cool. Other coaches have had that much power. But then we go and blame Spurrier for things going wrong and blame Gibbs for things going wrong and are told that "Gibbs didn't want Arch, Williams did", so is the defensive coordinator now the head guy in charge?

Its this lack of structure that pisses fans off and that makes Snyder look worse as an owner.

[Thinking Skins]

Vinny wasn't the one worried about the defensive line. Blache was. Vinny, remember, isn't the guy who wanted Jason Taylor. When Daniels went down and Snyder saw the concern from his coaches, he told them to do whatever they needed to make it right. Cerrato doesn't really get to determine who plays. Coaching staffs do that. I'm not saying Cerrato felt Evans was the answer, but, he wasn't the one who had to come to that conclusion. Blache, ultimately, was.

Again, what gives you the information to know it was Blache and not Snyder?

When faced with the need to make something happen, a need that bubbled up from the people charged with coaching the team, Vinny hit the phones and made a deal for an elite level defensive end. He did it boldly and quickly. He did it with the support of his owner who took on the money when he didn't have to. He did it at the behest of his coaching staff who told him to do something.

In August, the defensive ends available were who?

Even if this is in fact how things happened, it shows that Vinny should be blamed for setting up such a bad deal (or do I blame Zorn for that too?).

[Oldfan]

Art -- No. I don't want an owner involved in football decisions for the team. I want him to provide money and the ability for his football people to do what they feel is necessary. Snyder does this.

We disagree. I want Snyder involved and I think he is. For example, before the coaching search settled on Zorn, it's obvious that decisions were made to bring in Jim Zorn to help Jason and to abandon the Coryell brand and install the WCO. I seriously doubt that Dan merely rubber-stamped Vinny's decisions. Perhaps Vinny contributed the ideas, perhaps he was persuasive, but the final say was Dan's. And, I think those were both good, sound decisions.

Now, we need to follow through on the plan. The last thing we need is another "football guy" coming in with a new plan.

In Dan Snyder's shoes, there are only two football guys I'd turn my team over to given the chance. One of them has a job (Belichick) and the other is dead (Walsh).

[Art]

But thats the thing thats pure speculation on both sides. You say that Snyder has no input, others say he does. You can say that we don't have any sources, but I don't see you clamoring with inside info either. So it results as opinion.

No. No one says Snyder has input beyond that input provided by every owner. "How much is this going to cost me?" Snyder can, if he were inclined, limit his football people based on financial terms, as most teams do. Few commit the guaranteed out of pocket money Snyder does, so it creates a system where they are more limited often than we might be. At the end of the day, there's no actual opinion here. Snyder has ZERO authority over personnel BEYOND ownership budget authority. Snyder could TAKE authority. He's the owner. He's simply chosen not to at this time. Thinking otherwise isn't having a differing opinion. It's believing in fiction. Snyder owns the team, so, he OBVIOUSLY has input. When Gibbs spoke of input, it was, "We want this guy, and we think it'll cost $10 million up front." Snyder's input might be, "Do you really think he's worth that?" It might be something else. It might even be, "Gosh, I've seen him and think he sucks, but, if you need him, go get him." And such input may even be factored in I suppose.

At the end of the day Snyder doesn't grade players. He doesn't evaluate them. He doesn't identify those he wants and make people get them. That is all Y2K.

As far as I've heard Vinny discuss the front office decisions, they're all made with him, the coach, and Snyder all in the room going through each possible player, talking to scouts and coaches about their pros and cons and how they fit into the team. Its not a question of whether Snyder's present at those meetings. Is he just there listening making sure that Zorn and Vinny don't fight? Or is he offering input and choosing the direction for this team? We're not inside this room, so we may never know. But with some of the flip flops that I'm hearing Vinny and Zorn make, it leads me to believe that somebody with more power is causing them to change their minds - ala a Dan Snyder.

Yes, Snyder is in the room. Absolutely. When those priority decisions are going on, Schaffer is actually the most powerful person there. He tells them what he CAN do from a cap standpoint, which defines what Snyder must pay depending on the moves. Snyder does have to agree he'll fork out $60 million in bonus money, if the cap can take it. I'm sure, as a fan of the team as well, he also has an opinion of various players and various team needs. We all do here. He might ask them why we don't need an offensive lineman more than they think? He might even make them prove it to him. And the proof is in the "Redskin grade" for each player on our team and every available player in the league. That's how we determine if we can get better, at cost, etc.

