Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Larry's Guest Blog

Hey there. This is from Larry, a good dude who is a true believer when it comes to The Danny. He has some interesting thoughts and I am sure it will spark some conversations.

After watching and listening to the media and the brainwashed fans constantly and unfairly bash Dan Snyder, I've decided that enough is enough.

Let me start off by saying that my defense of Snyder is strictly what he does to put a championship team o the field. I'm not from Washington and have never been to Fed Ex field. For the fans that dislike him because of parking or obstructed seats, this blog isn't intended for you. But for the unappreciative fans out there who take this owner for granted, this blog is for you....let me also add that I admit that Snyder's first few years were not good...He admitted that and I believe he's learned from it.

I understand that many of you have been brainwashed by the media into hating snyder. I understand that many dislike Snyder because he's a young billionaire who can rub you the wrong way...but I also understand that OUR owner does everything in his power for us to have a CHAMPIONSHIP team...not a winning team, but a CHAMPIONSHIP team...there's a difference...he goes above and beyond to get that done.

is it his fault that coach gibbs has done a bad job?.....is it his fault that gibbs wanted saunders? is it his fault the defense collapsed? is it his fault williams wanted archuleta? is it his fault gibbs wanted Lloyd?

Dan snyder has given a hall of fame coach and some of the most respected assistants in the NFL all the tools they've asked for...if he didn't give them these tools, you the fans and the media would be ripping snyder for interfering with gibbs.

Everyone screams for a GM, making it sound like GM's never make mistakes. Ron Wolf, one of the most respected GM's in history, thought steve spurrier would be a great coach. The team made bad moves this year, but the team made many good moves the first 2 years. The biggest reason this team has had 2 out of 3 losing seasons under Gibbs is because coach Joe hasn't been the same coach he once was...Period!

By Jason La Canfora  |  January 9, 2007; 7:00 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Another Guest Column
Next: Another Guest Column

Comments

This writer makes a couple of good points but ultimately subverts his own thesis.

We should all remember that Danny didn't build Fed Ex. That one goes on the squire. We should also be mindful of the fact that the Danny has opened up his wallet time and time again to try to buy a championship. Some would say that's what good owners do. It worked for the DiBartolos, right? You guys see where I'm going with this...

But ultimately what incenses Redskins fans the most about Snyder is that he replaced a football mentality and culture that existed in Washington for decades with a corporate model that may work in other industries but that has been a miserable failure in the NFL.

Not hiring a GM is the worst example. No, Snyder did not pick Pretty Boy Lloyd nor did he pick Golden Archuleta. But here in lies the problem; Gibbs and Grilliams shouldn't be making those choices either. How many successful GM/Coach/Team President situations have there been in the NFL? I'm not sure, but I bet you could count them on one hand and for the failures you'd have to take off your shoes. Mike Ditka and dreadlocks come to mind.

The corporate pariah that is Snyder Inc. has gone way past this to alienate the fans and prices are only the tip of the ice berg. The most egregious overstepping is the fact he tries to control all of the media surrounding the team so that only the good news can get out. The fiasco of radio coverage is a pretty good example of that. How many radio stations do you have to have on to hear the game if your in the car? Can you hear it in the lot at Fed Ex?

I've been going to Skins games for the better part of 20 years and I think that the most troubling part of the corporate take over of the Skins is how after the Danny took over so many of the seats somehow ended up in hands of corporate owners so that you never know from one game to the next how many opposing team fans will be around you.

I could go on, but I'll leave some for everybody else as I'm sure this will be a hot topic.

Posted by: evan | January 9, 2007 7:40 AM | Report abuse

Nice piece Mr Cruise. Just the kind of defense one would expect from Danny Boy's boyfriend.

The man is one of the most inept owners in professional sports. He does deals for his ego not for winning and thinks with his smaller brain and you know how small that is Tomkat!

So stop the hallucinations and realize your top only cares about the bottom the bottom line ie the return on his investment!

Posted by: vaherder | January 9, 2007 7:55 AM | Report abuse

Larry,
Thoughtful column. I appreciate your point, and wish your guest column would have been allowed to percolate at the top of the blog for a little bit longer. Though in actuality, La Confora probably did you a favor by posting the two entries simultaneously, sparing you an extra few dozen hate posts from readers of this blog.

