The "Non" Mt Rushmore Symbols of the Dan Snyder Era

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

17 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

He's still donating via that charity, there's articles showing that.  If he didn't make it, that'd get thrown in his face, too, so glad he did because it is doing some good.  I wish he'd talk about why he's the soul contributor or what did know about cheerleading thing, it's hard to defend him on stuff he doesn't defend himself on. FO shifts suggest he didn't know.

 

I haven't found an article on that charity past 2015 and Wikipedia says it hasn't done anything past 2015. How much has he donated in recent years? What actions has it taken? Because I'd be interested to see it.

[Renegade7]

29 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

I haven't found an article on that charity past 2015 and Wikipedia says it hasn't done anything past 2015. How much has he donated in recent years? What actions has it taken? Because I'd be interested to see it.

 

I can't verify how much dollars he's been actually giving away and what for the last two years, but he's gone down to doing little stuff because so many of the tribes he was working decided not to accept money from him anymore:

 

http://www.washingtonredskinsoriginalamericansfoundation.org/whats-happening/

 

There is activity for 2017 and 2016, but I can't really prune their 990 docs for those years right now (coming back from break for work). 

 

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/541982366

 

I knew they were still doing stuff, but misread an article about how much he was donating money-wise the last two years.  It's definitely slowed down, I suspect its because nobody wants his money, that's lose lose right there, but I don't understand that either if polls show that level of support for the name by Native Americans that we're seeing now.  Their site isn't adding up to the amount of money being talked about in their 990s the last two years, so they may be leaving stuff out or really inefficient with what they are doing.

 

Something is not right here, I'm willing to take this off my Mt. Rushmore and replace it with giving those replacement players Super Bowl rings instead.  I'm still glad he made the charity, but I can't tell what his plan is with that anymore because he won't talk about it. The charity is not dead, but not close to what it was when it first started, it seems.

 

 

 

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

The charity spent over $3 million its first year, $1.5 million its second, and from what I can tell, it sent some helmets to a team in 2018 and apparently sponsored a bull rider.

 

Maybe - and I'm just throwing this out there - the name controversy died down, and the charity isn't really necessary any longer.

 

I know. It's crazy.

 

I do think that Snyder is going to be giving free tickets to Native Americans forever, because - let's face it - there are a lot of unused tickets, and it always looks good to have a camera cut to a Native American in a Skins' jersey.

 

 

[Renegade7]

38 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

The charity spent over $3 million its first year, $1.5 million its second, and from what I can tell, it sent some helmets to a team in 2018 and apparently sponsored a bull rider.

 

Maybe - and I'm just throwing this out there - the name controversy died down, and the charity isn't really necessary any longer.

 

I know. It's crazy.

 

I do think that Snyder is going to be giving free tickets to Native Americans forever, because - let's face it - there are a lot of unused tickets, and it always looks good to have a camera cut to a Native American in a Skins' jersey.

 

 

 

At face value, I can see that. 

 

I'd like to know how many tribes are turning down the money currently and if he's still offering (that's not clear).   From what I've read, a lot of them changed their minds because it appeared like they were taking money in support for the name. 

 

No matter what Snyder says or tries to do, there's nothing he can do to change that perception without changing the name.  There's still $2 million accounted for on their 2016 and 2017 tax forms respectively, but like you, I can't tell what they're intending to do with it or already done without looking even deeper into the forms (if it was something obvious, we shouldn't have to look that hard).

[The Rook]

The poster boy y'all are looking for in the empty jerseys/OTH player is Jason f'n Taylor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rook

[DJHJR86]

-Vinny

-RG3

-Spurrier

-Haynesworth

 

Honorable mention to Bruce Allen.

[Dan T.]

Here's the base of that mountain

 

 

[Bishop Hammer]

On 6/20/2018 at 12:59 PM, hawgboy said:

I guess I'm the only one who'd put Jason Taylor in stone. May have been a HOFer but as I recall he came here and was fairly underwelming and then got hurt.

I know he was a trade and not a signing so maybe the lack of money keeps him off the wall?

 

 

That's the only Skins jersey I bought that I ever regretted.  Hail I have 2 McNabbs and an RG3 that I will still wear, in public but I can't wear JT's.

[KillBill26]

1. Vinny

2. Spurrier

3. Haynesworth

4. RG3

 

IMO, these four best symbolize Snyder's biggest reasons for failure: prioritizing having a buddy in the front office over a qualified personnel guy, and making a splash trade & draft/signing/hiring instead of a methodical approach to building a winner.  

[Tsailand]

On 6/26/2018 at 3:19 PM, Bishop Hammer said:

 I have 2 McNabbs

 

Two? Really?  He was only here one season.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

God we suck

[Bishop Hammer]

On 6/27/2018 at 10:49 PM, Tsailand said:

 

Two? Really?  He was only here one season.

I got them both (a home & away) at a discount.  The white one I saw on sale for $20 and a mate saw the burgundy for the same price and picked it up for me before he knew I had already got one.  I would have been a wanker if I had stuck him with it for helping me out so that's the story of why I have two of # 5.