Again, Snyder doesn't define the grade. He does expect the grade to matter. Because the grade matters, he probably would say you can't have a C player grade here at a B position of need and put him above an A graded player at a B position of need. Whatever the grading system is. More complex than that . Now, in some cases the grade is the same. Who makes that final decision? Under Gibbs, it was Gibbs. Under Zorn, I believed it was Snyder making a tiebreaker, but, I've recently heard it's Zorn. That I don't know. I would not be surprised in the case of a tie where the football people were equally committed to different people who had the same grade and priority he might well have authority as he did under Spurrier. That is commonplace for any owner of any team which does not have a SINGLE authority figure though. Many teams do not.

Snyder has his recipe for success. I don't like it. I feel like it has no accountability. Snyder was a fan of the Redskins through the 1990s when we had a situation when Norv and Casserly made a ton of bad decisions. Similarly, we didn't know who to blame because neither had the ultimate decision. Snyder came in and fired Casserly and kept Norv. He later admitted that he fired the wrong guy.

Snyder's current recipe is Gibbs' recipe. I'm not sure I like it much either. But, I'm sure if Zorn fails, should we get Cowher, it'll adjust.

What we're seeing with the Vinny/Snyder duo is that we've made similar bad decisions and nobody (at least nobody on the outside) knows who to blame. Maybe Snyder has clean hands. Maybe its all on Vinny. Maybe its on Gibbs/Zorn/Williams, etc. But we (the fans) don't know. So just like Snyder went and blamed the wrong guy when he first became owner, we may be blaming the wrong guy right now. But thats the consequence of not having structure in the front office.

We've seen Vinny/Snyder make more good moves than bad decisions too. You don't seem to be struggling to find who to credit. Why not? As fans, we do know how mistakes are made in the collaborative system. A number of voices made a bad grade leading to a poor choice.

Look at the Wizards - we knew that once Polin hired Ernie, he had final say. Eddie Jordan could want a player but Ernie had final say. So we could complain to Ernie about overpaying for E. Thomas or for letting that SG go or for trading Hamilton or for a dozen other "bad" moves. We leave our problems with the coaching to Jordan.

This is a valid system. We simply don't run with it. We might in the future. The one we have now is a valid system too.

With the Redskins, we'd like to blame Vinny for the Taylor trade. We'd like to blame him for the Arch move or for the Lloyd trade, but then we're told "the Redskins only made those moves because the coaches wanted them" - so are the coaches the GMs too? Does Vinny get no responsibility? If thats the case then cool. Other coaches have had that much power. But then we go and blame Spurrier for things going wrong and blame Gibbs for things going wrong and are told that "Gibbs didn't want Arch, Williams did", so is the defensive coordinator now the head guy in charge?

The advantage to a collaborative system is it removes the blame game. Ernie can be blamed for X or Y. In our system, we don't want CYA people trying to blame someone. They can say they had a guy rated highly and wanted him, but were rejected, making themselves bigger and the decider smaller. It is a system that leads to leaks. One reason we're such a tight organization is our system is one where no one has to take the blame. It's no one, individually, to blame for Lloyd sucking. The grade put on him by 20 people rated him highly. He fell where he was going to fall because of that. Missing on him can not be blamed on any one person. EVERYONE contributed. You likely have one or two guys within that who had a differing viewpoint, and those were factored in.

It's actually quite an effective system to build closeness AND REMOVE outlying opinions to build consensus. This is why we've actually been MORE positive than negative on the move scale in recent years.

Its this lack of structure that pisses fans off and that makes Snyder look worse as an owner.

There is extreme structure. Clear structure. Everyone contributes. A grade is given. It defines how we go, based on EVERYONE, not one person. We're not juggling 10 opinions and trying to figure out which is best. We're putting them together and finding ONE opinion based on all of them. Mistakes still happen.

So do successes.

And, again, you don't seem to be looking to thank anyone for all the good moves. Why not? We've been a Top 5 defense for most of five years. Is that because of mistakes?

[Art]

We disagree. I want Snyder involved and I think he is. For example, before the coaching search settled on Zorn, it's obvious that decisions were made to bring in Jim Zorn to help Jason and to abandon the Coryell brand and install the WCO. I seriously doubt that Dan merely rubber-stamped Vinny's decisions. Perhaps Vinny contributed the ideas, perhaps he was persuasive, but the final say was Dan's. And, I think those were both good, sound decisions.

Now, we need to follow through on the plan. The last thing we need is another "football guy" coming in with a new plan.

