The Skins, sadly, will never be very good while Snyder owns the team, unless an Angel descends from the sky and opens his (Snyder's) eyes. Even then, Snyder would probably think he knew better. I've lived near halfway between Baltimore and DC for some 31 years now. Back in the late Seventies / early Eighties I was an Orioles fan too. I credit Peter Angelos with teaching me how important ownership is. Oh that he hadn't! So now I'm literally sandwiched with two of the worst owners you could want.
The Washington Redskins
- Thread starter SalvadorMontenegro
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #22
You might say that Dan(Snyder) is not Da Man!
From a business stand point, he's making a ton of money off the team. I think the Skins have the second highest revenue after the Cowboys. The big problem is that our fans are so damned loyal. No matter what, we're selling out every game well in advance. There's no real pressure for Snyder to make any changes. He never feels like, "Uh oh. I'm losing the fans!"
I don't live in DC anymore, but when I did, I remember the fans and how they'd be stoked before the beginning of the season. "ALL RIGHT! THIS IS THE YEAR!" And it never was. But the very next year, the same thing. Year after year after year after year.
The thing is, I believer Dan Snyder actually likes football and wants his team to win. That's what's troubling. With Peter Angelos, you have a guy who doesn't give a **** (pardon me) about fielding a successful ball club. All Peter Angelos wants is money. That's why he tried to block the Nationals for so many years. Snyder, however, consistently tries to create a successful team. The problem is, he has no clue what he's doing and, as others have suggested, he treats the team like a fantasy football league. He completely neglects the players the team "grows" and instead splurges on "talent" that doesn't mesh well. Think of the players we've let go over the years: Brad Johnson, Trent Green, Stephen Davis, Champ Bailey, Ryan Clark, Antonio Pierce, LaVar Arrington and probably innumerable more whom I can't think of at the moment. Not to mention that he fired Schottenheimer after one season, who then went on to lead San Diego to the playoffs numerous years in a row. Now think of the players that Snyder has signed who have tanked: Deion Sanders, Mark Carrier, Jason Taylor, Adam Archuletta, Jeff George, Bruce Smith, Dana Stubblefield, etc, etc, etc!
The thing that pisses me off so much about Dan Snyder is that it's like this: one day he was walking around and he discovered a brick wall in front of him. He decided his best course of action was to try and shove through the wall. It didn't work the first time, so he tried again. Still didn't work. He tried again. Still didn't work. He tried again. No dice. And all this time, he's been shoving against that brick wall. He's never tried to dig under it, climb over it, go around it, backtrack, whatever. HE'S STILL SHOVING AT THE WALL! You can't break down the wall, Dan!!!!!!!
Of course I recognize other teams are historically worse than the Redskins. Certainly I feel bad for the Lions who are possibly the most hapless, inept team in the history of American professional sports. But at least they're reliable. You know they're going to suck. You don't ever think, "Ok, maybe this is our year!" They've never had a team full of superstars. Hell, Barry Sanders has pretty much been their only noteworthy player. The Redskins are a tease. They build up a big, star studded team and you try not to, but you start to think, "Ok... Yeah... Maybe we can do this thing." And of course you can't. You can't do this thing. But then they beat the Cowboys, or they go on a three game win streak and you start thinking optimistically again. But no. It never happens. They're like spending the day with a woman who's promised you the possibility of a "good time" at some point during the day. You keep thinking, "Ok, here we go!" but as the clock hits 11:59 p.m., you realize that you never really stood a chance to begin with.
From a business stand point, he's making a ton of money off the team. I think the Skins have the second highest revenue after the Cowboys. The big problem is that our fans are so damned loyal. No matter what, we're selling out every game well in advance. There's no real pressure for Snyder to make any changes. He never feels like, "Uh oh. I'm losing the fans!"
I don't live in DC anymore, but when I did, I remember the fans and how they'd be stoked before the beginning of the season. "ALL RIGHT! THIS IS THE YEAR!" And it never was. But the very next year, the same thing. Year after year after year after year.
