TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 It's no secret that most of the financial success Snyder has experienced since purchasing the team can be attributed to either the lasting affect of the Golden Age (1981-1992) and revenue sharing. Beyond that, I think you said it best...one of these days the bottom will fall out unless the results change. It's sad to say...but we can't keep trotting out former heroes. They are in their 60s now and they don't move the needle for anyone younger than me (41). With each passing year, we lose a segment of the fan base that experienced anything more than a fluky late-season run and early playoff exit. Conversely, you have a baseball team who has quickly established itself as a perennial threat to make the post-season and a hockey team who just won a title. Barring success, this area's love of the Redskins will fade, it's just a matter of when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFK Lives Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 5 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: Barring success, this area's love of the Redskins will fade, it's just a matter of when. I think the future is now...given the ticket situation, general malaise surrounding this team and even the lesser activity on this board, points to the fading to dark you mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 4 minutes ago, RFK Lives said: I think the future is now...given the ticket situation, general malaise surrounding this team and even the lesser activity on this board, points to the fading to dark you mention. You're not wrong, but I think it depends on what you mean? Is interest lower than it used to be? Yes. Is the interest really anywhere close to falling below another local team's interest? Not even close...yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 This thread topic would have been spot on -- in 2009... when Vinny Cerrato was still with the organization, Daniel Snyder was ripping seats out of Fed Ex Field because the charade of a waiting list still had a flicker of believability even as opposing fans took over the place on game days, Danny was banning signs during those game days because he couldn't take the criticism and was suing season ticket holders who were in open revolt because of the ****ty product and customer gouging going on for the previous decade. But now? VeryOldSchool has brought us VeryOldNews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 2 hours ago, SkinsGuy said: They do, but its gotta be more to it than just stadium ownership. Even after 20+ years of one step forward/two steps back, this team is still worth over $3 billion. Either Snyder is a much better businessman than I gave him credit for, or the fanbase is way more dedicated than I thought. Also from 2016 - 2017 we were the 10th most profitable sports franchise in the world with 4% annual growth from the previous year . That's the impressive number for a team who has failed so consistently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 3 minutes ago, Dan T. said: This thread topic would have been spot on -- in 2009... when Vinny Cerrato was still with the organization, Daniel Snyder was ripping seats out of Fed Ex Field because the charade of a waiting list still had a flicker of believability even as opposing fans took over the place on game days, Danny was banning signs during those game days because he couldn't take the criticism and was suing season ticket holders who were in open revolt because of the ****ty product and customer gouging going on for the previous decade. But now? VeryOldSchool has brought us VeryOldNews. I don't agree...I think apathy can kick in a few years AFTER the worst things were happening. I can't gauge this, but it seems like there have been a few recent "meh" lead-ups to seasons. Ironically, 2015 was similar. Some die hards were excited/hopeful but there really was NO buzz for that season. Then we got hot in November and that turned into a pretty brief-but-cool ride. To your point though, just because they might be doing things better and more solidly today, doesn't mean there's actually more interest than there was a decade ago when Snyder was acting much more like a maniac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 2 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: I don't agree...I think apathy can kick in a few years AFTER the worst things were happening. I can't gauge this, but it seems like there have been a few recent "meh" lead-ups to seasons. Ironically, 2015 was similar. Some die hards were excited/hopeful but there really was NO buzz for that season. Then we got hot in November and that turned into a pretty brief-but-cool ride. To your point though, just because they might be doing things better and more solidly today, doesn't mean there's actually more interest than there was a decade ago when Snyder was acting much more like a maniac. 