In Dan Snyder's shoes, there are only two football guys I'd turn my team over to given the chance. One of them has a job (Belichick) and the other is dead (Walsh).

What you say is exactly true. Snyder is the decision maker for coach. No doubt about it. Some organizations give that to a GM. We don't. I actually don't have any problem with him serving in that capacity either. When I said I don't want him involved with the football decisions of his people, I meant once he's hired his people, he ought not be the guy telling them what they should think.

As the owner, he probably should be the guy responsible for hiring and firing.

[NewCliche21]

So would you fault a CEO if a regular employee got caught stealing from the company? I mean its the CEOs company so he should've known better...

If that employee was caught stealing over and over? Absolutely. He should've been fired long ago.

A better analogy would be a CEO with a consistently under-performing employee. Who should be fired as well.

[NewCliche21]

What you say is exactly true. Snyder is the decision maker for coach. No doubt about it. Some organizations give that to a GM. We don't. I actually don't have any problem with him serving in that capacity either. When I said I don't want him involved with the football decisions of his people, I meant once he's hired his people, he ought not be the guy telling them what they should think.

As the owner, he probably should be the guy responsible for hiring and firing.

And that's exactly my fault with Snyder. If you're hiring poor supervisors, then it's ultimately your fault. You can't expect good results if you put a monkey in charge of personnel.

[Thinking Skins]

No. No one says Snyder has input beyond that input provided by every owner. "How much is this going to cost me?" Snyder can, if he were inclined, limit his football people based on financial terms, as most teams do. Few commit the guaranteed out of pocket money Snyder does, so it creates a system where they are more limited often than we might be. At the end of the day, there's no actual opinion here. Snyder has ZERO authority over personnel BEYOND ownership budget authority. Snyder could TAKE authority. He's the owner. He's simply chosen not to at this time. Thinking otherwise isn't having a differing opinion. It's believing in fiction. Snyder owns the team, so, he OBVIOUSLY has input. When Gibbs spoke of input, it was, "We want this guy, and we think it'll cost $10 million up front." Snyder's input might be, "Do you really think he's worth that?" It might be something else. It might even be, "Gosh, I've seen him and think he sucks, but, if you need him, go get him." And such input may even be factored in I suppose.

So what do I do when I hear media reports from respected sources saying things like "Snyder is in love with Sanchez" or "Snyder really wants Cutler"? I know you didn't believe those statements, but they were being made. And what I found interesting is that both Zorn and Vinny had publicly stated that we weren't interested in either player, then suddenly they publicly stated we were. Kinda like the Taylor situation last year. Is Blache suddenly involved in the QB decision too? I'm led to believe some of the media in regards to this. I don't trust every rumor, but I find it hard to believe that they're wrong on Snyder this many times.

[Art]

And that's exactly my fault with Snyder. If you're hiring poor supervisors, then it's ultimately your fault. You can't expect good results if you put a monkey in charge of personnel.

He's hired Marty, Spurrier and Gibbs. Conceding Zorn was dumb, tell me how he's hiring bad supervisors.

[Thinking Skins]

We've seen Vinny/Snyder make more good moves than bad decisions too. You don't seem to be struggling to find who to credit. Why not? As fans, we do know how mistakes are made in the collaborative system. A number of voices made a bad grade leading to a poor choice.

Actually I am. I think it was Mad Mike who did an informative post on just this subject, and he was saying we should give the credit to Scott Campbell because when he was in charge of scouting, we had our best drafts. When he moved over to pro personnel, we had our best free agencies. Now he's in charge of player personnel. I actually had (have?) kinda high hopes for this front office knowing that he got a promotion last year...but we still traded for Taylor. So is Campbell to blame for that one too? I don't know.

[Art]

So what do I do when I hear media reports from respected sources saying things like "Snyder is in love with Sanchez" or "Snyder really wants Cutler"? I know you didn't believe those statements, but they were being made. And what I found interesting is that both Zorn and Vinny had publicly stated that we weren't interested in either player, then suddenly they publicly stated we were. Kinda like the Taylor situation last year. Is Blache suddenly involved in the QB decision too? I'm led to believe some of the media in regards to this. I don't trust every rumor, but I find it hard to believe that they're wrong on Snyder this many times.

What you should do, first, is laugh.

No one at the Redskins is talking to the media telling them who Snyder loves. The team shuts the media out. Second, understand self-fullfilling prophecies. Since teams will ONLY get information outside of the Redskins organization, meaning from other teams, or other agents, appreciate linking Snyder and his spending to a specific player helps them accomplish. One could argue, it also helps us.

