SnyderSucks wrote:Okay, because the people involved had the good sense not to come out and say "I don't want to work for Dan Snyder", one cannot infer that his ownership played a role in not creating an environment in which coaches want to work? You have multiple coaches withdrawing from consideration and Snyder played no role in this? When you have multiple people turning down a promotion, it is reasonable to infer that they don't want to work there and that the boss is probably playing a role in them not wanting the job. I guess, after interviewing, each of them decided they didn't want a promotion and a massive raise because they thought working for Snyder would be too much fun.
Or, after the interview, Snyder/Cerrato told them that they weren't in serious contention to be the next head coach of the Redskins. I mean, that's the problem; you don't know what happened behind closed doors (and neither do I)...but you're stating as if it's established fact that the reason that "top coaching candidates" won't come here is because of Snyder. You don't know that; you think it, but you can't be sure. All we get is little bits of media dribble, and importantly, none of it is from Snyder's side (as he doesn't talk to the press much)...so it's presenting a lopsided story.
Sorry for using a quote from that rag the Washington Post. I guess next time I'll find a quote from a paper with some credibility like the National Enquirer.
Now you're just being petulant. It's not the Post; it that it was from La Canfora and his silly Redskins Insider blog, which was rife with his sniping and inaccuracies.
Because you don't think Gardner should have gotten a contract, none of them should have? The problem isn't that one in particular didn't get a contract, it was that none of them did.
Who would you have given a contract to, from the Redskins drafts of 2004-2005?
I said you could argue the case about Gardner (for or against) not that they absolutely should have signed him. He was more productive than any #2 the team has had since then.
His production was okay (it's about Randle-El production), but that says more about the sorry state of the Redskins WR corps, than it does about Gardner. But also, Gardner dropped many, many passes...he was just too damn inconsistent. Again, after Gardner left the Redskins, he caught a total of 15 NFL passes.
In the end, the only constant on the team since Snyder took over is Snyder. In that time, no one, not even a hall of fame coach, has succeeded in making the team consistently good. I guess Snyder played no part in any of that.
Never would argue against any of that. This team was a disaster when he took over, and continued to be a disaster until he hired Gibbs. However, since 2004, the management has been markedly better (better player personnel acquisitions, better drafting (when they keep their draft picks), and less public exposure of the ownership). There's absolutely been improvement; granted, there was a LOT of room for improvement. But many people are stuck on the idea that Snyder is a terrible owner, and will always be a terrible owner. A more casual, less personally-involved observer with a more open mind would look at the evolution of Snyder as an owner over the past half decade, and conclude otherwise.
But I know I can talk all I want about how I, and many others, see improvement in him. The sad fact is that I'm still talking to someone who has chosen to call himself "SnyderSucks." After all, choosing a nickname like that is the hallmark of an open mind on this particular matter. Let's just agree to disagree.