Dear Dan Snyder: We do not like being fans anymore; we tolerate it

[88Comrade2000]

20 hours ago, joeken24 said:

If the Redskins ever win a SB with Dan as owner, will the dialogue change?

 

I'm just thinking of the Egles (yes I misspelled their ****ing name!!). Up until this year, they haven't won ****!! Jeffrey Lurie has owned them for 21 years. As a matter of fact, there are 13 other team owners that have never won the SB. They've all made mistakes. Now that's not to say they are not getting heat rounds from their fan base (Mike Brown probably has protection in Cincinnati). All I'm saying is this.....the dialogue always changes when you win. 

 

To me, trying to maneuver what's true and what's bull****s as it relates to a office I've never stepped foot in is beyond futile. All this bull**** takes away from the "sport" or the fun of football. As much bull**** as we all have to put up with on a day to day basis (commute, work, dumb ass people, etc.), its great to just sit down with a cold one and watch a little bit of Redskins football without getting into the "politics". At my age, I'm not delusional enough to think I can run a professional sport franchise. I really think this is about the only place that gets that far in the weeds with this ****. Oh yea, there is that Dallas owner that's talked about nationally. But that's more about the owner's dumb ass statements than the way the team is run (**** 'em anyway).

 

I'll say this...Snyder purchased the team as a fan. He's still a fan. That's a good thing!!

As a business owner myself, I also know this to be true..... Snyder will make business mistakes for the rest of his life......and you will too if you're into making things happen! 

 

But the bottom line to me is this: The team will be better when they get more play-makers, some "dogs", and a lot of smart players. That's it!!! Players win ****ing football games!!! Players win SB.

 

If Jeffrey can win, so can Dan.

 

If the Skins win a Superbowl under Snyder, it will be a fluke. Snyder has shown nothing that he has a capability to hire quality people and let them do their jobs. You see how the most successful teams are run, in the era of his ownership.  He is nowhere near those teams.  He's more closer to the worst teams of the NFL.

 

You are comparing him to Jeffery Lurie?   You do know, his Eagles have won; most of his ownership. True, until this year; they didn't win a Superbowl but they have been one of the more consistent teams during his ownership.  There's was a period in the 00's when the Eagles ruled the East.  Now, he has team that is going to compete for Superbowls during the next 5 years or so.  At best, Snyder may sniff a playoff birth or two; in that same time frame.

[joeken24]

On 2/20/2018 at 6:55 PM, Rdskns2000 said:

If the Skins win a Superbowl under Snyder, it will be a fluke. Snyder has shown nothing that he has a capability to hire quality people and let them do their jobs. You see how the most successful teams are run, in the era of his ownership.  He is nowhere near those teams.  He's more closer to the worst teams of the NFL.

 

You are comparing him to Jeffery Lurie?   You do know, his Eagles have won; most of his ownership. True, until this year; they didn't win a Superbowl but they have been one of the more consistent teams during his ownership.  There's was a period in the 00's when the Eagles ruled the East.  Now, he has team that is going to compete for Superbowls during the next 5 years or so.  At best, Snyder may sniff a playoff birth or two; in that same time frame.

Good points. But the ultimate goal is to win the SB. If you make the playoff and lose in the first round, you've just started your off-season one week later than the Skins. But I digress.....

What I've seen from the Skins has more to do with proverbial "game of inches" than front office stuff. I've seen every game this team has played since Snyder took over. What I've seen is dumb ass players, making dumb ass plays with the occasional glimmer of hope to keep me coming back. There's no denying that Snyder made mistake early on. What 32 year old billionaire fan wouldn't? But to me, holding on the that same dialogue seems a bit minuscule. 

I've made a decision to watch them through my NFL Mobile app a few days after they play - and that's if they win. Keeps my blood pressure down because I get too "jacked" when I watch live. But if you think they won't be competitive, why bother at all?

 

BTW (off subject), I was in the store today and saw a guy with an Eagles hat on. I said, congrats on the SB win. He replied, "Oh, I'm a diehard Redskins fan" 

WTF!!!!