Though I do believe we liked Sanchez, I know we liked Orakpo as well. No one will tell me who our No. 1 player was, but, I've had some people hint that Orakpo was rated ahead of Sanchez. He'd NEVER have fallen if someone didn't move up ahead of us to take Sanchez. If Snyder was smart enough to call, Cleveland, for example, and tell Mangini he lusted for the Sanchez, knowing the Jets did as well, and knowing those relationships, might have helped assure someone like the Jets moved up.

I realize most here feel that's too complex for Snyder, but, assume if Orakpo was a player they really liked, like Sanchez, and they wanted him to fall or even to move up slightly to take him, we needed Sanchez to be gone. I do believe there's gamesmanship in the league.

Denver told Washington on Thursday it was not interested in Campbell. Yet, 20 minutes before the deal with Chicago, a team you NEVER heard was even in talks, they leak we're offering two firsts and Campbell. We weren't both because we wouldn't have AND because they wouldn't take it. What's it do? Gets Chicago to throw in a third.

I believe teams use us for our reputation and we use our reputation for ourselves. And when Denver says Snyder really loves Cutler, in spite of the fact Denver never even spoke to Snyder -- that's a fact -- as they spoke to Vinny, it is for THEIR benefit to make someone else think we wanted him.

Again, don't you find it funny the team that GOT Cutler who ACTUALLY did give up three picks and a player for him was NEVER mentioned, by anyone, at any point? Denver knew who their serious partner was. They weren't going to burn them. They knew who their less serious partner was. They were helped by that.

Blache is not directly involved in the QB decision, no. He's involved with providing a Redskin grade on our QB and all available QBs by providing his assessment. That grade sets priority. Clearly this offseason our priorities were DL, CB, OL, QB. Had they been in a different order we'd probably have Cutler or Sanchez now.

The draft we don't go by priority. We go by BPA on our board, for better or worse.

[Art]

Actually I am. I think it was Mad Mike who did an informative post on just this subject, and he was saying we should give the credit to Scott Campbell because when he was in charge of scouting, we had our best drafts. When he moved over to pro personnel, we had our best free agencies. Now he's in charge of player personnel. I actually had (have?) kinda high hopes for this front office knowing that he got a promotion last year...but we still traded for Taylor. So is Campbell to blame for that one too? I don't know.

So Campbell is why we make good moves, but Vinny and Dan are the bad move people? Crazy to you or no?

[Oldfan]

What you say is exactly true. Snyder is the decision maker for coach. No doubt about it. Some organizations give that to a GM. We don't. I actually don't have any problem with him serving in that capacity either. When I said I don't want him involved with the football decisions of his people, I meant once he's hired his people, he ought not be the guy telling them what they should think.

As the owner, he probably should be the guy responsible for hiring and firing.

Well, we have partial agreement on the hiring of the head coach. Yet, I have Dan being involved with the decision to bring Zorn here to work on Campbell's game and with the decision to abandon the Coryell in favor of the WCO. These are football decisions with a major impact on the team's future.

Now, I'm okay with Dan making those decisions, but from your earlier remarks, I didn't think you would be.

[Art]

Well, we have partial agreement on the hiring of the head coach. Yet, I have Dan being involved with the decision to bring Zorn here to work on Campbell's game and with the decision to abandon the Coryell in favor of the WCO. These are football decisions with a major impact on the team's future.

Now, I'm okay with Dan making those decisions, but from your earlier remarks, I didn't think you would be.

Nope. That goes hand and hand with setting your team up. I don't think an owner should hire the assistant coaches like we did last offseason, but, in the flux of setting up your program when Gibbs left, the owner, Snyder in this case, determined he wanted to shift offensive systems and retain defensive systems and went about hiring people to do just that. I'm fine with that being the owner's decision. Once the people are hired, step out of their way.

[NewCliche21]

He's hired Marty, Spurrier and Gibbs. Conceding Zorn was dumb, tell me how he's hiring bad supervisors.

Sorry, I can see how you took it that way. Vinny is the supervisor to whom I'm referring.

[TheLongshot]

Mostly all true statements, but look at two immediate things that Kraft did with his coaches that Snyder didn't. Kraft kept his first two coaches for at least 3 years a piece. Now that may not be too long in coaching standards, but its longer than Norv lasted (a year and a half), longer than Robiske lasted (half a year), but if you don't want to count them cause they weren't hired by Snyder, its longer than Marty lasted (a year) and longer than Spurrier lasted (2 years). Gibbs lasted 4 years and then we hired Zorn and there is talk about him being on the hot seat (albeit none that I've heard of from Vinny or Snyder).

