Poll: Do you think some in the media are genuinely concerned the Washington Redskins are getting their act together?

[fullnelson9999]

Believe it or not, the Redskins are not relevant. The media does not care enough about them to create some sort of conspiracy and bring them down. They may as well be Detroit or San Francisco.

Honestly, the only thing that gives the Redskins any sort of "relevancy" is Dan Snyder and his antics.

[Dirt]

Believe it or not, the Redskins are not relevant. The media does not care enough about them to create some sort of conspiracy and bring them down. They may as well be Detroit or San Francisco.

hell, the Lions get more hype now than we do ;/

[ChillSkinzFan84]

How are we getting our act together? Numerous mistakes were made by the FO, the season was a embarrassment, the year long media circus was a embarrassment, we won 6 games, and we still have the same issues we did last year. Not to mention we will be aggressive in Free Agency just like Vinny and Dan were.

Seems to me things are the same as always. I know alot of us are HOPING things have changed but we havent seen evidence that they have.

[DC9]

Seems to me things are the same as always. I know alot of us are HOPING things have changed but we havent seen evidence that they have.

Delayed gradification. The changes that have been made and the changes that are being made, take time to show on and around the field. This isn't madden, we can't simulate a season, we have to sit through it and continue on the course we are on. It'll happen, have a little faith and patient.

And there is nothing wrong with being aggressive in free agency if you are getting the right players at the right price. If we are going out and signing Randy Moss for 8 years and 100 mil, then it's time to panic. I'll lay you odds we don't though.

HAIL!

[DC9]

My perception is the media never gives us our due. We're one of those franchises that just won't be talked about as elite, like the Niners, Pats, Steelers, Cowboys etc. Even on our Super Bowl years, we were not given the credit we deserved. The media gave us respect for winning the three SBs, but I always feel that they feel we were lucky (2 strike years). But, I really don't care what they think, as long as we win.

I know right? When was the last time any of you saw one of the Redskins' Super Bowls being played on NFL network?

[DGREENHULK]

Depends on the source. Some actually grew up in the DMV and are Skins fans while others just know how passionate skin's fans are and which buttons to push. Here's a tip, don't listen to 106.7 (sans the junkies) or anything that comes from TMZ's version of football, Florio.

I agree with you here it DEPENDS on the source. There are some out there that no matter how the team does they will infuse their negativity into the story.......

[pjfootballer]

I know right? When was the last time any of you saw one of the Redskins' Super Bowls being played on NFL network?

The 1991 season, they didn't take us seriously until we were 11-0 and Dallass rolled into town. Then we lose. SB 26 is also only ranked, I believe #14 on the America's Game series. We had the highest point margin (points for to points against) of any SB team in history. We pitched 3 straight shutouts at home. We destroyed the supposed best team in the league (Buffalo) in the final. I could see them questioning the 82 team (relatively unknown) and the 87 team (actually the #3 seed of 5 NFC teams) and being they were strike years. But we have just as much glory and history as some of the other teams I mentioned. Hell, the Steelers have been around since the 30's and their first title wasn't until 1974. The Pats didn't win anything until 2000. I guess sports is in the "what have you done for me lately" place.

[@DCGoldPants]

Nope. I think reporters especially local ones would rather cover a winning team than a losing dysfunctional one. Its easier to get coaches and players to usually chat, which gives you more stories. When you're losing, they start looking at "why" the team on the field is losing, or why the front office is doing something.

Not to say that if the ticket office was selling to brokers instead of waitlist folks during a winning season, that it shouldn't be news.

I think the OP is kind of a reach to be honest.

---------- Post added June-9th-2011 at 06:38 PM ----------

Believe it or not, the Redskins are not relevant. The media does not care enough about them to create some sort of conspiracy and bring them down. They may as well be Detroit or San Francisco.

Honestly, the only thing that gives the Redskins any sort of "relevancy" is Dan Snyder and his antics.

Pretty much the truth here. The Redskins as a football team have become less and less relevant over the Snyder years. The Redskins Soap Opera of coaches and bad signings are the real story now. I imagine a lot more people click a link about Haynesworth being fat and lazy over the Redskins win against the Titans. Why? Because its more interesting to more people.