The thing is, I believer Dan Snyder actually likes football and wants his team to win. That's what's troubling. With Peter Angelos, you have a guy who doesn't give a **** (pardon me) about fielding a successful ball club. All Peter Angelos wants is money. That's why he tried to block the Nationals for so many years. Snyder, however, consistently tries to create a successful team. The problem is, he has no clue what he's doing and, as others have suggested, he treats the team like a fantasy football league. He completely neglects the players the team "grows" and instead splurges on "talent" that doesn't mesh well. Think of the players we've let go over the years: Brad Johnson, Trent Green, Stephen Davis, Champ Bailey, Ryan Clark, Antonio Pierce, LaVar Arrington and probably innumerable more whom I can't think of at the moment. Not to mention that he fired Schottenheimer after one season, who then went on to lead San Diego to the playoffs numerous years in a row. Now think of the players that Snyder has signed who have tanked: Deion Sanders, Mark Carrier, Jason Taylor, Adam Archuletta, Jeff George, Bruce Smith, Dana Stubblefield, etc, etc, etc!
The thing that pisses me off so much about Dan Snyder is that it's like this: one day he was walking around and he discovered a brick wall in front of him. He decided his best course of action was to try and shove through the wall. It didn't work the first time, so he tried again. Still didn't work. He tried again. Still didn't work. He tried again. No dice. And all this time, he's been shoving against that brick wall. He's never tried to dig under it, climb over it, go around it, backtrack, whatever. HE'S STILL SHOVING AT THE WALL! You can't break down the wall, Dan!!!!!!!
Of course I recognize other teams are historically worse than the Redskins. Certainly I feel bad for the Lions who are possibly the most hapless, inept team in the history of American professional sports. But at least they're reliable. You know they're going to suck. You don't ever think, "Ok, maybe this is our year!" They've never had a team full of superstars. Hell, Barry Sanders has pretty much been their only noteworthy player. The Redskins are a tease. They build up a big, star studded team and you try not to, but you start to think, "Ok... Yeah... Maybe we can do this thing." And of course you can't. You can't do this thing. But then they beat the Cowboys, or they go on a three game win streak and you start thinking optimistically again. But no. It never happens. They're like spending the day with a woman who's promised you the possibility of a "good time" at some point during the day. You keep thinking, "Ok, here we go!" but as the clock hits 11:59 p.m., you realize that you never really stood a chance to begin with.
Living in DC for 16+ years, it surprised me that it's the only place I've seen that seems to have more fans of other teams (Steelers, Cowboys, etc.) than their own. I guess it's because of all the transient political folks and gov't workers brought in from other states.
I'd probably have liked them more if it hadn't seemed like the area sports coverage was always coming up with excuses as to why they were going to lose before they even went out on the field. No other team I've seen has coverage like this, and as transplant I always wondered why they did it.
I'd probably have liked them more if it hadn't seemed like the area sports coverage was always coming up with excuses as to why they were going to lose before they even went out on the field. No other team I've seen has coverage like this, and as transplant I always wondered why they did it.
I am a long time 'Skins fan, Eddie LeBaron was the first Redskin quarterback I remember, years and years ago (he even played for the hated Cowboys!); regardless of the ownership, egos, mistakes, rewards (understand that I am also a Yankees fan, the abuse as a fan I can withstand!), someday the glory of the Washington Redskins will return!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've long suspected that these two points are related. Yes, we have a large population of fans of many different teams, probably because of all the political types that migrate here for positions. And with all the lobbyists and other special interests as well as the politically connected or just generally wealthy buying up these tickets as some type of bargaining chip or token of favor, the average fan has long since been priced out of the games... I won't tell you how much we ended up paying for the last game I went to
Of course, I don't know that this is actually happening, or if it is, how much of an effect it has on demand... it sure seems like that sometime.- Thread starter
- #26
It's a victory! We're going to the super bowl!!!!!!!
We beat the Raiders. I beat the Raiders last week 17-13.
- Thread starter
- #28
Yeah, I know. I was being sarcastic. My Mom beat the Raiders a few weeks ago.
Honestly, though, we've been looking a lot better. We nearly beat a team that's 13-0, barely lost to the Eagles and put up good numbers against, yes, the Raiders.
Like I said, the sad thing is that Jason Campbell is finally playing like a good quarterback and he's leaving after this season. So, next season we'll be back at step one. Yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy...
