Long n Left Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 The (now) 10 people who voted for Dan go to bed without dinner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Please see my sig for my answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 What did Cooke do that Snyder doesn't? Did Cooke know football personnel better? I'm going to say that JKC didn't know as much as Snyder but that's a good thing. He knew enough to stay the hell out of it and let football people handle it. Snyder knows enough to be dangerous. Let's hope he's got it out of his system for all our sakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngestson Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 The (now) 10 people who voted for Dan go to bed without dinner! I wonder how Danny voted 10 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Considering the VAST differences in results between Cooke's tenure as owner and Snyder's, I wonder if former GM Bobby Beathard could shed any light on the subject? "He never once that I can remember interfered with any decisions we made. During the season he only came over to the office on Thursdays, and he'd come in, say hello, or sometimes you'd never see him. I don't even know if he ever went in the football part of [the building] back there except to say 'Hey guys, how you doing,' and that's it." – Bobby Beathard on Jack Kent Cooke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Considering the VAST differences in results between Cooke's tenure as owner and Snyder's, I wonder if former GM Bobby Beathard could shed any light on the subject? "He never once that I can remember interfered with any decisions we made. During the season he only came over to the office on Thursdays, and he'd come in, say hello, or sometimes you'd never see him. I don't even know if he ever went in the football part of [the building] back there except to say 'Hey guys, how you doing,' and that's it." – Bobby Beathard on Jack Kent Cooke The funny thing is that the first time around Beathard did a lot of the same things that Vinny gets skewered for. But with no salary cap and an unlimited budget it was much easier to bring in veteran depth. We always had great depth in the 80s. No need to pick and choose. Bring in guys like Gerald Riggs and R.C. Theilemann for depth. Trade all your high draft picks, no biggie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 The funny thing is that the first time around Beathard did a lot of the same things that Vinny gets skewered for. But with no salary cap and an unlimited budget it was much easier to bring in veteran depth. We always had great depth in the 80s. No need to pick and choose. Bring in guys like Gerald Riggs and R.C. Theilemann for depth. Trade all your high draft picks, no biggie.I hear ya. The franchise's fervant fan base is its stongest resource. With no salary cap, we were able to use our wealth to bolster the team. That resource could still be used to bolster the organization. Although we can't load the roster any more than any other team can, we could have the best back office and strongest scouting department in the league. We had Vinny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood1127 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Just a question? Wasn't his son John Kent Cooke the owner for a little while? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Just a question? Wasn't his son John Kent Cooke the owner for a little while?Nope. Jack Kent Cooke could have put the ownership of the team in a trust for his son or left the team to his son in his will if he wanted to and/or thought he could pay the inheritance tax but he left the team to a foundation with instructions to sell it to the highest bidder. John Kent Cooke tried to buy the team but was outbid by the Milsteins and then El Diablo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood1127 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Nope. Jack Kent Cooke could have put the ownership of the team in a trust for his son or left the team to his son in his will if he wanted to and/or thought he could pay the inheritance tax but he left the team to a foundation with instructions to sell it to the highest bidder. John Kent Cooke tried to buy the team but was outbid by the Milsteins and then El Diablo. Ohh, that's how it worked. So really, his son had no say in what the team did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Although we can't load the roster any more than any other team can, we could have the best back office and strongest scouting department in the league. We had Vinny. The sad part is that our owner actually is willing to give the team an advantage in circumventing the salary cap but his own involvement has undone any advantage we've had there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Ohh, that's how it worked. So really, his son had no say in what the team did?He might have been on the board of directors of the foundation but he wouldn't have had any more say in directing the team than any other board member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4ever Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 The only reason Daniel Snyder owns the Redskins is because Jack Kent Cooke didn't indicate passing the ownership to his son John. Had that happened, the Redskins would be an entirely different team today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlySkins4ever Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 You my friend, are courageous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedr01 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Good God, this lockout needs to end soon. :ols::ols::ols::ols: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood1127 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 The only reason Daniel Snyder owns the Redskins is because Jack Kent Cooke didn't indicate passing the ownership to his son John. Had that happened, the Redskins would be an entirely different team today. Every time I hear this, I want to agree. Do anyone know of the where about's of John Kent Cooke or any business he has been associated with. Business records of him would give us a clue on how well he would manage the team on a business level. I'm not aware on his knowledge of football, but maybe a he picked up a thing or two from his father. Is there anyway John Kent Cooke could buy the team from Snyder with a group of other people? It would cost him a pretty penny. Maybe 1 billion? I'm not sure how much this team is worth but Snyder originally bought it for 800 million. The team has not improved much sense then. We've seen a few play off appearances, but nothing more than that. If John worked hard enough, he could get this team back. It would take a big investment group, but I believe John could accomplish this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horatio Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Actually, a JKC in his current condition (desperately clawing at the lid on his casket) would be a more astute owner than Snyder. Unless JKC was actually cremated... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood1127 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Actually, a JKC in his current condition (desperately clawing at the lid on his casket) would be a more astute owner than Snyder.Unless JKC was actually cremated... Now that's funny. I actually believe you. It's just a shame how this team sits through losing seasons and all Snyder can do is sit back and count his money. As much as I hate to say this, Jerry Jones shows more concern for his team than Dan Snyder does with the Redskins. Having played football gives him an extra step over Snyder. Snyder is a business man with no knowledge of the field. This team needs someone who has actually watched the sport and has a good sense on how to make things work. Not someone who just sits back and jacks fans out of more money with parking and season tickets. If Jack is watching right now, he probably wishes he could go back and time and leave the team in his sons name. He probably thought that someone with actual knowledge of the sport would buy the team. We may not have seen super bowls in the past 3 years, but we would have at least made the play offs more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gracelander Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 I'd choose the lord of the rings JKC. Hell if they could reinstate his fedora hat as owner today I would give my full respect to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 This is ridonkulous.....if the NFL gave the team to majority holder Milstien, we would have paid Trent Green to stay but they hancuffed us....and John KC kept the Norvola virus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Every time I hear this, I want to agree. Do anyone know of the where about's of John Kent Cooke or any business he has been associated with. Business records of him would give us a clue on how well he would manage the team on a business level. I'm not aware on his knowledge of football, but maybe a he picked up a thing or two from his father. Is there anyway John Kent Cooke could buy the team from Snyder with a group of other people? It would cost him a pretty penny. Maybe 1 billion? I'm not sure how much this team is worth but Snyder originally bought it for 800 million. The team has not improved much sense then. We've seen a few play off appearances, but nothing more than that. If John worked hard enough, he could get this team back. It would take a big investment group, but I believe John could accomplish this. Other than his last name being Kent Cooke, why would you want him to be owner? ---------- Post added June-12th-2011 at 02:35 PM ---------- This is ridonkulous.....if the NFL gave the team to majority holder Milstien, we would have paid Trent Green to stay but they hancuffed us....and John KC kept the Norvola virus. As well as the Casserly strain... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Other than his last name being Kent Cooke, why would you want him to be owner? His last name is Cooke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 His last name is Cooke AND it's not Snyder. That's another important reason why we would want him to be owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.