2009 was already 10 years into Snyder's tenure. Bad stuff had been happening way before then. I was off by 2 years on the time frame when seats started getting ripped out of the stadium due to, what? Meh? Anger? Apathy? In the 2011 off-season, nearly 10,000 seats were removed from the upper deck to reduce capacity to around 83,000....A Redskins team official admitted that the seats were removed due to lack of demand. During the 2012 offseason, 4,000 additional seats were removed .The seats that were removed permit the team to continue to sell out and avoid the NFL television black-out rule. In December 2013, the Redskins set a record for the lowest announced attendance ever at FedExField with 56,247, most likely because of the team's poor record at the time and inclement weather. Attendance in the 2014 season averaged less than 78,000 per game, and never rose above 81,000. On June 1, 2015, The Washington Post reported that another 4,000 to 6,000 seats, primarily in the top eight rows of the upper decks, were tarped off using chain link fencing and tarps during the 2015 off-season. Team officials said the removals were made due to "season ticket holder feedback", and declined to say how exactly many seats had been removed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedExField Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 I see your point...but think about it this way...in 2011 they removed 10K seats and now, 7 seasons later, they still don't need them and acknowledge they aren't selling out. So, apathy is still on the rise/interest is still on the decline. At best, it's flat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 This article, from the Wall Street Journal, asks Are the Redskins Losing Washington? Another Bad Season and Continued Missteps Are Loosening a Disparate Region's Ties to Its Team https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704779704574553660931611086 ... It is dated November 24, 2009. ~~~~~~~~~ 4 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: I see your point...but think about it this way...in 2011 they removed 10K seats and now, 7 seasons later, they still don't need them and acknowledge they aren't selling out. So, apathy is still on the rise/interest is still on the decline. At best, it's flat. We agree. I'm arguing that the brand decline began long ago. I am NOT arguing that it has rejuvenated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Maybe I'm confused @Dan T. Is your point that the decline didn't begin just now or that it's not continuing? I agree with the former but disagree with the latter. Edit - answered above. thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Just now, TD_washingtonredskins said: Maybe I'm confused @Dan T. Is your point that the decline didn't begin just now or that it's not continuing? I agree with the former but disagree with the latter. See above. The Redskins brand decline began long ago. And it's about at K-Mart level these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 What's interesting is that I believe ratings show that NFC East teams including the 'Skins still get very good ratings in prime time. I believe there is still mass appeal in the franchises that are considered "grandfathered in" or "classic" However as far as the week to week coverage goes, this is a team most experts have predicted to come in last place in the NFC East (or maybe fighting it out for 3rd). There just isn't going to be national coverage and interest in teams projected to be mediocre. Winning solves all these issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volsmet Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Expected a Nike thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kleese Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 3 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: Right, but not because it's us. More so because it's Aaron Rodgers and the Packers, no? To an extent yes, but not entirely. If it was Bucs/Packers or even Panthers/Packers it likely wouldn’t get same distribution. I don’t think the Redskins are a marquee team by any means, but they have seemed to remain a “safe” choice for networks. For example, Redskins/Saints last year was one of the few time slots that was up from the comparable game on the same network the year prior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fight for ole DC Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 1 hour ago, volsmet said: Expected a Nike thread. Me too. I expected to read about how a miscalculated business decision ruined a successful brand. The Redskins brand will never decline in my eyes. Fan for Life!!! HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Lord god....smh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 19 hours ago, samy316 said: I don’t think the lack of game coverage for Sunday’s game is due to brand dominance or lack there of. If you look at the 3 games on FOX at 4:25 this Sunday, it’s obvious that we’re the least attractive game of the 3. Dallas-Carolina is the anchor game because of the Cowboys, and Cam Newton, and Seahawks-Broncos is a more noteworthy game, because of Russell Wilson, and Von Miller. To be honest with you, why would our game be a marquee game? If you take the temperature of the National Media, and their expectations for both teams, they probably view us as mediocre-bad. If we were facing a better team, we would obviously get more coverage. While our brand is down, there is a strong correlation between brand and winning,especially with the rise of being able to follow almost any NFL team no matter where you live. Also, I think football has become more a star driven sport (marketing-wise) than 20 or more years ago plus stars can change teams while they are still stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 5 