Poll: Dan Snyder -- Is he a good owner or a bad owner?

[Art]

Al,

I am debating the idea with you. You, again, have restated the idea. The idea you've stated is that there has been "no consistent underlying football philosophy underlying the hires." So, again, I ask you, would Snyder have been more impressive to you hiring Mouse Davis instead of Joe Gibbs? YOU are making the critique that there's no underlying philosophy to the hires Snyder has made.

I'm asking you if this is a problem would you have made a different hire. It's a simple question. If you wouldn't have, then, great, stop making this foolish point you don't agree with. If you WOULD have, then great, say who and we'll understand you didn't want Gibbs because you wanted consistency within philosophy.

It seems to me you KNOW the Gibbs hire was good and we didn't want consistency with what Spurrier was doing. Yet, you continue to make this a point as if it's something you need to make negative. I don't believe you think this is negative. But, all you have to do is say, "Yes, philosophical consistency is more important than hiring Joe Gibbs." You make that statement and at least you'll be consistent, if a bit nutty .

Then, let me point out there HAS, absolutely, been a consistent philosophy with EACH hire Snyder's made. What philosophy is that? Hire the best. Period. That's a good philosophy. Each coach he's hired has been the best available. Spurrier, remember, would have been diety Ron Wolf's hire, so, we know how good that decision was.

It doesn't have to work out to be a wise choice. It simply has to be a wise choice.

You seem to think had Snyder hired Spurrier and Spurrier ran off two 16-0 seasons that Snyder would get credit. That's baloney and YOU know it. Everyone wanted Spurrier. Everyone thought he was too smart to fail. Everyone thought he'd succeed. Had he, the credit would have been Spurrier's, not Snyder's.

Therefore, it's embarrassing to attempt to make Spurrier's failure Snyder's failure, UNLESS you can demonstrate that the guys Spurrier asked for weren't provided. If you think a sixth string runner and third string QB is not providing, say so. If you know Spurrier could have had those guys, say so.

You have now reverted back to "winning" as the key to determining success as an owner. So, I'll revert back to, that's nuts. An owner only provides what his people tell him they need to win. It's his PEOPLE who have to be right. Not the owner.

It's not Snyder's fault that Gibbs failed as a coach this past year. It's Gibbs' fault. The only person who thinks the blame goes to the owner here appears to be you and a dozen fans of opposing teams. The company you're keeping here isn't the best.

[fansince62]

Art.....the fact that someone disagrees with you does not ipso facto make their points foolish...speaking of netiquette.....

the issue isn't who I would select so quit trying to obfuscate the matter...the issue is who DS has hired, again and again, and the obvious lack of consistency in these hires irt coaching philosophy. it's there. it's a FACT.........it's not anyone else's responsibility.

everyone didn't want Spurrier...and that is irrelevant anyway. Are you making the laughable suggestion that Snyder is motivated by the prevailing winds? That he doesn't think these things through for himself? That he has no concept at all of what he wants to achieve with this club over the long haul? That post Gibbs the next hire will be whomever the pundits and bleacher denizens think is the best candidate?

while your closing ad hominems did raise a smile (certain bebaviours become predictable over time after all!), I have steadfastly maintained that winning is what counts post after post. Let's not venture into historical reconstructionism here. If you want to persist with the notion that an owner is simply a Daddy Warbucks who has no influence over the potential for a franchise to win or lose - I refer you to the Bengals and Cardinals. In the event, if you are on a jihad to advance the risible idea that DS is the "best owner in sports" that is your perogative. Others know better and can still cotinue to rest secure in the hope that things are improving and that the Skins will win again - especially as the current owner learns how to be successful in his new business.

Just Win!

[Art]

Al,

No one is suggesting a disagreement with me is, itself, foolish.

What is foolish is your repeated statements that Snyder has a flaw in not maintaining a consistent direction with regard to his coaching hires, and then NOT directly address whether you'd have maintained that direction or hired Joe Gibbs.

It's foolish and it's silly to make these statements while acknowledging the intelligence of hiring Gibbs. If you believe we should have maintained consistency in the coaching philosophy at all costs, meaning not hiring Gibbs, then your point against Snyder is not foolish, though it is a bit crazy .