 

Must be something in the potomac...... 

On 2/20/2018 at 10:08 AM, thebluefood said:

@joeken24 - I'm really having a hard time finding the similarities between Snyder and Lurie. They contrast more than they compare.

 

-Lurie's a Boston boy (life long Pats fans) who bought the Eagles, despite thinking it was a iffy purchase, and has built the team up to be one of the most consistent winners in the league. He seems to be a low-key owner who is liked and respected by Eagles personnel and team owners across the league. 

 

-Snyder's a local, born and bred 'Skins fan, who jumped at the chance at buying the team in '99 and has become a punchline in the D.C. area and the nation-at-large because of his "hands on" approach to the team since buying it and has managed to alienated everyone from fans to personnel to park rangers. 

I wasn't comparing. I was simply alluding to owners that have not won a SB.

On 2/20/2018 at 10:06 AM, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Tell you what, if that day ever comes I will let you humble me, prison inmate style, with a samurai sword. Not the handle either... the business end.

 

Winning in the NFL isn’t like, “hey, everybody gets a turn!” It’s not that it hasn’t been dan’s turn yet and that when it inevitably happens, everyone’s just going to jump on the bandwagon. He has been incompetent in his role as custodian of the Redskins franchise for going on two decades now. His managerial and sexual impotence are the reason we’ve been and will continue to be an embarrassment both on and off the field.

Though about not replying. But I'll just say.......

 

 

Scroll further down........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Further........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

........

 

[88Comrade2000]

I said that young fans should just go find another team to root for, you aren't going to get much joy rooting for the Skins.

 

Since Gibbs retired the first time in 1992, we seen some previously downtrodden teams have had success,

 

The Pats, once a doormat in the late 80's/early 90's finally turned things around with Bill Parcells. Did, okay with Pete Carroll and of course hit big time with Bill Bellichick.

 

The Colts also, were mostly a dormant team for long time but finally hit it, with Peyton Manning.

 

The Bucs long time down trodden team, began a playoff contender with Dungy and won a Superbowl with Gruden.

 

I can go on and on.  They are so many teams that sucked but went on to have some success.  Heck some teams rose and then fell and came back again. The Rams would fall into category.

 

 

I don't see any sustained success for this team, ever, under Dan Snyder.

[joeken24]

On 2/20/2018 at 9:00 AM, MassSkinsFan said:

 

Absolutely. The whole point of the OP is to suggest that Dan can make changes that need to be made in order to win.

 

 

I get where you're coming from, working in a highly innovative environment myself. We learn from our mistakes and we take risks. 

 

But, we also make sure the right people with the right skills are hired and allowed to do their jobs. We do not tolerate idiots and promptly dismiss them when it becomes obvious that's what we're seeing. If Dan did that, we would not have suffered Vinny Bug Eyes for so long.

 

Yes, we do need to get more play-makers, dogs and smart players. Who is going to find those people, get them to join the Skins and make it all feasible? We might not agree, but I do not think our FO has the talent to find them. I'd argue that our recent improvement in this area is due to SMGM, not Bruce Allen. At this point I'm hoping I'm wrong, but my eyes tell me I'm not.

 

 

Their respective records tell a different story. 

I get the part about not tolerating idiots. But turnover is a ****. I'll chalk the Vinny fiasco up to Dan being too young to understand the business.

 

Bruce is a whole other dynamic. Bruce has been in the business for a while and has actually been a part of SB organization. Before he came to the Skins, this team overpaid washed up free agents, picked bust after bust, and (in my opinion) hired two of the most incompetent coaches in NFL history (Zorn and Spurrier). The two coaches under Bruce is Shanahan and now Gruden. So far, neither coach has made significant impacts from a winning perspective. But I do see a more professional organization than what it was. And again, they're being more fiscally sound. 