[TonePatron]

Who doesn't like a Good *poop Show,? I mean we are like the stinky kid in High School, When we take a shower it's fine, but if we go one day without one, we are right back to getting labeled the Stinky kid

So let's clean our ish up please

[DarrellsMyHero28]

Gah this thread is so infuriating.

How do normal people legitimately not understand this?

We are a complete and total joke. Dan Snyder is one of the worst owners in professional sports. We have thrown money at our problems and failed miserably. We went from a fantastic franchise to complete crap. Why the hell wouldn't people make fun of us? Why wouldn't the media kick us while we're down? Don't you enjoy mocking the Raiders and the Pirates and the Clippers? Its hilarious how bad they are! We've been epically bad, I'm sorry to break it to anyone that hasn't been paying attention.

The day that we become a legitimate franchise and win a Super Bowl I will die happy but seriously are you all buying Dan Snyder's latest moves hook line and sinker? I have no idea if Bruce Allen and Mike Shannahan will be successful but until I see legitimate, long-term results on and off the field coupled with some patience from Snyder I will be skeptical at best. Are we making a turnaround? Maybe, but haven't we heard this before? Haven't we said "this is different" before? Does Joe Gibbs coming back ring a bell? I don't blame anyone that doesn't necessarily care either way about the Skins laughing at us. Its really not that difficult to put yourself into those shoes.

Calm down. The mainstream media is unimportant. Journalistic integrity has been out the window for years. Who gives a flying **** if we get the respect we deserve? I sure as hell don't care. I care about what happens on the field. If we win 5 Super Bowls in a row and ESPN still hypes Dallas every year I'll walk around with my Super Bowl Champs shirt on and laugh at everyone.

[B55Green]

I think some are. I've said for quite some time, what are these buffoons going to report on once the team is back to being successful? They've enjoyed bashing the team and the name so much, I don't think they'd be able to put a quality article or blog out. They still fail to realize we are no longer going after the big name free agents as we use to. Sure McNabb could fall into that, but it was a hit and miss. We didn't make a run at Peppers etc.

We'll see though. ESPN will always hate, that's for certain.

[Commander PK]

Gah this thread is so infuriating.

How do normal people legitimately not understand this?

We are a complete and total joke. Dan Snyder is one of the worst owners in professional sports. We have thrown money at our problems and failed miserably. We went from a fantastic franchise to complete crap. Why the hell wouldn't people make fun of us? Why wouldn't the media kick us while we're down? Don't you enjoy mocking the Raiders and the Pirates and the Clippers? Its hilarious how bad they are! We've been epically bad, I'm sorry to break it to anyone that hasn't been paying attention.

.

Kicking us when we are down, shouldn't involve making **** up, or stretching the truth when you have no idea what the hell is really going on. What is the difference between this kind of "reporting" and tabloid fodder? The answer is nothing.

I mean, at the end of the day it is what it is. I realize that people are going to write what they want to write, but if they can "call it like they see it" than so can I.

[Hollywood1127]

I don't think the team will get their act together under the current ownership and coaching staff this team has. There is always going to be something wrong. Too many bad decisions in the past clout this team. When the owner changes, the team will change.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

Kicking us when we are down, shouldn't involve making **** up, or stretching the truth when you have no idea what the hell is really going on. What is the difference between this kind of "reporting" and tabloid fodder? The answer is nothing.

I mean, at the end of the day it is what it is. I realize that people are going to write what they want to write, but if they can "call it like they see it" than so can I.

If you followed other teams the way you follow the Redskins I would guarantee that you'd feel the same way about how the media treats that franchise, were they in a similar situation.

The media wouldn't be gnashing their teeth if the Redskins became a dynasty. I seriously doubt its personal, unless its a matter of members of the media disliking Snyder...which I can't really take issue with.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

If you followed other teams the way you follow the Redskins I would guarantee that you'd feel the same way about how the media treats that franchise, were they in a similar situation.

So that speaks negatively about sports media in general, not about Redskins fans.

The media wouldn't be gnashing their teeth if the Redskins became a dynasty.