This is the corner you've placed yourself with your specific focus on the lack of consistent philosophy as a negative while you believe the specific hire has been a positive. It's HARD to blame a man for something you don't blame the man for. That's foolish.

That you need to keep MAKING that point -- a point YOU don't agree with -- is foolish.

It's got nothing to do with me. If we were on the same side in believing Snyder lacked something, you'd STILL be foolish to make THIS particular point because YOU don't believe the point you're making.

So, again, I ask you simply. If not making hires that maintain a consistent coaching philosophy is a negative, you would NOT have hired Gibbs, right? Answer the question.

Snyder has made three hires. That you seem to believe we should have maintained philosophical consistency is just strange. We've had failure. As ALL owners who see failure under them try to do when making new hires is SHIFT the philosophy so ANOTHER approach may be successful.

You see this in every level of sport from college to pro.

You replace a failed coach and system with a DIFFERENT approach and system. And you do this over and over until you find success. To suggest we should have maintained failed systems seems, in itself, a strange negative to place on Snyder.

The fact that ownership in some places has contributed to a losing environment is obvious, Al, but it's not a trait shared in Washington. The owner who doesn't provide does contribute to losing. The owner who DOES provide doesn't.

To suggest it is anyone BUT you on the jihad her is simply sad, guy.

Nearly 75 percent of respondents AGREE with me. And the people IN YOUR CORNER are, by the dozens, fans of other teams. The only person with an agenda here is you. You have to alter the reality the HIGH majority sees.

And as is common with people who see things differently than just about everyone else, you do so by using false negatives, like, Snyder is to blame for hiring Gibbs because he failed to maintain a consistent coaching philosophy.

Even YOU realize how strange this is which is why you've now asked me not to focus on any of the actual hires. The sole campaign I'm on is to get people who are against Snyder to express that negativity in a fair and accurate way.

Henry did that.

You haven't.

[RDSKNfaithfull]

Art~

Point blank our orginazation has had a problem with consistentsy. It starts at the top. Take the glasses off. The most popular move is not always the best move. Dan is a fan like you, like me that does get a A for effort. Effort alone does not make you the best owner in sports.

[denverdan]

I missed this thread over the weekend and had no idea that HH31 and RW31 had been silenced and I just wanted to say how shocked and saddened I am

[Art]

Originally posted by RDSKNfaithfull

Art~

Point blank our orginazation has had a problem with consistentsy. It starts at the top. Take the glasses off. The most popular move is not always the best move. Dan is a fan like you, like me that does get a A for effort. Effort alone does not make you the best owner in sports.

The organization has, indeed, had a general lack of consistency, but it doesn't start at the top. When Snyder attempted to foster an atmosphere of consistency, his head coach decided to quit. Snyder doesn't get blame for that.

There are no glasses that require me to recognize Snyder gets no real blame for his head coach quitting. Snyder's had three hires to lead the franchise now. One he fired and at the time seemed like the appropriate decision. One quit. One is still here.

Again, no glasses are required to see that.

Glasses ARE required to see that despite Spurrier's failure as a coach and general lack of concept as to how to improve things, Snyder was not, at least openly, looking to fire him. In his effort to attain some consistency, Snyder was willing to stick with the program under Spurrier.

Glasses are required to ignore this assessment based on known facts.

I understand there are people who don't like Snyder as the owner. I understand these people are generally fans of the opposing team or Redskin fans unwilling to actually come up with a plausible reason to dislike Snyder.

Al, here, for example, knows how implausible his rationale is in that he blames Snyder for a lack of philosophical consistency in his coaching hires, while offering full support for at least his LAST football hire, and likely ALL THREE football hires have had general support considering they were top notch selections at the time.

It's hard to suggest what you find no flaw with is a flaw, don't you think?

If the best you have to offer here to me is that I should take off my glasses for not understanding Snyder is to blame for Spurrier quitting, I'd recommend you come to understand you are one of those Redskin fans unwilling to come up with a plausible reason not to like Snyder.

As an organization it's absolutely true we have lacked consistency which has been our biggest failing. But, to ignore the specifics of how that came about and simply to assign Snyder the responsibility is not thoughtful and requires some blinders of your own, don't you think?