We can say they made a mistake with Kirk (which is more than likely the reason for this thread in the first place). But Kirk is asking for too much money now. Forget about 2 years ago. To me, the organization was smart for wanting to see more after only one descent year out of Kirk. That made sense to me when it was going on in 2016 based on how he did in 2015 (his first year as a starter). I think a lot of times, people use hindsight as the argument. A two year deal may have been reasonable at the right price. That's it. But I think it was more about timing than anything else. You're trying to rebuild a team; you're recovering from a $36 million cap penalty. Kirk virtually sucked the three years before 2015. He has a pretty good year in 2015. But really, who in their right mind would give a one year starter a long term deal? The reality is, after that, it was Kirk (who said out of his mouth) "there was no amount of money the Redskins could have offered...." 

So you move on....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirk_Cousins

[joeken24]

On 2/20/2018 at 6:10 AM, LD0506 said:

 

Oh my achin' head..... I am SO tired of hearing this horse****. "He calls himself a fan so that qualifies him to run the team!!"

 

TheDan is the best thing that Cowboy, Eagle and Giants fans have going for them. He has done more damage to this franchise, the fanbase and it's legacy than all the collected "swinging gate" moments in history. His inability to run things is a problem, his utter cluelessness about his inability is massive.

 

Stop calling him a fan, fans want the team to succeed, fans want a team they can be proud of. TheDan wants the limelight cast by the effort of others. If he wants to prove to me or anyone else that he actually IS a fan, that he genuinely cares about this franchise, he will sell it to someone sincerely dedicated to its success.

Everyone's opinion matters. 

But again, the only information we get about Snyder comes from reporters. I'll take that **** with a grain off salt. 

If he's not a fan, so be it. But your argument seems more emotional than factual. 

[joeken24]

On 2/19/2018 at 11:04 PM, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

This is not the comparison I would be using if I was trying to defend Dan Snyder.

 

Lurie has been over .500 67% of the time he’s owned the team (24 seasons).  44 more wins than losses.   His teams have played in 26 playoff games, 6 conference championships, 2 Super Bowls, winning one.

 

Dan Snyder’s teams have been over .500 a little over 25% of the time (19 seasons).  39 more losses than wins.  His teams have played in 7 total playoff games and 0 conference championships.

 

 

 

 

Again, I'm not comparing. I was simply pointing out owners that have not won a SB. You're comparing.

Lurie has seen more success. But my ultimate point is if the Redskins win a SB, will the dialogue about the owner change?

I believe the dialogue about the owner is the same as a player. A player starts having success and all the heartwarming stories about the player starts getting air time by the Monday Night Football's and NBCs of the world. That player could have taken a **** in public. But over time, that player becomes a fan favorite if he balls out. Hell, all we really know about Dan is what we read in the Washington post (mostly talking about the name change). Many say, Dan is far removed from the day to day ops of the Redskins. If he wasn't, I believe we'd hear more from him, don't ya think?

I just want to see good football on the field. Damn all that office drama. 

[Wyvern]

Nothing is ever completely black or white about a person, even Dan Snyder.  

 

There's always some "good" (the desire of a traditional Skins fan to rebuild the franchise to its glory years, the wonderful work of his wife on worthy NFL charity initiatives, etc., etc.) but accompanied by a lot of "bad" (his capricious, over-involved, novice-like interference in the running of the Skins, his mishandling of so many issues that devalued the Skins FO as a place where NFL talent might want to invest their careers, his continuing support of a dysfunctional executive team based on they being linked by name to the Skins glory years, etc.)

 

Under Snyder, this once proud franchise has experienced a litany of bad decisions, NFL penalties, historic free-agency fiascos, sucker trades, mega-busts in the draft, GM controversies, a declining fan base, rocketing prices, deteriorating home-field conditions, price-gouging on ticket sales, parking, amenities, and creation of the Skins coaching carousels.  

 

Overall, the picture is probably a very dark gray --  and even Snyder supporters need to acknowledge how the "buck stops at Dan Snyder's desk" and that, inevitably, he's the accountable one for over 20 years of dysfunction.

