Are you freaking kidding me???

HailSkins94 · Post by **HailSkins94** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:19 pm

http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story/9657716

Just read...

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:29 pm

What a clown, but I wonder if he stands behind his hate-filled, driven-by-envy, diatribe? He 'stone-cold guaranteed' Snyder's 'skins would never win the Super Bowl while he owned the team. If he's so sure, he ought to promise not to write another ignorant word if he's wrong. Or is he, like the other critics, just talk?

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:34 pm

Wow, that guy hates people who have money.

Arionquinn · Post by **Arionquinn** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:38 pm

Pre-Gibbs-2nd-Coming Era, I would have been inclined to partially agree with this article. But I think the writer has lost touch with Snyder's maturity over the past few seasons.

While his draft decisions haven't been the best (2005 draft excluded, I think we did pretty well then), he's working on longevity of a team rather than 1-hit wonder-less FAs.

I have much more confidence in him now than I did during the Spurrier reign.

But gees, does this article sound like it was written by a Skins fan?

HailSkins94 · Post by **HailSkins94** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:44 pm

Arionquinn wrote:Pre-Gibbs-2nd-Coming Era, I would have been inclined to partially agree with this article. But I think the writer has lost touch with Snyder's maturity over the past few seasons.

While his draft decisions haven't been the best (2005 draft excluded, I think we did pretty well then), he's working on longevity of a team rather than 1-hit wonder-less FAs.

I have much more confidence in him now than I did during the Spurrier reign.

But gees, does this article sound like it was written by a Skins fan?

Exactly why I am opposed to the article, great point!

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:55 pm

The words "billionaire squirt" are in the lead, he's resorted to a personal attack in his opening statement, anything after that point is tainted by that statement.

Arionquinn · Post by **Arionquinn** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:09 pm

While I do have more confidence in the team, I think Patrick Hruby of ESPN's Page 2 has a much better explanation for the loss on Monday night: Tom Cruise.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... uby/060913

skins2357 · Post by **skins2357** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:20 pm

the way i look at it, Danny is a genious with his money. Look at how he has taken the skins and made them the most valuable sports franchise in the world. I was talking with my brother at the game and he was explaining to me how he bought tom cruise' contract. I personally hate tom cruise and think he;s fallen off his rocker but if you look at the facts here ( football aside ) Tom Cruise still has a huge fan base and even when his crappy movies bomb (MI3), that movie still makes an obcene amount of money. The way I look at it Danny saw a way to make more money and took it. I have no problems with Danny making as much money as he wants, next yr maybe we will hire Bill Walsh out of retirement and pay him thanks to the money tom cruise makes Danny Boy!!!!

gay4pacman · Post by **gay4pacman** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:21 pm

Bill Walton voice..."Thats Horrible"

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:28 pm

If it's all the same to you, I won't even bother to read it. I'm going to cut my nails instead. :roll:

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:33 pm

UK Skins Fan wrote:If it's all the same to you, I won't even bother to read it. I'm going to cut my nails instead.

That's the correct answer. Clicking on that link only encourages these people to continue. Ever notice the biggest names in the online sports world all bash the skins? It's not a coincidence that we always click the link and then send an email. That's how you prove you readership: click-throughs and emails received. They don't care the emails says or why you click the link. It's all a matter of numbers.

My 2 cents

SkinzCanes · Post by **SkinzCanes** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:37 pm

While his draft decisions haven't been the best (2005 draft excluded, I think we did pretty well then), he's working on longevity of a team rather than 1-hit wonder-less FAs.

Really? Is that why we let Ryan Clark go and gave Archuleta what at the time was the biggest contract ever for a safety? To work on the longevity of a team you need to build through the draft and how have we done with that lately? How many of our draft picks from recent years are still on the team and actually contributing and how many have been cut or underperformed??

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:50 pm

SkinzCanes wrote:To work on the longevity of a team you need to build through the draft

This is entirely untrue, and it's exactly what Gibbs and Snyder are working together to disprove. Gibbs uses draft pick to acquire underrated, younger veterans who have proven themselves in the league. Here are some names that have become part of the core of the Washington Redskins: Marcus Washington, Clinton Portis, Shawn Springs, Cornelius Griffin, Santana Moss. . .