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: It's no secret that most of the financial success Snyder has experienced since purchasing the team can be attributed to either the lasting affect of the Golden Age (1981-1992) and revenue sharing. See I have a hard time buying that. It's hard to believe that revenue sharing- basically other team's handouts- would propel a wayward franchise (record wise) like the Redskins to 4th richest franchise in the league, and the 10th richest in all sports. There has to be more to it than that. Besides, when that revenue sharing deal was arranged, weren't the Redskins on the side of the teams balking at giving their revenue to the "poorer" teams? I remember stories of Smyder and Jerry Jones standing together at being against revenue sharing. Or maybe I'm remembering incorrectly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 30 minutes ago, SkinsGuy said: See I have a hard time buying that. It's hard to believe that revenue sharing- basically other team's handouts- would propel a wayward franchise (record wise) like the Redskins to 4th richest franchise in the league, and the 10th richest in all sports. There has to be more to it than that. Besides, when that revenue sharing deal was arranged, weren't the Redskins on the side of the teams balking at giving their revenue to the "poorer" teams? I remember stories of Smyder and Jerry Jones standing together at being against revenue sharing. Or maybe I'm remembering incorrectly? I think the revenue sharing gives Snyder (and all owners) their baseline. They never have to worry about losing money or going out of business. When you factor in the fact that this team had a 60+ year tradition (including 5 championship seasons) before anyone knew who Dan Snyder was, I think a lot of the heavy lifting for marketing and generating interest had already been done for him. Essentially - this team could run and market itself on cruise control because of it being an original NFL franchise and because of our relatively recent success when Snyder purchased the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Another troll thread. Getting dire right now. My God I dread to think what may unfold over the coming weeks. Please Alex, come up with the goods for the sake of the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted September 8, 2018 Share Posted September 8, 2018 Skins are going to be starting their game opposite Game 2 of the WNBA Finals. I seriously would rather watch the Mystics than the first half of the Skins game. And if Tiger is in contention at the BMW Sunday, it makes the competition tougher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted September 8, 2018 Share Posted September 8, 2018 44 minutes ago, hail2skins said: I seriously would rather watch the Mystics than the first half of the Skins game.. Well somebody has to cheer the tall chicks on, good for you. I will be watching football because ai love football and I love professional football most of all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted September 8, 2018 Share Posted September 8, 2018 I listen to a bunch of football podcasts including the The Ringer, PFF, and SI. They all annually have season preview episodes where they breakdown each division. The only one to even mention the Skins was PFF. Same with websites online outside of the ones devoted to the team. Everyone is jaded with the Skins...including the media Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted September 8, 2018 Share Posted September 8, 2018 On 9/6/2018 at 10:03 PM, zoony said: Im not sure a coverage map is proof of anything, but yes, the redskins are a c-list brand. Dan is a **** leader and businessperson. We don't have many "brand name" players or head coach so it's hard to be a brand team. Maybe Peterson changes this? Alex Smith? Peterson is certainly a brand name. Then again, when Snyder did throw tons of money at "brand name" players he was criticized more than he is now for basically laying low. I guess what Dan really needs to do is find a better GM who finds a better coach and better players? Just like how Bobby Beathard did it. I guess I'm agreeing with you that Snyder just can't figure it out and it's killing his product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 On 9/7/2018 at 4:20 PM, TD_washingtonredskins said: I think the revenue sharing gives Snyder (and all owners) their baseline. They never have to worry about losing money or going out of business. When you factor in the fact that this team had a 60+ year tradition (including 5 championship seasons) before anyone knew who Dan Snyder was, I think a lot of the heavy lifting for marketing and generating interest had already been done for him. Essentially - this team could run and market itself on cruise control because of it being an original NFL franchise and because of our relatively recent success when Snyder purchased the team. It takes money out of Dan's pocket, The last numbers I've seen were from 2016 and we had the 3rd highest revenue behind Dallas and New England, I'm not talking about valuations based on assets and IP but just raw gross sales. The Redskins are one of the most profitable sports franchises in the world, there's data to back that up. Basically, teams like the Skins, Cowboys, Patriots, and others are subsidizing other teams in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.