 

Had Snyder simply been a GM, after his dismal 20 year record, most NFL owners would have fired Snyder long ago.  But Dan Snyder is an owner, and so we're stuck with him ---until he sells the team.  

 

Perhaps, as the media tells us, maybe Snyder's a better owner today than 19 years ago -- but his overall record of decisions as an owner, probably places him in the lower-level performance groups of  football executives/owners.

[MarkB452]

7 hours ago, Wyvern said:

 But Dan Snyder is an owner, and so we're stuck with him ---until he sells the team.  

 

or dies or does something so terrible that the NFL makes him sell the team, or moves the team when no locality in the DMV area will pay for his super new wonderful stadium with a moat...

 

 

[88Comrade2000]

18 hours ago, joeken24 said:

I get the part about not tolerating idiots. But turnover is a ****. I'll chalk the Vinny fiasco up to Dan being too young to understand the business.

 

Bruce is a whole other dynamic. Bruce has been in the business for a while and has actually been a part of SB organization. Before he came to the Skins, this team overpaid washed up free agents, picked bust after bust, and (in my opinion) hired two of the most incompetent coaches in NFL history (Zorn and Spurrier). The two coaches under Bruce is Shanahan and now Gruden. So far, neither coach has made significant impacts from a winning perspective. But I do see a more professional organization than what it was. And again, they're being more fiscally sound. 

We can say they made a mistake with Kirk (which is more than likely the reason for this thread in the first place). But Kirk is asking for too much money now. Forget about 2 years ago. To me, the organization was smart for wanting to see more after only one descent year out of Kirk. That made sense to me when it was going on in 2016 based on how he did in 2015 (his first year as a starter). I think a lot of times, people use hindsight as the argument. A two year deal may have been reasonable at the right price. That's it. But I think it was more about timing than anything else. You're trying to rebuild a team; you're recovering from a $36 million cap penalty. Kirk virtually sucked the three years before 2015. He has a pretty good year in 2015. But really, who in their right mind would give a one year starter a long term deal? The reality is, after that, it was Kirk (who said out of his mouth) "there was no amount of money the Redskins could have offered...." 

So you move on....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirk_Cousins

The NFL has a history of giving QBs long term deals, based on one year playing time or lot less.  

 

Jimmy Garoppolo sure did well, with less playing time.

 

The Cousins era is over, unless the Skins really do something stupid in 2 weeks.  No need to rehash. It's over and done with.

 

 

[ixcuincle]

No offense but he don't tgive a damn what the rabble and peanut gallery thinks, he's in it for the business and the dollars. As long as people keep throwing money at the Redskins he will continue. 

 

Plus I've been adamant that he hasn't done anything THAT bad in the last few years. If anything more of the anger is on Bruce Allen (someone is going to have to explain that to me too). 

[Veryoldschool]

Snyder is making different mistakes then he did 2 decades ago but he is still making stupid mistakes.  The 2012 RGIII bust cost the team 4 high draft picks and now they have lost the best Redskins QB in a couple of generations.  As fans, we don't really know why we can only speculate. I blame Snyder while others may blame Allen or Kirk.

 

Cousins is too polite and disciplined to explain his side of it but in the end, it doesn't mater Snyder pissed away the best thing he has had in his 20 years of mismanagement of the club.  A competent owner would have the talented and affable Cousins gracing the sidelines, the locker room and the TV for another decade, not Snyder who plucks away roses and fertilizes weeds.

 

Snyder is only blessed with the instinct for separating fans from their money, he is a disaster managing a team and a franchise.  My recommendation to younger fans is to find a second NFL team to root for at a minimum so you have a chance to have some fun following the NFL.  I'm following Cousins to his new team with hopes a decade of fun to come!

[joeken24]

1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

The NFL has a history of giving QBs long term deals, based on one year playing time or lot less.  

 

Jimmy Garoppolo sure did well, with less playing time.

 

The Cousins era is over, unless the Skins really do something stupid in 2 weeks.  No need to rehash. It's over and done with.