[DUSTINMFOX]

I love how the Snyder critics (especially certain guys on 980) use every chance they can to take shots at him......

Just yesterday I had to hear the same crap about how the Patriots/Steelers/Eagles are building the RIGHT way...through the draft.

And then they mentions how they spend their money WISELY on premier free agents, instead of just throwing it around carelessly......It's such crap...like Snyder has any control over how players play. He and other critics just rehash the same tired crap about Deion, Smith, George, and Carrier. Snyder has acknowledged he's made mistakes...and he's learned from them.

Customers come into my store all of the time w/the same tired crap.....They see a jersey for $269.99 and the first thing they say is....

"Ha, I'm not going to put another penny into Snyder's pocket.." Or this gem....."This must be one of Danny's stores." These are the fans that don't know what the hell their talking about....bottom line. They are uninformed and base all of their opinion on what they hear on radio/tv. They honestly think that Snyder is dreaming up the suggested retail value of our products???

Or when they complain about stadium prices of beer and such.....hello, have you been to any other sporting events the last ten years???

[PeanutTillman]

Originally posted by Art

Peanut,

Snyder is far superior to Kraft or Rooney. In every measurable way an OWNER can be. Wins and losses count against coaches. Not owners. That's why they keep score and stats and everything.

What are you talking about.

So spending money defines an owner, or the amount of money you have defines how good an owner is?

The Bears are the richest franchise in the NFL, and they SUCK. Rooney and Kraft both have teams in the championshiop game. Oh, and also ignore the fact that the Rooney's have only had 2 caoches in the past 20 years.

That defines a good owner, an owner who sets his team up to win, not 1 who just hires a celebrity coach and a bunch of stat-happy UFAs.

Just because a player sells jerseys doesnt mean he's good.

Somebody should forward that to Danny boy.

[DUSTINMFOX]

Originally posted by PeanutTillman

The Bears are the richest franchise in the NFL, and they SUCK.

Somebody should forward that to Danny boy.

....that's funny:laugh:

[Art]

Originally posted by PeanutTillman

What are you talking about.

So spending money defines an owner, or the amount of money you have defines how good an owner is?

The Bears are the richest franchise in the NFL, and they SUCK. Rooney and Kraft both have teams in the championshiop game. Oh, and also ignore the fact that the Rooney's have only had 2 caoches in the past 20 years.

That defines a good owner, an owner who sets his team up to win, not 1 who just hires a celebrity coach and a bunch of stat-happy UFAs.

Just because a player sells jerseys doesnt mean he's good.

Somebody should forward that to Danny boy.

Certainly, yes, reinvesting in one's team is a solid measurement for how an owner is performing. The Bears are not the richest franchise in the NFL, so, your fiction notwithstanding, the fact that the Bears MAY have available funds and don't use those to provide better players for your football people may be why they suck and if so, that would be a failure in ownership.

It is, frankly, dumb as dumb can be to measure owners by how you measure coaches. Owners are not responsible for wins and losses. Coaches are. No owner has a record under his name. An owner simply provides his organization what the people in his organization tell him they need.

That, and making appropriate choices with those hires, is all an owner must do to succeed.

[DUSTINMFOX]

Originally posted by PeanutTillman

. Oh, and also ignore the fact that the Rooney's have only had 2 caoches in the past 20 years.

That defines a good owner, an owner who sets his team up to win, not 1 who just hires a celebrity coach and a bunch of stat-happy UFAs.

Just because a player sells jerseys doesnt mean he's good.

Somebody should forward that to Danny boy.

OK.....

So how many coaches you've had in the last twenty years is what defines an owner. So it is Snyder's fault that Gibbs' left in the first place?

Rooney will ultimately be judged on whether Cowher wins the big game..because they have in the past. There are no moral seasons or victories in football. You ask a Steelers fans right now what they think of Cowher and they will tell you great things...but ask them the same question if they don't win the Super Bowl and I bet they will have a different answer.

You win as an owner two ways....

1) Make money

2) Win Super Bowls

[fansince62]

well...thank god DS never became vicerally involved with player hiring!...thank god he never undermined coaches by creating avenues around the coach into the front office! thank god that as a long-time Skins fan (DS) all the Skins from the glory years couldn't wait to associate with him! thank god the turner firing was handled as well as it was. thank god ticket prices have stayed steady. thank god fans received the privilege of paying to watch training camp. thank god we continue to uncover so many gems in the latter rounds of the draft.

best owner in sports my rear quarter. he's improving. you are getting ahead of yourself in your zeal to please.