Honestly, though, we've been looking a lot better. We nearly beat a team that's 13-0, barely lost to the Eagles and put up good numbers against, yes, the Raiders.
Like I said, the sad thing is that Jason Campbell is finally playing like a good quarterback and he's leaving after this season. So, next season we'll be back at step one. Yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy...
I'm just thinking "Stephen Davis all over again". Campbell is going to be the dude the Skins shat on that goes to another team and goes to the Superbowl. It wouldn't, at all, be the first time that's ever happened in the Poison Dwarf era.
Barely losing is still losing no matter how you look at it.
- Thread starter
- #31
^
That's true, of course. But we've shown that we can compete, at least. At the beginning of the season, we weren't even doing that. We just went out and rolled over. Nearly topping an undefeated team is a big improvement even if we didn't finish the job. I don't think anyone was expecting us to play as well as we did. See, if you're a Colts or Saints or Patriots or etc. fan, a trip deep into the playoffs is what you expect and hope for. As a Redskins fan, I'm just hoping for a pulse and signs that there is potential in the future. That's what makes me happy.
I wish him well, I really do. We've put the guy through hell. A new coach almost every year, openly courting other quarterbacks, not allowing him to use his arm strength and forcing him to throw short passes, an owner who's nuts. He's handled himself with aplomb and integrity through it all. I will root for him no matter where he goes.
That's true, of course. But we've shown that we can compete, at least. At the beginning of the season, we weren't even doing that. We just went out and rolled over. Nearly topping an undefeated team is a big improvement even if we didn't finish the job. I don't think anyone was expecting us to play as well as we did. See, if you're a Colts or Saints or Patriots or etc. fan, a trip deep into the playoffs is what you expect and hope for. As a Redskins fan, I'm just hoping for a pulse and signs that there is potential in the future. That's what makes me happy.
I wish him well, I really do. We've put the guy through hell. A new coach almost every year, openly courting other quarterbacks, not allowing him to use his arm strength and forcing him to throw short passes, an owner who's nuts. He's handled himself with aplomb and integrity through it all. I will root for him no matter where he goes.
At the beginning of the season, after a 9-7 win against the Rams, I was complaining about it with a friend of mine. He said, "Well, a win is a win. I'd be happy with a season of +2 victories." BUT, I said, it's not just the margin. It's the fact that they couldn't muster up more than 9 points against ST. F!@#$ing LOUIS. Hell, even Detroit managed to find the endzone against them.
Similarly, putting up 30 against a team doing as well as the Saints are this year is no joke. It's still a loss, true, but they're showing a little bit of life and perhaps even that they care what happens to this team. If the first half of the season went like this, but we still ended up 4-9, I think I'd be less annoyed than I am with their performance now.
I think you fellas are missing what I am saying here. Now I realize all you Redskins fans are trying to find some sort of silver lining, but face it you are a lousy team. Losing close games isn't a good thing because all it shows is that your team is incapable of going that extra distance needed to win a game. Nothing more. It doesn't mean you'll be any better next year.
- Thread starter
- #34
Of course it doesn't mean that. Going 16-0 this year doesn't mean you'll be a winning team next season. Look at the Steelers - they won the Super Bowl and now they're close to awful.
Nobody is disputing that we're a lousy team. But I don't see how you can say that we haven't improved. As the gentleman above mentioned, we BARELY beat St. Louis, a team with one win; and we gave Detroit and Kansas City their first victories of the season. At the beginning of the season, how do you think we would have fared against the Saints? We probably would've been blown out. Yes, you're only as good as your record, but the fact that we can contend against one of the NFL's elite and the current front runner in the NFC East shows that at least we are moving in a positive direction.
Nobody is disputing that we're a lousy team. But I don't see how you can say that we haven't improved. As the gentleman above mentioned, we BARELY beat St. Louis, a team with one win; and we gave Detroit and Kansas City their first victories of the season. At the beginning of the season, how do you think we would have fared against the Saints? We probably would've been blown out. Yes, you're only as good as your record, but the fact that we can contend against one of the NFL's elite and the current front runner in the NFC East shows that at least we are moving in a positive direction.