[Riggo#44]

Jason Taylor is an underrated Mt. Suckmore nominee. Laron Landry? Arrington?

[Renegade7]

9 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

Jason Taylor is an underrated Mt. Suckmore nominee. Laron Landry? Arrington?

Arrington was my first favorite Redskins player.  I think he's in ring of fame, which I didn't approve of, but he's not in Haynesworth territory.  Can't get right couldn't get right after Marvin Lewis left, it's more his off field stuff I have a problem with, like him going after Gibbs on way out.  At one point he was actually really good, I didn't forget that.

[TheGreatBuzz]

On 6/20/2018 at 3:37 PM, Renegade7 said:

 

, making money hand over fist at a faster rate then other franchise growth rate matters, especially if he's putting it back into the franchise (and while we're losing, odds are its going to skyrocket if we start winning playoff games again). 

Got a source for that part?  I haven't seen anything that says we grew in value at a faster rate than average.  I know valuing a sports franchise can be complicated with do they own a stadium and what not but I'm not sure you are correct here.

Oh, and my list is as follows:

 

1) Vinny.  Is anyone even debating this?

 

2) Haynesworth.  We still get laughed at for this.  SiriusNFL was talking about it just the other day.

 

3) Bruce Allen.  That was such a great trick played on the fanbase.  So many were happy for one reason or another.  And I think most are ready for him to go.

 

4) Shanahan.  Surprised this hasn't been mentioned.  I add him because the way it all played out in such a spotlight made it clear the dysfunction in the front office in case anyone was doubting it.

 

 

I don't include Snyder himself only because I believe he would get a little mini boner by having a statue of himself and I won't give him the satisfaction.

[Renegade7]

4 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Got a source for that part?  I haven't seen anything that says we grew in value at a faster rate than average.  I know valuing a sports franchise can be complicated with do they own a stadium and what not but I'm not sure you are correct here.

 

Not sure if you've been following valuing the franchise over the last couple years, but Snyder bought the team for $800 million.  The value of the franchise currently is $3.1 billion, by comparison the Bills is currently half that.

 

Here's an older article that puts it more in context:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2016/07/13/redskins-worth-2-85-million-eighth-overall-in-the-world-third-highest-in-nfl/

[TheGreatBuzz]

5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Not sure if you've been following valuing the franchise over the last couple years, but Snyder bought the team for $800 million.  The value of the franchise currently is $3.1 billion, by comparison the Bills is currently half that.

 

Here's an older article that puts it more in context:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2016/07/13/redskins-worth-2-85-million-eighth-overall-in-the-world-third-highest-in-nfl/

 I hear the talk on the radio. But I don't compare it to the values of other franchises. I was more wondering how their growth compared to other franchises. Have they grown that much quicker than all the others?

[Renegade7]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 I hear the talk on the radio. But I don't compare it to the values of other franchises. I was more wondering how their growth compared to other franchises. Have they grown that much quicker than all the others?

All?  Not sure why asking that again, I didn't say all.  But a couple of them, absolutely, just showed we've grown more this century then Bills are worth now total.  Couple other teams I can tell same comparison easy, like Tampa and Detroit.  

 

Here's a link that shows current rate, it's slowed down, but exploded since Snyder bought the team (so you really have to look at where a franchise was around 2000 to now).

 

https://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/list/

[TSO]

 

8 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

All?  Not sure why asking that again, I didn't say all.  But a couple of them, absolutely, just showed we've grown more this century then Bills are worth now total.  Couple other teams I can tell same comparison easy, like Tampa and Detroit.  

 

Here's a link that shows current rate, it's slowed down, but exploded since Snyder bought the team (so you really have to look at where a franchise was around 2000 to now).

 

https://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/list/

 

The value of the Redskins under Dan is a pretty interesting topic to get into. 

 

That link you just posted has different numbers than this one: 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2017/07/12/full-list-the-worlds-50-most-valuable-sports-teams-2017/#1b8dc7fb4a05

 

I think yours is more recent because the valuations are higher. 

 

I believe the Redskins were second to only the Cowboys when Dan initially purchased the franchise, or at least when that Forbes’ list started coming out, in terms of revenue. That’s based entirely on memory, so I might be off there. But they’re behind the Cowboys, Pats, Giants and Niners according to the Forbes’ link I posted. They got back in front of the Niners according to yours. 

 

So, if anything, I’d lean towards the thinking that they’ve actually been losing ground under Snyder to other teams versus anything else.

 

I don't think you can just look at the revenue increase because virtually every team in the NFL gets that almost by default. I mean, you’d essentially have to be a total moron to lose money or not increase revenue at least slightly year over year running a franchise in the revenue-sharing NFL. Then there are the factors of location and per capita income. 

 

But by the looks of it, the teams above them have actually done a better job the last how many years.