Here's the thing. Danny's not the Squire. He isn't ever going to be The Squire. But while Danny DOES care for the bottom line (and the return on his investment), I have to believe he cares equally as much or more so about winning. He's obviously very competitive, he has spent a s-load of money on the best players one could acquire since he has been here, and spent a ton of money to hire the one person he (and all of us) thought could turn this franchise around. If you think he is one hundred percent about the money, and you don't believe the beltbuckle and little fanboy stories, you have to at the very least realize he is a very smart business man, and he realizes that a consistently losing team will eventually erode the fanbase, thereby eventually costing him money. I can't fault him in the least for his efforts the last three years.

Would I prefer having a GM with equal authority to Gibbs? Yes. But who is to say Gibbs would have agreed to come back under those circumstances? Who is to say Gibbs would agree to that now? Three years ago, if people knew the Danny had an opportunity to sign Coach Gibbs, but refused because Gibbs wanted complete control of the franchise, people would have had his head on a pike.

I don't like the Danny. I don't like what he's done to the stadium, I don't like his association with Tom Cruise, I don't like his friendship with Larry Michael, I don't like his dealings with the Post, I don't like his tree cutting practices, I don't like his brand of business, and I don't like the cut of his jib. But misguided as he was the first four years of his tenure as owner, you can't say he hasn't done everything J. J. Gibbs has asked of him since Gibbs has returned. Like him or not, we're stuck with him. You can't vote him out of office. He's not going ANYWHERE. And I for one would much rather lose with Danny at the helm than someone like Bill Bidwell.

Posted by: DCLance | January 9, 2007 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Lance,
"Like him or not, we're stuck with him. You can't vote him out of office. He's not going ANYWHERE."

True enough. And the one thing I forgot to mention is that we fans still line his pockets as much as we say we don't like him.

I have to say that, and I have no way of proving this, that I had real misgivings about bringing back Gibbs especially without a Bethard or Casserly around.

What was the end game? How long would a 67 year old guy give it if it didn't work? And where is your franchise after the in the aftermath of the hall of fame coach's failure?

We're not to that point yet, but one more year like this year and we'll be in worse shape than our post Norv years.

Posted by: evan | January 9, 2007 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Double what Evan said. Excuse me while I settle in for some crab cakes and -sigh- watch the Ravens kill everyone on the way to the super bowl.
Now THEY have an owner who puts SPORTS first and money later.

Posted by: ILikeSonny | January 9, 2007 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Sorry but that's just not true. Snyder still meddles in all matters Redskin.

Danny doesn't get better players he just pays more to lesser players.

Also, I'm sick of hearing about how he spends "his" money to buy these FA's. When Redskins Corporation is in the red and he is still spending lavishly then I'll feel sorry for the guy. Right now he spends the fans money. (granted we are stupid enough to pay the outrageous prices and that's not his fault.)

But Danny didn't build the brand and has done little to foster loyalty.

Is all of this Danny's fault? No, it's Gibbs' fault. You know how i know that? Cause Gibbs said so.

What is our longest winning streak since the Danny took over? 8 wins, what did the coach get from Danny for that? A pink slip. Why? Because the Coach/GM told him to butt out and Danny couldn't stand it.

Posted by: Skinz | January 9, 2007 9:53 AM | Report abuse

I concur with DC.
How long would a 67 year old guy give it if it didn't work? And where is your franchise after the in the aftermath of the hall of fame coach's failure?
Evan, your wrong about this. Think Tuna and Saban. Whether or not you think Gibbs still has it as coach, he is true to his word. Now look at Dallas and Miami. Tuna has no playoff wins, is right around .500 with that team made in his image, has a completely disfunctional locker room and if he leaves, they are s.o.l. Saban too, nothing to show for the hard work but starting over. Gibbs will stick around. If he leaves - which I don't think will happen - then all hope is lost for next year. The one reason is because someone else will have a different vision and we will have to again watch the mass turnover until new coach get's his players.