[Art]

Originally posted by fansince62

well...thank god DS never became vicerally involved with player hiring!...thank god he never undermined coaches by creating avenues around the coach into the front office! thank god that as a long-time Skins fan (DS) all the Skins from the glory years couldn't wait to associate with him! thank god the turner firing was handled as well as it was. thank god ticket prices have stayed steady. thank god fans received the privilege of paying to watch training camp. thank god we continue to uncover so many gems in the latter rounds of the draft.

best owner in sports my rear quarter. he's improving. you are getting ahead of yourself in your zeal to please.

Snyder has, absolutely, been viscerally involved with player hiring. He was in 2000 when he helped direct player acquisitions that improved the defense 26 spots in league rankings and he was the last three years when he didn't direct the player acquisitions, but executed the plan his people came up with.

Your sarcasm further reveals the false nature of anti-Snyder rhethoric. Snyder's involvement then improved our team substantially. His involvement now creates an unmatched advantage we have over EVERY other team because while he defers to his football people, he creates an atmosphere that allows contracts to come together quickly so we get OUR choices in free agency rather than the leavings other teams can't close with.

No team in the league has our advantage in free agency which is created by Snyder's close involvement with the execution of the plan his people present him. Yet, you want to make this a negative. Hiring Gibbs, bad. Getting the players his people tell him to, bad.

This is not a good place for you to be, Al.

Your thought that Snyder has created avenues around coaches to the front office is another entirely fictional negative view. It was reported Smith did an end run around the coaching staff and went to Snyder and Snyder said, "Deal with the coaches."

Another prime example of Snyder doing JUST what you hope an owner will do, yet, you turn into a negative by not expressing the whole story. It's BAD the player went to Snyder is all you'll tell. You won't complete the reported story that Snyder told the player go to the coach.

Why?

Ticket prices have increased some, but, Snyder has spent over $100 million improving the unfinished stadium he was given. Should he swallow this? He puts money directly into the team. It's not like he's counting profit. He's spent millions on the roster AND with the stadium. Ticket prices SHOULD increase. Your expectation through a sarcasting comment that would suggest otherwise is, again, an example of incomplete and misleading rhetoric.

Fans did have to pay to watch camp, because the country required a limitation to how many cars and people were allowed there at the time, and one way to accomplish this was to charge LESS for camp to get a ticket than people used to have to pay for a tank of gas to go to the last camp. And when the infrastructure was built up enough to allow larger audiences, the county no longer required specific tracking of people on that road, so, Snyder stopped charging for camp.

What do you think the majority of Skins fans would prefer? Camp for $10 in Ashburn, or camp in Frostburg for $50 in gas plus food and hotel charges likely to be assessed being well away from home and likely unwilling to make a five hour drive round rip in a day?

Of your sarcastic commentary, only the Turner statement AND the draft statement have any legitimacy.

And of them, only the Turner statement really reflects on Snyder.

If we're going to continue this conversation, Al, I'm going to have to request you start with an effort to speak somewhat truthfully if you want to be taken seriously.

Like Henry did.

I'm surprised you are deteriorating in this way as the thread goes on, getting less and less reasonable and realistic as you go. You must be quite desperate to validate why you, and dozens of Eagle fans think the way you do.

[fansince62]

whatever Art.....you are lost in your own rhetoric.....we can at least agree that we both hope for better next season.....were you ever a used car salesman?....:-).....

[Art]

Originally posted by fansince62

whatever Art.....you are lost in your own rhetoric.....we can at least agree that we both hope for better next season.....were you ever a used car salesman?....:-).....

Al,

You're still my boy and I'm more than willing to end friendly, but, something about this post distresses me. After your series of sarcastic outright falsehoods, half truths and incomplete statements, to call my attempt to present the OTHER side as rhethoric seems wrong, don't you think?