You only really get credit for Marty, and even then he wasn't let go because of his coaching, but because Snyder wanted to releve him of his personnel responsibilities and he said no. All the evidence says that Snyder wanted to keep Spurrier longer and not only to keep Gibbs, but to extend him.

The other thing is that Kraft and the Patriots had a winning record BEFORE Brady. People act like Drew Bledsoe was hogwash in New England. The dude was a Pro-Bowl QB who took his team to the SB. Thats not something that can't be built around. In fact, he's so good that Parcells signed him when he went to rebuild Dallas. I can't say that Bledsoe would be as good as Brady, but I think they'd have been just as good as they'd been (putting up records of at or above .500 for the most part).

I think Bledsoe's best years were behind him at that point, and even then they didn't last all that long. He always threw way too many interceptions in his career. (he averaged about 15 ints a year. Brady has never thrown more that 14 in any year.)

I'll agree that having a franchise QB eases a lot of things, but having Manning in Indy didn't save their head coach's job (the one before Dungy). Similarly Reeves having Elway didn't save his career. Part of this I'm willing to vet to just dumb luck that Brady is that good.

Funny you mention Dungy, because he was always missing great QB play to go along with his defense.

Even if we back up and look at the days under Carroll - he took over a SB team and each year they got progressively worse, but the owner still had patience with him. Danny's not known for having any kind of patience similar to that. In fact he's known for being just the opposite, the kind of in your face owner who expects immediate results, with a frame of mind that I'm buying you the goods to win now, so WIN NOW!

Yet, Zorn still has a job despite melting down the stretch. He was going to stick with Spurrier even tho he looked like a sinking ship. I don't see the evidence.

And, technically, that is an example of Snyder being a bad owner, overruling his football people by putting in an artificial ownership ruling that limits their ability to accomplish that which they deem important. Had they come to a conclusion that Cutler or Sanchez were the clear answers for us, being hamstrung by the man upstairs to be unable to make such a move is actually what defines poor ownership.

You never want your owner inteferring with the people he's hired. Now, it's equally likely that his people told him they were not going to make such a trade at this time because no one was that valuable to them and it was their conclusion which was restated by Snyder. So we would have to know how that came about to assess positive or negative traits.

But, in the end, most of the people who demand Snyder stay out of things would be THRILLED if Snyder were the cat to say, "Nope, no trading next year's first." When, the fact is, you should be furious he would intefere with his people in that way.

I don't agree with you. The philosophy of the team is defined by ownership, and no team runs things in the same way. The Rooneys, for example, have never been much for FA and I'm pretty sure that comes from on top. Same goes with the Colts. Is the rather unique way we do business in the NFL because of Vinny? I don't think so. I think it is because of Snyder and how he wants this team run.

Now, I agree that Snyder probably didn't say "no trading next year's picks" to his employees, but to then say that he has no say in the philosophy of the football team is rather blind.

[Art]

Sorry, I can see how you took it that way. Vinny is the supervisor to whom I'm referring.

Vinny is a piece of the system given a raise and promotion by Gibbs. Cerrato worked for Gibbs, remember. Gibbs was his direct boss. Should we call Gibbs and ask him how he was so wrong on how good a job Vinny did for him? That jerk.

[Thinking Skins]

So Campbell is why we make good moves, but Vinny and Dan are the bad move people? Crazy to you or no?

But this shows a problem with this "democracy" Front Office approach. How do we reward success and penalize failures? We want to do this right? From what I've seen when Campbell was in charge of scouting we had good drafts. When Campbell was in charge of pro personnel we had good free agency. So I'd think that Campbell's grade is high in both these areas - hence he got a promotion and the other guy got fired.

So this shows that Snyder's holding people responsible for their "grades". And what do these promotions mean? I'd guess that it means that their votes hold more importance. I mean should the DB coach have as much input as the DL coach on how good Haynesworth is? Similarly, I'd think that when Campbell was over scouting, he had more of a vote on the draft picks and less of a vote on free agency. And when he was over free agency, his vote's power was probably switched. Now he probably has a higher vote (than he previously did) in both areas.

And if we get into this heirarchy of votes, then what we get into is a partial ordering of the coaching staff. The exception is that we have a two (three) headed monster because we don't know whose vote counts more Vinny or Zorn (or Snyder).