Posted by: bangkokben | January 9, 2007 10:09 AM | Report abuse

I concur with DC.
How long would a 67 year old guy give it if it didn't work? And where is your franchise after the in the aftermath of the hall of fame coach's failure?
Evan, your wrong about this. Think Tuna and Saban. Whether or not you think Gibbs still has it as coach, he is true to his word. Now look at Dallas and Miami. Tuna has no playoff wins, is right around .500 with that team made in his image, has a completely disfunctional locker room and if he leaves, they are s.o.l. Saban too, nothing to show for the hard work but starting over. Gibbs will stick around. If he leaves - which I don't think will happen - then all hope is lost for next year. The one reason is because someone else will have a different vision and we will have to again watch the mass turnover until new coach get's his players.

Posted by: bangkokben | January 9, 2007 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Schottenheimer actually only had a five game winning streak (after starting 0-5), and from what I understand, the Danny wanted Spurrier all along (even before he hired Schottenheimer). When Spurrier finally was available, the Danny was able to get his man, and let Schottenheimer go.

Snyder has monetized the franchise beyond belief. I am not an expert on this matter, nor do I have time to look up the facts right now, but each team gets so much money from the television deals that the salaries of players are pretty much covered by the money the NFL doles out to each franchise. Snyder spends CBS's/ESPN's/FOX's money (and Popeyes, Papa John's, FedEx's, etc.). As much as people complain about high ticket prices, the Redskins I believe are sixth in the league in average ticket prices, which could speak more to the region's demographics and affluence than the state of the franchise.

Yes, it is expensive to attend an NFL game, but I really don't feel like the Danny is bilking his fans anymore than any other owner.

Posted by: DCLance | January 9, 2007 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Nice post Lance, well said.

Bringing Gibbs back took the emphasis off of Snyder, and seemed to lift the dark cloud that had been hovering over Redskin Park.

Initially, I liked the idea, the concept, of ceding control to someone who knew more about running a football team.

Unfortunately, Snyder picked the wrong guy. Gibbs has no background in front office operations, never a GM, which shows, and at this point, has no business continuing to be one. Draft picks are like nuggets of gold. Some are worth more than others, but they are all valuable. It is what you do with them that counts.

Gibbs'legacy is tied to his offensive innovation, not player procurement or cap management. Stick to what you know, and more importantly, what you do best.

I know that, and Danny should have known that.

Posted by: k Squared | January 9, 2007 12:20 PM | Report abuse

it is his fault that he overpays everyone he brings in...and some peoople think that is why these people never live up to expectations...he opens his wallet too much...its that corporate mentality that evan talks about...lets get back to football...drafting, trading and signing free agents with fiscal responsibility!!!

Posted by: deadskin | January 9, 2007 12:26 PM | Report abuse

The fact that Cerrato is still in the front office really says it all.

Marty, for all his faults as a talent evaluator, knew one thing -- Vinny was and is a front office disaster.

Vinny could not get a NFL job after Marty ran him out of town. Any NFL job.

Then Snyder runs Marty out of town because, in Snyder's words, he "wasn't having fun anymore" because he wasn't involved in the football decision making process.

Snyder promised Spurrier a legit GM. He broke that promise when he brought back Cerrato.

Gibbs made a huge mistake when he came back -- he had the power and respect to tell Snyder Cerrato had to go and that a new front office had to be put in place. The fact that he didn't is still the biggest mistake Gibbs has made.

Cerrato's resume NFL consists of running the 49ers and the Redskins (twice) into the ground.

And somehow he is still an intergral part of the front office.

But hey, at least Snyder is still having "fun" via Vinny.

Too bad the fans are not.

Posted by: Andrew | January 9, 2007 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I also agree with Dc. I would rather have Danny than Bidwell. I want an owner that is agressive and has more money than God to spend.

You guys remember how this started, Dannys buys team, beause of the (cooke trust leaving out many, many details)Ownership transfer is delayed, Danny is stuck with Norv. Danny tells Norv win or else. We go to the playoffs. Offseason superbowl I begins.Danny continues to meddle every year untill we are a national laughing stock (To many stupid things to put in here)

That brings us to now, Danny hired Gibbs to restore what he destoyed.That is exactlly what Joe has to do put us on a path where we are a playoff contending team every year. Danny is going to spend the money on who Joe tells him to.