Of all the teams that earned a first round bye last year, is there a legitimate playoff contender among them?
- Thread starter
- #36
I'd say no. The Giants and Titans still have a faint glimmer of hope remaining, though I can't see the Giants rebounding from the shellacking they took last night.
I have no clue what happened to the G-Men. Their stalwart defense has become awful. McNabb and DeSean Jackson lit them up. Their running game isn't doing much either. Eli, believe it or not, is about all they have going for them.
I have no clue what happened to the G-Men. Their stalwart defense has become awful. McNabb and DeSean Jackson lit them up. Their running game isn't doing much either. Eli, believe it or not, is about all they have going for them.
I'm a (leaning towards was) a Chiefs fan. 'Nuff said.
Sorry for your bad season. Thanks for the win!
Sorry for your bad season. Thanks for the win!
I was pleased by this past week's win over the Raiders...but I have to realize 2 things a) they are not that good either and b) it is sadly too little, too late
- Thread starter
- #39
Yeah. I hate to say this, but I almost wish they had lost. Since I'm so confident Jason Campbell is going to leave, I can assume we're going to end up drafting a quarterback. The more wins we have, the higher our position in the draft...
Actually, since I'm pretty confident Portis is going to leave, as well, we have all sorts of uncertainty. How many teams don't have a certain running back, quarterback AND coach. The scary thing is, to the best of my knowledge, there really aren't any big names up in free agency, either. If we lose Campbell and can't draft someone like Colt McCoy, who are our options? Kellen Clemens? Daunte Culpepper? It's pretty frightening, but I can easily see Snyder and Cerrato paying a little above the minimum and guaranteeing Michael Vick a full season as our starting QB...
Actually, since I'm pretty confident Portis is going to leave, as well, we have all sorts of uncertainty. How many teams don't have a certain running back, quarterback AND coach. The scary thing is, to the best of my knowledge, there really aren't any big names up in free agency, either. If we lose Campbell and can't draft someone like Colt McCoy, who are our options? Kellen Clemens? Daunte Culpepper? It's pretty frightening, but I can easily see Snyder and Cerrato paying a little above the minimum and guaranteeing Michael Vick a full season as our starting QB...
First of all, the breaking news is that Vinny Cerrato has resigned as executive vp of football operations... or GM, essentially. Not sure what to make of this news so late in the season. Must've been some sort of trigger to get him/them not to wait until the end of the season. Speculation is it has to do with Holmgren's talks with Cleveland coming to a head.
In reference to our position in the draft and our record. I believe wins are still better on two accounts. First, even if we ran the table these last three weeks (unlikely), we'd still have one of the worst records in the NFL at 7-9. Second, if we lose the rest of the season and end at 4-12 we'd behind about 5 other teams with similar records, assuming they also lose the rest of their games. Taking strength of schedule into account, however, might be a little tricky. We did play a lot of teams that have dismal records at the begining of the season, so we might fall somewhere in the middle compared to other teams (but that's only for teams that we end up tieing with record-wise.) I'm guessing the best we could hope for would be 5-6th overall pick. Will a few more wins put us down to 10-12th? Maybe. But the best quarterbacks, assuming we need to draft one, will have been gone. All drafting is largely speculation and luck (there have been many great players that didn't even get picked in the first round), so by the time you get to where we're likely to be or where we might be should we finish 7-9 the results aren't certain.
This is all besides the point. Regardless of Vinny's absence, the Redskins have traditionally been horrible talent evaluators (or just unlucky for the last decade or so.) They've traded away picks for aging former stars of other teams; they beefed up their defensive secondary, which was pretty decent last year, when they had an aging O-line... the list goes on. Will the possibilty of one or two spots higher in the first round make that much of a difference? Again, with someone else making the calls, who can say for certain? I'm dubious, to say the least.
On the other hand, if you accept that you're not necessarily going to get the answer in the draft, then you have to do what you can to make yourself attractive to potential trades. (Besides, drafts are mostly investments in future seasons.) Money helps, but two teams offering similar deals, and one of them isn't the redskins has to be taken into account. If they finish strong, and show like there's something to build on next year, that evaluation might work out differently.
Similar threads