 

 

A voice of reason. You are absolutely right about the "no need to rehash" statement. You're also right about the Jimmy G move. We'll see how that plays out. 

[88Comrade2000]

19  Seasons have been played, since Dan become owner in the summer of 1999. In that time, here's what has happened in the NFL(Teams more winning seasons than us, in bold):

 

Rams:

Winning Seasons - 5

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 6

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 1-1

Coaches:  9

 

49ers:

Winning Seasons - 5

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 5

Division Titles - 3

Superbowl Record: 0-1

Coaches:  8

 

Seahawks:

Winning Seasons - 13

.500 Seasons - 0

Playoff seasons - 12, made playoffs with losing record in 2010

Division Titles - 9. won division with losing record in 2010

Superbowl Record: 1-2

Coaches:  3

 

Cardinals:

Winning Seasons - 4

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 3

Division Titles - 3

Superbowl Record: 0-1

Coaches:  5, 6th starts in 2018

 

Raiders: 

Winning Seasons - 4

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 4

Division Titles - 3

Superbowl Record: 0-1

Coaches:  10, 11th starts in 18

 

Chiefs:

Winning Seasons - 10

.500 Seasons - 1

Playoff seasons - 7

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  6

 

Broncos:

Winning Seasons - 11

.500 Seasons - 4

Playoff seasons - 9

Division Titles - 6

Superbowl Record: 1-1

Coaches:  6

 

Chargers:

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 4

Playoff seasons - 6

Division Titles - 5

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  4

 

Colts:

Winning Seasons - 14

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 14

Division Titles - 10

Superbowl Record: 1-1

Coaches:  4, 5th starts in 18

 

Jaguars:

Winning Seasons - 5

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 4

Division Titles - 2

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  6

 

Titans: 

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 7

Division Titles - 3

Superbowl Record: 0-1

Coaches:  4

 

Texans (Entered league in 02): 

Winning Seasons - 6

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 4

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  4

 

Buccaneers:

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 0

Playoff seasons - 6

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 1-0

Coaches:  6

 

Falcons:

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 8

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 0-1

Coaches:  7

 

Panthers:

Winning Seasons - 6

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 7, made playoffs with losing record in 2014

Division Titles - 5, won division with losing record in 2014

Superbowl Record: 0-2

Coaches:  3

 

Saints:

Winning Seasons - 8

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 7

Division Titles - 5

Superbowl Record: 1-0

Coaches:  3

 

Bears:

Winning Seasons - 6

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 4

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 0-1

Coaches:  4, 5th starting in 18

 

Lions: 

Winning Seasons - 5

.500 Seasons - 1

Playoff seasons - 4

Division Titles - 0

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches: 8, 9th starting in 18

 

Packers: 

Winning Seasons - 14

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 13

Division Titles - 9

Superbowl Record: 1-0

Coaches: 3

 

Vikings:

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 8

Division Titles - 5

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  5

 

Steelers: 

Winning Seasons - 14

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 12

Division Titles - 9

Superbowl Record: 2-1

Coaches:  2

 

Browns:

Winning Seasons - 2

.500 Seasons - 0

Playoff seasons - 1

Division Titles - 0

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  9

 

Bengals:

Winning Seasons - 7

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 7

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  3

 

Ravens: 

Winning Seasons - 12

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 10

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 2-0

Coaches:  2

 

Patriots:

Winning Seasons - 17

.500 Seasons - 1

Playoff seasons - 15

Division Titles - 15

Superbowl Record: 5-3

Coaches:  2

 

Jets: 

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 6

Division Titles - 1

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  6

 

Dolphins: 

Winning Seasons - 8

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 5

Division Titles - 2

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches: 10

 

Bills: 

Winning Seasons - 4

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 2

Division Titles - 0

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches: 10

 

Giants: 

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 8

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 2-1

Coaches:  4, 5th coach starts in 18

 

Eagles: 

Winning Seasons - 12

.500 Seasons - 2

Playoff seasons - 11

Division Titles - 8

Superbowl Record: 1-1

Coaches:  3

 

Cowboys: 

Winning Seasons - 9

.500 Seasons - 4

Playoff seasons - 7

Division Titles - 4

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  5

 

Redskins 

Winning Seasons - 6

.500 Seasons - 3

Playoff seasons - 5

Division Titles - 3

Superbowl Record: 0

Coaches:  8

 

Okay, I was bored and killed some time.  20 teams had more winning seasons than us in the Dan Snyder era.