I've been very willing to defend my position by answering specific questions that would limit it. I have not resorted to branding obvious negatives from Snyder as positives, as you've done turning clear positives into negatives by essentially calling his choice of Gibbs into question and by suggesting it's negative we have such a valuable advantage in free agency due to his participation.

That, my friend, is being lost in one's own rhetoric. When you are SO desperate to prove how right you are that you take what everyone agrees as positive aspects of Snyder and present them as negatives IS wrong.

Ending jocular is fine. Just don't pass along what you've done as something I've done in this thread. That's ALL I ask in closing.

That, and will you buy this fantastic truck?

[fansince62]

so I'm a liar now?....:-).....

art...still love ya and will man the walls with ya when the time arrives....but you have an exceedingly aggressive style that inevitably leaves your fellow travelers gasping for air as they duck the rocks, arrows, and ad hominems you level at them.....keep the faith brotha.....

[Art]

Originally posted by fansince62

so I'm a liar now?....:-).....

art...still love ya and will man the walls with ya when the time arrives....but you have an exceedingly aggressive style that inevitably leaves your fellow travelers gasping for air as they duck the rocks, arrows, and ad hominems you level at them.....keep the faith brotha.....

I don't know that YOU are a liar, but the approach you took and content of your words were, to some degree, lies. It's a lie, for example, to say it was bad for Snyder to not maintain philosophical consistency in hiring coaches when you believe he made the right hire with the coach he just hired. It's a lie to suggest Snyder's involvement with player acquisitions is negative, when everyone, everywhere, sees the advantage no team can match DUE precisely to that involvement.

It's a half-truth to say ticket prices have risen without explaining the over $100 million spent to improve an incomplete stadium. It's a half-truth to say Snyder charged for training camp without explaining it was CHEAPER for Skins fans STILL and the country required some tracking making tickets the obvious, easy way to do that.

If you'll note, I didn't bring a whole lot of extra heat in this thread until YOUR position became less connected and until YOU began contradicting yourself by thrusting negatives on Snyder even in areas you don't agree are negatives. This has and will always be the way.

[RDSKNfaithfull]

Art~

When is the last time you went to Fed Ex? Its a cash cow he did not put money into it to improve it for the fans :laugh: We have one of the worst stadiums in the league. Fed Ex is a dump. The obstructed Veiw seats must have been for the fans as well. Face it most of the season tickets are owned by Corperations. The washington post itself I think has near 200 seats. Im not on the Snyder is the worst owner in the league side of the fence but the other extreme is just as ignorant.

[Art]

Originally posted by RDSKNfaithfull

Art~

When is the last time you went to Fed Ex? Its a cash cow he did not put money into it to improve it for the fans :laugh: We have one of the worst stadiums in the league. Fed Ex is a dump. The obstructed Veiw seats must have been for the fans as well. Face it most of the season tickets are owned by Corperations. The washington post itself I think has near 200 seats. Im not on the Snyder is the worst owner in the league side of the fence but the other extreme is just as ignorant.

For ignorance to apply, one must at least attempt to bring something tangible to the discussion and not the mindless bunk you've resorted to here. It's a FACT Snyder has spent over $100 million on stadium/infrastructure improvements at FedEx. To say otherwise simply shows a lack of knowledge on your part. You need to realize that one should not judge on one's bad information.

Judge on reality. I don't believe we have one of the worst stadiums in the league at all. Jack Kent Cooke built it to emulate one of the finest football venues in the league, the Meadowlands, and we have a very fine stadium in this regard. It's not as cute as smaller parks are, but, it's not going for cute.

The obstructed view seats, absolutely, are for the fans. They are the ones buying the seats. Snyder's helped numerous Redskin fans possess seats by expanding the stadium as he has. While I would not buy an obstructed view seat when my number comes up, that's a choice for the individual to make.

Since Snyder took charge, the rule about corporations purchasing general admission tickets has been fairly strictly enforced becasue Snyder wants corporations buying bigger ticket items like luxury boxes or club seats. The seats the Post owns date back to RFK stadium under an arrangement with Cooke.

You may not like it, but it's not Snyder's doing. We have very few general admission seats that aren't directly in the hands of actual fans. I recommend if you have a problem with what I've stated is my position on Snyder you at least TRY to offer a factual viewpoint in counter if you expect to make much headway.