It shouldn't require a team to be world champions year after year before the mediots start to look at that team objectively. They're not supposed to be like bandwagon fans singing glowing praises of teams that are winning and ridiculing teams that are losing. You can get that at any one of literally thousands of fan message boards.

I seriously doubt its personal, unless its a matter of members of the media disliking Snyder...which I can't really take issue with.

Who gives a rat's ass if a sports journalist likes or dislikes any particular owner? lol...Everything you've said in your post paints a damning portrait of sportswriters and sports media in general...and more or less validates fans' anger, regardless of which team the fans root for.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

So that speaks negatively about sports media in general, not about Redskins fans.

It shouldn't require a team to be world champions year after year before the mediots start to look at that team objectively. They're not supposed to be like bandwagon fans singing glowing praises of teams that are winning and ridiculing teams that are losing. You can get that at any one of literally thousands of fan message boards.

Who gives a rat's ass if a sports journalist likes or dislikes any particular owner? lol...Everything you've said in your post paints a damning portrait of sportswriters and sports media in general...and more or less validates fans' anger, regardless of which team the fans root for.

Then the thread should be titled "Why does the sports media suck?" and not "Why is the media out to get the Redskins?" which is essentially what it seems like.

I don't think its ridiculous for the media not to believe in the turnaround. I don't believe in it, at least not just yet. I've been fooled way too many times, I'll believe it when I see it. I've liked some of the things the new FO has done and I've been very upset with other things. It takes time, but you can't really look at last year and say definitively that everything is hunky-dory and we're well on our way to being competitive.

Do I think that the media is generally concerned that the Redskins are getting their act together? No, a thousand times no. There will always be bad teams for the media to make fun of. I don't think anyone that isn't a Redskins fan or a fan of our rivals cares either way if we start getting better.

Would I care if a team like the Lions, who I don't really care about at all, may start being legitimate? No. I don't care. Good for them.

[wildbill1952]

I answered yes in that "some" would include at least one. I'm sure there's some pro-Dallas or anti-Snyder media type that want to continue the hate and are scared the Skins might do something. But there are people planning on the end of the world in 2012 because the Mayan calendar didn't go on into infinity, also.

Personally, I don't see either of them happening by 2012. Love the Redskins, but that OLine is terrible.

[Chants]

No. Like it or not, the jabs this team has received over the past 20 years have pretty much been deserved.

Sports journalists love few things more than a bad team made good. The story just writes itself.

So as a whole, sports journalists probably would like to see the Redskins improve.

[gholmesbm]

The Redskins have not been good for a while, and have made a number of questionable & unsuccessful moves. The media will always jump on that train, as do many fans, for that matter.

Some of us can remember when other teams were in the same position - Colts, Patriots and Saints for example. And the Redskins were in this place before the Allen/Gibbs years.

Our time will come again - how long we have to wait is the question.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Then the thread should be titled "Why does the sports media suck?" and not "Why is the media out to get the Redskins?" which is essentially what it seems like.

Um...how about "the media sucks because they often seem intent to speak negatively about some teams while overhyping others".

I don't think its ridiculous for the media not to believe in the turnaround. I don't believe in it, at least not just yet. I've been fooled way too many times, I'll believe it when I see it. I've liked some of the things the new FO has done and I've been very upset with other things. It takes time, but you can't really look at last year and say definitively that everything is hunky-dory and we're well on our way to being competitive.

The overall question, though, is if we feel there are some in the sports media who don't want to believe the Skins are going about things in a much better way...not that the way they're doing things now will net results right away. Emotional fans refusing to allow themselves to invest their emotions and time into believing the Redskins are turning things around is one thing...that's to be expected.

A lot of fans and too many in the media look at little else other than win/loss column when it comes to the Skins...the Lions, in contrast, are "doing things the right way" regardless of their record, though. Whether or not the Lions have beaten the Skins or the Skins have beaten the Lions is irrelevant to this argument, so please don't rely on that stance as if it proves anything I said is wrong (just doing a preemptive strike there lol)...

Do I think that the media is generally concerned that the Redskins are getting their act together? No, a thousand times no.