Some of these guys cost draft picks, some didn't. Draft picks are risky; a very high percentage of our restricted free agent acquisitions have worked out for us--and some have become stars. Not many of them look like they are going anywhere, either.

(edited)

SkinzCanes · Post by **SkinzCanes** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:07 pm

This is entirely untrue, and it's exactly what Gibbs and Snyder are working together to disprove. Gibbs uses draft pick to acquire underrated, younger veterans who have proven themselves in the league. Here are some names that have become part of the core of the Washington Redskins: Marcus Washington, Clinton Portis, Shawn Springs, Cornelius Griffin, Santana Moss. . .

Some of these guys cost draft picks, some didn't. Draft picks are risky; a very high percentage of our restricted free agent acquisitions have worked out for us--and some have become stars. All are contributing to the longevity of this team. The days of signing aged has-beens are over (and let's not turn this thread into a Mark Brunell debate).

Sure, we haven't had draft picks, but this was done on purpose, and if you ask me Gibbs' personel strategy is working quite well.

I disagree completely. Sure we have gotten some good players for draft picks. I'm not saying that you should never do that. But if you look at this years team the most glaring problem imo is the lack of depth. Just look at the cb position. Look at teams like the Eagles or Patriots....even when they have injuries they always seem to have young players that can step in and fill the void. Where do they get those players? Through the draft. You have to pay veterans more money than you do younger players and with the salary cap that leaves you with less cap space to use to improve depth. It's really nice to have a bunch of high priced veterans in your starting lineup, but this is football and injuries happen. And this team is in no position to sustain any injuries whatsoever because of our lack of depth. Not only does this team not value draft picks enough but when we do have them we do nothing with them. It's not the hardest thing in the world to figure out that you should pick Sean Taylor with your first round pick, but where are all the late round guys that we have drafted in recent years? Most are cut or on the practice squad. The draft is a great way to get cheap, young talent to develop and to use for depth. The good teams have figured that out, the Skins haven't.

SkinzCanes · Post by **SkinzCanes** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:15 pm

For example, take the Archuleta signing. We had a guy in Clark that played well for us, cost less, was a team guy, and wanted to stay here. Instead of paying Archuleta a boatload of money we could've used that cap space to bring in another kicker and/or corner back and /or backup offensive lineman. What you rather have? A high priced safety, crappy kicker, and no depth at oline and cb, or Clark and a new kicker and more capable backups at corner and oline???

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:19 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
SkinzCanes wrote:To work on the longevity of a team you need to build through the draft

This is entirely untrue, and it's exactly what Gibbs and Snyder are working together to disprove. Gibbs uses draft pick to acquire underrated, younger veterans who have proven themselves in the league. Here are some names that have become part of the core of the Washington Redskins: Marcus Washington, Clinton Portis, Shawn Springs, Cornelius Griffin, Santana Moss. . .

Some of these guys cost draft picks, some didn't. Draft picks are risky; a very high percentage of our restricted free agent acquisitions have worked out for us--and some have become stars. Not many of them look like they are going anywhere, either.

True, some free agents have become key pieces (you named some nice examples), but then so have some of our draft picks - Cool

ey, Taylor, and Rogers are already paying off, and I see Campbell and McIntosh as 'core Redskins' of the future, maybe even this year. The other good thing about younger players is that they're cheap - Cool

ey and Taylor are costing us much less than a top-tier, veteran TE or safety would. Isn't Arch making more than Taylor, but who's more vital to this defense? If I could keep only one, I'd keep Taylor. My belief is that it takes both - smart drafting and smart FA signings. I'm somewhat bothered that Gibbs is trading away so many picks (reminds me of all those years in the 80's wherein he traded the No. 1 pick every year for like 6 years straight), but I'm going to wait and see how it plays out.

USAFSkinFan · Post by **USAFSkinFan** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:22 pm

Michael Freeman's an idiot... who cares how Snyder spends his own money. He's learned a lot about being a good owner in short time... and he's helped his coaches get the tools they need whenever they've asked... you can't ask for much more than that... they're playing with the same salary cap as every other team...