 

6 winning Seasons 

 

Redskins-   Maybe a playoff birth or two under Alex, but that's it.

Panthers- They have already been to 2 Superbowls. They are consistent playoff contenders. They have a chance to win a title.

Texans- They have their QB and could be a regular contender. They have a chance to win a title.

Bears- They lost a Superbowl.  I'm don't think they will sniff another appearance anytime soon.

 

5 Winning Seasons 

Rams- They went 1-1 in Superbowls. They fell and now they are back. They have a chance to win a title and should be consistent contenders.

49ers- They lost a Superbowl. They fell but future looks bright.  If Jimmy is for real, they should be consistent contenders and have a chance to win a title.

Lions-  They maybe playoff contenders, but I doubt they win any title.

Jaguars- If they can get a QB, they should be consistent contenders and have a chance at a title.

 

4 Winning Seasons

Bills-  I think if they can get a QB, they can be at least contenders.

Raiders- I think Gruden makes them contenders and eventually gets them a title.

Cardinals-  If they get a QB, maybe one last shot but their window is closing soon.

 

2 Winning Seasons

Browns-  They finally got a real front office.  Now they need a QB and after this season, a head coach. Future looks bright.

 

The Skins haven't really stack up well, under Snyder.  While typing this, I didn't realize just how bad we really have been. Even some teams equal or worse than us, have appeared in a Superbowl.  They are many teams that seem to have a bright future.  I honestly, can't say that about us.

[hail2skins]

The Skins are an overall 132-171-1 (.434) during Snyder's ownership.

 

But what is really galling is their division record since 1999.....lets take out the records against Arizona during his first three years when the Cards were still in the NFC East.

 

Against Philly, we are 16-22 (.421), which I guess is close to our overall percentage and a bit surprising given that the Eagles have probably been the overall best team in the division over the past two decades.

 

Against the Giants, we are 14-24 (.368)

 

Our overall division record is 41-73 (.360), which tells you that our record against the remaining divisional team has to be REALLY bad.

 

We are 11-27 (.289) against the Cowboys under Dan Snyder.

[Fat Stupid Loser]

My son asked, "why can't we like someone good?"

[88Comrade2000]

What's even worse. they are so many recent downtrodden teams that at least appear to be on the upswing and could become regular contenders and have a chance at a title.  We aren't one of those.    The Raiders have had only 4 playoff births, most of those were when Gruden was coach the first time. Their Superbowl loss was in 2002 but now they have Gruden again. I think he will get them there and ironically, Jay maybe on his staff when they do.   The Cards who also only had 4 playoff births, made one Superbowl appearance.  There window is about to close, but they got to a Superbowl.  The Jags and Bills have sucked for so long, looks like things are getting better for them.  Hell, even the Browns; may finally have things going better.

I think Detroit will be more of the same.  I think only Chicago, is the one team; I'm doubtful on.

 

Yeah, we may get a playofff birth or two under Alex; but the Skins won't be building a long term, consistent contender. So, it's hard to care that much anymore.  You go through the motions but after a certain point each year; it's on to next year. 

[RG3fan]

I've always been a fan of the Redskins but Bruce Allen I just can't stand. Yes George Allen was a genius but not Bruce. That's why there is a thing called "General Manager" that needs to be with the Redskins. They had it with Scott McCloughan and I really liked him. I don't think ol Bruce liked it that McCloughan was getting the credit for drafting good players yet that's what McCloughan is good at is making a Super Bowl contender as he has made three of them with the 49er's, Packers and Seahawks. Then the Skins fire McCloughan which still ticks me off. They say "he's a drunk" well I wouldn't care just as long as he drafted good players. If the 2018 season is as bad as I think it will be Bruce Allen need to GO!