 

Based off the older list I linked to, from 2016 to 2017, the Giants and Niners increased revenue by 11% whereas the Skins only did by 4%, which was the smallest increase on that top 50 list by any NFL franchise. Only the Texans and Eagles increased by that same, small, amount as well. Every other team on the list increased their year over year revenue by a bigger percentage. 

 

Going off your list, and assuming it’s more recent, they did a little bit better, but it’s still below average. The average increase in revenue for an NFL franchise was about 8%, whereas they hit 5%. 

 

So if that’s any indication the Skins are actually regressing under Snyder, who bought a team already generating top revenue. At the very least, we can say they’re presently not keeping pace with the average increase in revenue. Would have to go back and look at it year over year since Snyder took over to really get a better understanding. 

 

I might be looking at it wrong, though, but just from my preliminary research that’s what I’d take from it. Might also add some reasoning to why those hires at financial/economic positions were made recently. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

5 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

All?  Not sure why asking that again, I didn't say all.  But a couple of them, absolutely, just showed we've grown more this century then Bills are worth now total.  Couple other teams I can tell same comparison easy, like Tampa and Detroit.  

 

Here's a link that shows current rate, it's slowed down, but exploded since Snyder bought the team (so you really have to look at where a franchise was around 2000 to now).

 

https://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/list/

Well you said "then other franchise growth" so I assumed you meant faster than at least a majority of other franchises.   I think submittedone did a good job explaining it.  It seems he has done a bad job growing it when compared to most other teams.

[Renegade7]

@TheGreatBuzz  @thesubmittedone Snyder bought the team for $800 million and since then has grown in value by $2.3 billion dollars.  In the link I posted, that's close to or more then value of at least half the other franchises.

 

That second Forbes link has conflicting info, mine is most recent and does not show the redskins as the slowest growing franchise at all, though still bottom third.  I can't verify franchise rankings list in 2000, either, Forbes links are broken, but did find one for 2011 that shows value growth since 2000 (more on that later).

 

But saying we were already high on the list doesn't explain why were still 4th in the NFL.  We should be much lower if we've slowed down as much as we'd think makes sense concerning our record.  Saying were losing ground to Pats, Giants, and SF misses the point:  all those teams have either been to or won a super bowl since  Snyder bought the team, he still hasn't won 11 games and we're still #4.

 

What I did find was a Forbes link from 2011 showing the growth of franchises from 2000 to 2011, which again shows a faster growth rate then most other teams, about $700 million (like vs green Bay and philly):

 

https://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/30/nfl-valuations-11_Washington-Redskins_300925.html

 

If you judge the growth rate of the franchises value by the last year versus since Snyder bought the team, you won't see my point: we shouldn't be #4 right now, not even close.

 

We were worth less then a billion when Snyder bought the team, so why aren't we down there with Buffalo, Cincy, and Detroit in terms of overall value right now (which are teams I constantly see us compared overall lately in terms of winning)?

 

I thought about the size of metro area being a factor, as worth more then the steelers, but rams areally worth $700 million more then chargers, so not that simple.

 

This is redskins chart from link I added to this post.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Let's just loosely say Dan really has increased the value of this franchise at an above average level, why exactly should we be applauding that? 

 

What has it resulted in that benefits us as fans of the team?  I'm not being a smartass, I'm just really curious why this should be considered as something worthy of praise by the fanbase.  I simply cannot see what's good about putting more money in the pocket of a man that has failed to bring any shred of winning in nearly 20 years in charge.  This is a strange take from the ProDan contingent.

[Renegade7]

The strange take is that Snyder gets full blame for everything that goes wrong, but limited if any credit for anything that goes right.  

[TD_washingtonredskins]

On 7/3/2018 at 5:33 PM, Renegade7 said:

Arrington was my first favorite Redskins player.  I think he's in ring of fame, which I didn't approve of, but he's not in Haynesworth territory.  Can't get right couldn't get right after Marvin Lewis left, it's more his off field stuff I have a problem with, like him going after Gibbs on way out.  At one point he was actually really good, I didn't forget that.

 

Here's why Arrington would be in consideration...he's emblematic of the Snyder era due to expectations vs. actual production. He was drafted #2 overall and was touted as the next Lawrence Taylor (even wearing 56). He flashed for sure and had some solid-to-good seasons. But in the end, he was all sizzle and no steak. He was benched by a legendary coach because he couldn't play within the scheme (and keep in mind, this was during a time when our defensive scheme was leading this team). 

 

Meanwhile, with much less fanfare and build up, the guy drafted right after Arrington somewhat quietly played at an All-Pro level for years, made a few Pro Bowls, and is likely a top-5 left tackle in franchise history. 

 

Arrington and the fact that he never lived up to the hype IS THE DAN SNYDER REDSKINS. Not awful, but over-promised and under-delivered. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

The strange take is that Snyder gets full blame for everything that goes wrong, but limited if any credit for anything that goes right.  

 

At your job, if you mess up most everything that really matters but get some little things right - would you expect to be given ‘credit’ for those little things you did right? Or beat up and most likely fired for all the big things you screwed up?