I will say that it's a pretty amazing statistic that we've signed 21 pro-bowlers, none of which have gone on to make the pro-bowl as a Redskin... but I guess that happens a lot when you sign veteran players... I'll bet Lavar (Mr. Nickels) doesn't go as a Giant...

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 4:08 pm

USAFSkinFan wrote:Michael Freeman's an idiot... who cares how Snyder spends his own money. He's learned a lot about being a good owner in short time... and he's helped his coaches get the tools they need whenever they've asked... you can't ask for much more than that... they're playing with the same salary cap as every other team...

I will say that it's a pretty amazing statistic that we've signed 21 pro-bowlers, none of which have gone on to make the pro-bowl as a Redskin... but I guess that happens a lot when you sign veteran players... I'll bet Lavar (Mr. Nickels) doesn't go as a Giant...

Agreed. Freeman's jealous Snyder has the money to have fun and willing to spend it, and angry Snyder's not inviting him to the owners box becuase Freeman's a NOBODY!!!!

Snyder is clearly learning how to spend. If he kept repeating the same mistakes it would be bad, but clearly he's not. Freeman may be interested that Snyder is not the only owner that has not won a Superbowl since he bought the Redskins. And from what I've read no one, or at least few have made as much money as Snyder off their team in that time!

Alas us, we have a rich owner who loves the team and spends whatever it takes to win, how did it ever get so bad?

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 4:55 pm

Wow, how jealous is this guy; what a moron.

If Snyder inherited his money, then I might, might see it this way. But Snyder is a self-made billionaire. I have a lot of respect for that.

Its articles like this that feed the other media types. Almost like it's the "cool" thing to do; bust on Snyder and the Skins; i.e. Tony Kornholer on Monday night.

I can't believe the editors and/or the publishers let him get away with writing something like that.

This shows very poor class and character in this a-hole.

JPM36 · Post by **JPM36** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:00 pm

Can this be moved to Smack?

I have some comments about the writer.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:17 pm

JPM36 wrote:Can this be moved to Smack?

I have some comments about the writer.

I second that. Smack anyone???

roybus14 · Post by **roybus14** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:31 pm

You know what??? You can't have it both ways.... When Snyder first bought the team, he was a meddlesome owner who threw his money around like a drunk in a saloon during the gold rush.

Now that he has put the "right" people in place on the coaching staff and given them "say", you need to back off of him and look at who is working for him. All he is doing now is allowing those that supposedly know football, make the decisions and all he is doing is writing the check.

You need to focus your attention on the HC and Assistant Coaches making millions and ask "what the f'#* are they doing. Sanders will get a couple of games pass from me because his bringing in a whole new system but Williams on the other hand, is failing miserably and not earning his millions. I find it hard to comprehend that you build and coach a defense predicated solely on the health of one player or position, Springs/CB. There are teams in this league that don't have "shut down" corners but are still able to be a very good defense. Look at Pittsburgh. Their defensive stars are Porter and Paolumalu. A LB and a FS. It's like if we can't blitz, we got nothing. Once again, that falls back to the coaching, scheme, and personnel selection. None of which Snyder is dealing with daily. If Williams is as good as he walks around, then he will get this defense straighten out and you will see a better performance from them starting this Sunday.

When are Archuleta and Rogers going to be benched like Lavar for not being where he is supposed to??? If they don't improve and don't get benched as a result, then that just confirms that they had it out for Lavar and it had nothing to do with Football.....

theoneandonly#9 · Post by **theoneandonly#9** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:58 pm

Smack Indeed!! bloated, overated, WOW does he have a problem with our team, or what! I can only respond in Smack.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:12 pm

The funniest thing about the poll is that when I voted it looked like "Hell Freezing over was first" but the Skins winning a Superbowl edged out Tom Cruise getting an Oscar.

It's like they are saying we stink, but not as bad as that guy.

I hate self serving Media-Dorks.

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:30 pm

ok. i created a smack thread...
and, copied the article, verbatim.

http://www.thehogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20537