[Fat Stupid Loser]

48 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

 

 

Yeah, we may get a playofff birth or two under Alex; but the Skins won't be building a long term, consistent contender. So, it's hard to care that much anymore.  You go through the motions but after a certain point each year; it's on to next year. 

Alex is a competent placeholder. That's it. And he is old. We are building nothing here to believe in. This is a step backwards, back in to the cycle of the last 25 years. I agree, its hard to care anymore.

[thebluefood]

2 hours ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

My son asked, "why can't we like someone good?"

My heart! I can't handle it. 

 

[88Comrade2000]

2 hours ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

My son asked, "why can't we like someone good?"

Tell, him; you let him go. He's free to like someone good.

[LightningBuggs]

3 hours ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

My son asked, "why can't we like someone good?"

 

I ask myself that same question.

[Bishop Hammer]

When my closest mate got into football he became a Redskins fan for me and another buddy.   I feel I owe him an apology for that.  Before this Cousins debacle, I was hoping my nephews would become Skins fans as well...now I don't.  

 

Wherever Big Cuz goes I'm sure he will play well and elevate his new team because they will be better run and more professional than this one. 

[SkinsFTW]

On 2/22/2018 at 12:49 PM, joeken24 said:

But my ultimate point is if the Redskins win a SB, will the dialogue about the owner change?

 

"If the Redskins win a Super Bowl," is like putting a tooth under your pillow and hoping for the tooth fairy to leave you something. 

 

Because if tomorrow (or 5 years from now) you see them winning a super bowl somebody just rickrolled you with a 25+ year old Redskins SB YouTube video. 

 

That doesn't mean Dan Snyder is competent any more than the tooth fairy is real. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

On 2/22/2018 at 6:39 PM, Veryoldschool said:

Snyder is making different mistakes then he did 2 decades ago but he is still making stupid mistakes.  The 2012 RGIII bust that cost the team 4 high draft picks already and now they have lost the best Redskins QB in a couple of generations and as fans, we don't really know why.  We can only speculate, I blame Snyder while others may blame Allen or Kirk.  Cousins is too polite and disciplined to explain his side of it but in the end it doesn't mater Snyder pissed away the best thing he has had in his 20 years of mismanagement of the club.  A competent owner would have the talented and affable Cousins gracing the sidelines, the locker room and the TV for another decade, not Snyder who plucks away roses and fertilizes weeds.  

 

I agree with all of this.  And this is coming from probably the guy who has hammered Bruce the most especially on the contract. 

 

Now, I don't buy even one iota that Bruce is just some poor sap who left to his own devices would do the right thing but is foiled by Dan who pulls his strings and leads him down the dark path so to speak.  But I do buy that a guy like Bruce thrives in the pathetic-depressing culture set by Dan.   He's Dan's kind of guy. 

 

Guys like Bruce and Vinny easily fit Dan's culture -- they can play the politics of that building, suck up to Dan and better yet become his best friend.  It's gag worthy to me.  

 

My only hope is to dislodge Darth Vadar from the Emperor and perhaps we get lucky and Dan doesn't hire another guy who confirms and flows with his craziness but instead pushes it in a better direction.  Dan seemed to really respect Gibbs so maybe he has it in him to hire someone with integrity and maybe in turn we get lucky and some of that rubs off on him.  Got no idea if it will go down.  But its my only hope at the moment. 

[zoony]

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Guys like Bruce and Vinny easily fit Dan's culture -- they can play the politics of that building, suck up to Dan and better yet become his best friend

 

This is so on point you have no idea.  Snyder is 100 percent of the problem.  Bruce Allen is too incompetent to be part of the problem.  Its giving him way too much credit.  Its like comparing Admiral Veers to Darth Vader