I believe that the story has already been written on Joe's return and the restoration of the franchise, we just don't know the ending. The central figure in this novel's name is Jason Campbell.If he developes and is the franchise qb for the next decade and helps joe over the next 2 years move us in the right direction and then helps joe's handpicked successor make us into a championship calibur team. That is Joe's legacy in Gibbs II and if he is a bust or so so,are than we are in real trouble.

Long winded, but the main point is we have lacked the most crucial, can't fake it, make it up, fact you don't go anywhere, can't build anything without a franchise QB.So all the moves and signings and posturing we have done in the past and have been lambasted for have been like trying to put the bar and hot tub in before you have a foundation or a roof.

I want Danny to stay aggessive and spend his money, I think Joe will give him the right direction to spend it more wisely.

Posted by: Old School | January 9, 2007 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Still not sure what you guys think I'm wrong about.

I don't think we're really in disagreement.

Gibbs- good coach, not so much the GM, maybe on the dwonside of his career.

Danny- Spends lots of our money to little or no posisitive effect.

Hence the need for GM not named Vinny.

The point I was making is that unless Joe can turn it around in a big way next year we're going to have big trouble for a long time. I was not implying that I think Gibbs won't be back.

Posted by: evan | January 9, 2007 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Is it Snyder's fault that he is regarded as a pretentious, untrustworthy, arrogant jerk?
YES
Is it Snyder's fault we signed Deion, Jeff George, Bruce Smith, etc?
YES
Is it Snyder's fault we got rid of Marty and hired Spurrier?
YES
Is it Snyder's fault players don't want to sign with the Redskins after hearing about contract issues with Coles, Arrington, etc?
YES
Is it Snyder's fault we have Vinny Cerrato playing a major role in personell evaluations?
YES
Is it Snyder's fault we are one of the three worst teams in the NFL since he took over the team?
YES
Is it Snyder's fault life long Redskins fans have started looking for another team to identify with because they no longer recognize their 'home team'?
YES YES YES!!!!!

Posted by: Are you kidding me? | January 9, 2007 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Bill O'Reilly is to George W. Bush as:

Larry is to Dan Snyder

Posted by: SAT Question | January 9, 2007 1:47 PM | Report abuse

OK, this is obviously hypothetical, so bear with me.

But if Snyder were presented with the following deal, who here thinks he would take it:

The Redskins win 5 out of the next 10 Superbowls...but, the Redskins would be the least profitable sports team in America over that 10 year period.

In my opinion, no way he takes the deal. All Snyder cares about is money, and even though we are one of the worst teams in the league, the Skins are the most profitable team in all of sports. So, I don't see any reason for Snyder not to 'stay the course'

Posted by: Quick Poll | January 9, 2007 2:00 PM | Report abuse

OK, in what universe could that ever happen? I mean outside of Pittsburgh.

Posted by: evan | January 9, 2007 2:57 PM | Report abuse

This subject and follow up has been one of the more deliberate and thoughtfully "discussed" issues on this blog. I have enjoyed reading the input.

The "team" on the field has put together a good offense (clicked late again, anyway), special teams, and now needs a D makeover - I think they need at least 5 new pieces (DE, multiple LBs, SS, and CB). I don't think a GM can fix that in the 2 years left for Gibbs.

So, where does that leave the team AFTER Gibbs leaves? How much dead cap space and wasted/traded picks?

Posted by: Shotgun | January 9, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

That sounded like it was written by an Extremeskins Mod/Redskins Apologist.

Those lame mods over there go after anybody in the media who writes anything remotely negative/true about our franchise.

How about we be realistic and admit that there is a major failure going on here, starting at the top.

Posted by: Sarge | January 9, 2007 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Larry Michael?

Posted by: turd ferguson | January 10, 2007 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Someone said earlier that "Schottenheimer only had a five game winning streak."That was after an 0-5 start;the Redskins became the first team ever to reach.500 after losing their first 5 games.They played with such attitude in the second half of that season.They had the playoffs in their sights with Tony Banks at QB,if you can believe it.The knock on Marty has always been,"he'll get you to the playoffs,but not much further."Would most Redskin fans take that right now?

Posted by: seang | January 12, 2007 11:18 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company