Not "the media"..."SOME IN" the media. There are Cowboys fans who say on their message board that they are concerned that Shanahan and Allen are turning the Redskins around. Trust me when I say there are Cowboys fans in the media who appear to hold the same viewpoint and let that leak through in their articles and opinions. To me that's unprofessional but I no longer expect professionalism in sports journalism and are pleasantly surprised when a sports writer uses knowledge, intelligence and a (mostly) unbiased viewpoint when talking about the Skins. When most writers talk about Dan Snyder, they act like gossip writers talking about Paris Hilton.

There will always be bad teams for the media to make fun of. I don't think anyone that isn't a Redskins fan or a fan of our rivals cares either way if we start getting better.

Which goes back to what I just said...that there ARE Cowboys/Giants/Eagles fans in the media who DO care.

Would I care if a team like the Lions, who I don't really care about at all, may start being legitimate? No. I don't care. Good for them.

That's nice, but to paraphrase you from earlier in your post, the thread isn't titled "Is DarrellsMyHero28 concerned about other teams are getting their act together?"...

---------- Post added June-12th-2011 at 10:26 AM ----------

No. Like it or not, the jabs this team has received over the past 20 years have pretty much been deserved.

Sports journalists love few things more than a bad team made good. The story just writes itself.

One thing they do seem to love more is a nice, "easy" article to write about how much Snyder sucks as an owner. Any sliver of negative rumor or speculation evolves into a full-length article about the evils of Snyder's ownership. And quite often, they don't even need that.

[ChillSkinzFan84]

Delayed gradification. The changes that have been made and the changes that are being made, take time to show on and around the field. This isn't madden, we can't simulate a season, we have to sit through it and continue on the course we are on. It'll happen, have a little faith and patient.

And there is nothing wrong with being aggressive in free agency if you are getting the right players at the right price. If we are going out and signing Randy Moss for 8 years and 100 mil, then it's time to panic. I'll lay you odds we don't though.

HAIL!

What changes? And i never had a problem with free agency like most of you on here did. I'm just pointing out that we will be aggressive just like we used to be.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

What changes?

Cutting a lot of under-performing players instead of keeping them on because of their salaries or they are the "owner's pet"...

Removing the direct line that players had to the owner...

Instilling the zone blocking scheme...

Instilling Kyle's offensive scheme...

Instilling the 3-4 defense...

[ChillSkinzFan84]

Cutting a lot of under-performing players instead of keeping them on because of their salaries or they are the "owner's pet"...

Removing the direct line that players had to the owner...

Instilling the zone blocking scheme...

Instilling Kyle's offensive scheme...

Instilling the 3-4 defense...

We're talking about organizational changes not onfield changes. If that were the case then every new coach we've had made changes.

Joe Gibbs removed the direct line to the owner from players...so like I said what changes?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

We're talking about organizational changes not onfield changes.

The first two are changes directly connected to organizational changes. The last three are indirectly connected, as in if the changes had not been made organizationally, these other changes would not have resulted.

If you want a HUGE organizational change, though, hiring an actual GM for the first time in Snyder's tenure would fit that definition.

Joe Gibbs removed the direct line to the owner from players...so like I said what changes?

No he didn't. Snyder was still directly involved with some players during Gibbs' last tenure as head coach.

[ChillSkinzFan84]

Ok so if thats the case then Zorn made changes when he implemented the west coast offense, blache made changes when he took over as d coordinator. Al Saunders made changes when he brung in the 700pg playbook, spurrier made changes when he brung in the fun n gun. See what i mean? All coaches have made those onfield changes, doesn't mean they are the right changes. Thats why we're talking about organizational changes.

Bruce Allen is somewhat of a change but Shanny has the control so its actually how it was when Gibbs had total control & Vinny played the GM role.

And Gibbs did cut the line off to the owner, numerous players & people in the organization have confirmed it. And when Snyder said it in the interview he did a few weeks back Lavar Arrington was asked if that was true and he even said it was true. And he & Chad Dukes always bash snyder, they were bashing him when the questione was asked to Lavar but he said he had to be honest & admit that it was true.

So once again I ask what changes have truly been made?

---------- Post added June-12th-2011 at 02:46 PM ----------

And you said we're not keeping players just because of they're salary, but isn't that what we're doing with Haynesworth right now?