[fansince62]

art...man you are so far gone in your comical attempt to sprinkle fairy dust over Snyder that I'ld advise some caution. You are, very often.......brilliant. But you are on the edge here. Were you even near accurate in your appraisal of my posts, you would have more wisely elected to chose words such as "inconsistent" over "lie." Aside from speaking to matters you have no idea whatsoever about (e.g., intent), it's insulting to me and denigrating of you to venture down this path. I understand that that is how you debate and accept that as a fact of Fedex life. It's not becoming.

I am working some issues with friends in Iraq and Indonesia right now. This is so pathetically minimalist in its import that I defer to your fully vetted theory substantiated by outstanding and incontrovertible fact. There are much more important things to work than this ridiculous thread. The floor is yours. The soapbox is free.

[RDSKNfaithfull]

Originally posted by Art

For ignorance to apply, one must at least attempt to bring something tangible to the discussion and not the mindless bunk you've resorted to here. It's a FACT Snyder has spent over $100 million on stadium/infrastructure improvements at FedEx. To say otherwise simply shows a lack of knowledge on your part. You need to realize that one should not judge on one's bad information.

Judge on reality. I don't believe we have one of the worst stadiums in the league at all. Jack Kent Cooke built it to emulate one of the finest football venues in the league, the Meadowlands, and we have a very fine stadium in this regard. It's not as cute as smaller parks are, but, it's not going for cute.

The obstructed view seats, absolutely, are for the fans. They are the ones buying the seats. Snyder's helped numerous Redskin fans possess seats by expanding the stadium as he has. While I would not buy an obstructed view seat when my number comes up, that's a choice for the individual to make.

Since Snyder took charge, the rule about corporations purchasing general admission tickets has been fairly strictly enforced becasue Snyder wants corporations buying bigger ticket items like luxury boxes or club seats. The seats the Post owns date back to RFK stadium under an arrangement with Cooke.

You may not like it, but it's not Snyder's doing. We have very few general admission seats that aren't directly in the hands of actual fans. I recommend if you have a problem with what I've stated is my position on Snyder you at least TRY to offer a factual viewpoint in counter if you expect to make much headway.

What facts have you brought to the table Art? really? 100,million IN YOUR OPINION was spent for the fans. When on game day the fans of other teams filter in and see Fed Ex for what it is. Dan is Scrunching in seats to make more money IN MY OPINION. You are a great poster but at the end of the day your opinion holds no more weight than others.

Snyder will get it together and he is making "headway" lol. You are very biased when it comes to this topic (I have no idea why) that is why I stayed away from this thread untill I started seeing "best owner in sports":doh:

Im threw, your opinion will be the same at the end of the day and so will mine. I will TRY to just forget this thread and enjoy your post in other threads (non Snyder realated)

please no witty pot shots;)

Who do you want to draft?

[Art]

Originally posted by fansince62

art...man you are so far gone in your comical attempt to sprinkle fairy dust over Snyder that I'ld advise some caution. You are, very often.......brilliant. But you are on the edge here. Were you even near accurate in your appraisal of my posts, you would have more wisely elected to chose words such as "inconsistent" over "lie." Aside from speaking to matters you have no idea whatsoever about (e.g., intent), it's insulting to me and denigrating of you to venture down this path. I understand that that is how you debate and accept that as a fact of Fedex life. It's not becoming.

I am working some issues with friends in Iraq and Indonesia right now. This is so pathetically minimalist in its import that I defer to your fully vetted theory substantiated by outstanding and incontrovertible fact. There are much more important things to work than this ridiculous thread. The floor is yours. The soapbox is free.

Al,

Inconsistent statements are those made, then acknowledged. A lie is a statement that someone offers you several opportunities to correct and you willfully fail, while repeating the same charge. That's why I chose the word I chose. Obviously, you have the intent here, because you keep making specific statements YOU don't believe. That's why I keep asking you to reconcile the charge you keep making with the fact you don't disagree with the selections as a manner to redirect some of the commentary.

Flatly, though, it's a lie to say Snyder allows an end run around his coaching staff by the players when you know the incident you speak of ended with Snyder telling the player he doesn't allow the type of thing at all. It worries me when I see such desperation, increasing in hollowness and willfully misleading rhetoric as I've seen from you.

And I've told you so. I still like you a rather great deal. It is just fascinating to me when people allow themselves to postulate theories that are knowingly against what they believe themselves in order to prove a point.

[Art]

Originally posted by RDSKNfaithfull

What facts have you brought to the table Art? really? 100,million IN YOUR OPINION was spent for the fans. When on game day the fans of other teams filter in and see Fed Ex for what it is. Dan is Scrunching in seats to make more money IN MY OPINION. You are a great poster but at the end of the day your opinion holds no more weight than others.

Snyder will get it together and he is making "headway" lol. You are very biased when it comes to this topic (I have no idea why) that is why I stayed away from this thread untill I started seeing "best owner in sports":doh:

Im threw, your opinion will be the same at the end of the day and so will mine. I will TRY to just forget this thread and enjoy your post in other threads (non Snyder realated)

please no witty pot shots;)

Who do you want to draft?

What facts were brought to the table?

Well, the factual assessment of what an owner's job is, in hiring good people, letting them set the direction of the franchise and doing whatever possible to provide them what they tell you they need. Additionally, creating a group dynamic that gives the Redskins a clear advantage over all other teams in free agency due to ownership involvement can't go unnoticed.

As for the stadium upgrades, if all Dan was doing was squeezing in seats for the fans, you could partially argue he wasn't doing it for the fans. Of course, since fans sit in the seats, it's for the fans. But, from completing a sound system left LESS than half done by Cooke, to improving access to upper levels of the stadium, to expanding infrastructure around the stadium are all things that directly improve the FAN experience without directly providing additional revenue.

Until you factor those in and allow yourself to recognize THOSE improvements your opinion is based on the false premise that all Snyder's doing is packing in seats so he can make more money. And, given how you've seen Snyder spend money on the franchise it's hard to say he's overly interested in simply making it. He's interested, ultimately, in spending more cash than any owner to give his people what they want.

And that, ultimately, is for us too. When Snyder starts holding onto that money, you may have a point. Until he does, you don't. That's why at the end of the day my opinion does matter more than your opinion -- at least on this matter.

I've allowed myself to base my views on a specific, spelled out criteria for what good ownership is defined as. You've yet to provide that. The people who HAVE provided that suggest WINS are all that matters, to the degree that ownership is responsible for the decisions made by the football people. The same people scream it's a negative when ownership makes decisions and not the football people, so, even here they aren't consistently able to present a definition of ownership Snyder fails in.

And my opinion is based the fact that within HIGHLY specific function of an owner, there are none who perform as well. Fortunately in the specific measurements here, it's not an opinion at all to outline the success. We witness it. It's measurable by all.

The only way to ignore it is to create false negatives as Al did, or as you're attempting. Therefore, yes, my opinion comes in at a far greater level of meaning than yours. At least here. Sadly though, you are the only person who won't allow factual information to break through your ill-formed concepts.

That diminishes you and all for the statement.

Who I want to draft depends on who we need after free agency. Get with me in April on that .

[fansince62]

I'm off to the shrink...need to do something about this schizophrenia I am apparently afflicted with...thanks doc!!!!

you have no idea what I believe....btw....

clearly...you are willing to believe anything!

[Art]

Originally posted by fansince62

I'm off to the shrink...need to do something about this schizophrenia I am apparently afflicted with...thanks doc!!!!

you have no idea what I believe....btw....

clearly...you are willing to believe anything!

Al, either I know precisely what you believe and you need a shrink, or I am dead wrong in what you believe, and you need a shrink .

Either you recognize hiring Gibbs was a great move and therefore, your continued attempt to paint a lack of consistency with coaching hires as a negative seems empty given you don't believe it was a negative to change philosophy by hiring Gibbs.

Or, you believe the hire of Gibbs was bad. You haven't really answered that, despite repeated attempts to get you to. My assumption is you think hiring Gibbs was a pretty damn fine plan -- which is why you kept asking that I not address the specifics of who has been hired when addressing your complaint.

But, as I stated earlier, if you believe hiring Gibbs was a bad move because you believe philosophical consistency is that important, it would lend some weight to your view and it would not seem as empty, but, it would seem completely crazed .

Empty or nuts. You make the call .