The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

DEHog wrote:

In John Feinstein's book Next Man Up, former Redskin Assistant Coach Mike Nolan recalled his first meeting with Snyder.

“I still remember my first meeting with him,” Nolan said, shaking his head. “He was sitting at his desk, smoking a big cigar. First, he did about fifteen minutes on how he got to be rich. Then he said to me, ‘If I guaranteed you a fifty-thousand-dollar bonus for getting our defense to be in the top three in the league, would that be an incentive to get you to work harder?’

“I told him no, it wouldn’t, because with or without a bonus, I was going to give heart and soul to the job. He looked at me and said, ‘You’re probably another one of those guys who lets his wife tell him what to do, aren’t you?’”

Of all the things this one bothers me the most (if true) It speaks to the problems I have with DS has I have told you before I know a few things about him...I wish I didn't...It bother me that we have an owner who is this way. He does alot of good things as well...but when I read things like this it make me question his motives for the good he does.

You know what bothers me about that DEHog? I am sorry to say, I think it might just be true

As I have said before and it can be checked by my posts here at THN - I have been on record as a Snyder "apologist" and defended his actions as "being in the best interests of the team" I recently came to the conclusion that was not the case and now I think he's only interested in what in the business world is termed ROI - this is return on investment - this guy only needs to do one thing to show he has this team's best interests in mind and that is to turn over the management of all things to do with football to someone who know's what is going on.

Snyder is a low life for taking us on this long ride and here we are looking at more of the same - he needs to get off the bus, and soon.

it really is kind of funny to hear people here defending this bozo and thinking that those of us who oppose him are somehow not Redskins' supporters because we are tired of his mediocre achievements - it is because of our feelings for this team that we are so vehement about what we can all plainly see - he really does not know how to run a NFL franchise or he would do the right thing and turn it over to someone else.

You know what bothers me about that DEHog? I am sorry to say, I think it might just be true

Wow! That'll leave a mark...

Makes me wonder about that Lavar tells all thread.

Kilmer72 wrote:Makes me wonder about that Lavar tells all thread.

LaVar is still an overrated has-been, this changes nothing

The Lavar fiasco is a perfect example of what is wrong with this front office.

No continuity. You do not let go of one of your marquee players in his prime. A player who already was well entrenched in the community and was loved by fans.

Ten years of mediocrity. This has everything to do with Snyder. No denying it. You reap what you sow. What Snyder has sown has come to fruition. Profit , profit and more profit. Sad but true.

Now if you do not mind guys I will put my blinders back on. It feels better that way.

Hey, at least we got Phat Albert this offseason!

Countertrey wrote:

You know what bothers me about that DEHog? I am sorry to say, I think it might just be true

Wow! That'll leave a mark ...

not really - as I said, I'm a former Snyder 'fan' - now I understand that while I was prepared to think most of the stuff that the DC media was putting in print was just a bunch of BS, I'm begining to think, maybe most of it is factual.

just a shame that the team most of us like has these bozos running things - not a big deal - after all it's just a game .... isn't it

and there are obviously a lot of fans that would prefer to think it will all be better soon - I'll be here ..... just occasionally reminding the 'faithful' that mediocrity is certainly a lot more preferrable than being a fan of a lot of other teams in the NFL that never seem to make the playoffs, which is a statement that someone 'defending' Snyder's tenure, made here recently.

we deserve better than that, but that is what we are certainly assured of with these 2 bozos - tell me how happy we are after this season





that will leave a mark

SkinsJock wrote:it really is kind of funny to hear people here defending this bozo and thinking that those of us who oppose him are somehow not Redskins' supporters because we are tired of his mediocre achievements - it is because of our feelings for this team that we are so vehement about what we can all plainly see - he really does not know how to run a NFL franchise or he would do the right thing and turn it over to someone else.

I am convinced that YOU TRULY do not love the Redskins in the bottom of your heart. You are probably a fair weather fan. You cannot see the positives. You ONLY see the negatives. Frankly, why do you follow the team if you feel this way? Your message really gets really TIRED very quickly that is why I dread to read your posts.

Your message is NEGATIVE and uncomfortable. I prefer to discuss the next EXPENSIVE player acquisition because it is exciting and I feel that I can do nothing about the Front Office. I am powerless. Instead, if I discuss players and coaches, I feel that I am CONTRIBUTING to the progress of the team with my intellect and knowledge.

I am convinced that if I give the owner a bit more time, BECAUSE HE IS REALLY LEARNING and LOVES THE TEAM, he will come through for us.

Well, and if he does not and all of the above does not work:

Well, I will close my eyes and wish REALLY, REALLY hard that we get a great team when our grandchildren become grandparents.

SkinsJock wrote:and there are obviously a lot of fans that would prefer to think it will all be better soon - I'll be here ..... just occasionally reminding the 'faithful' that mediocrity is certainly a lot more preferrable than being a fan of a lot of other teams in the NFL that never seem to make the playoffs, which is a statement that someone 'defending' Snyder's tenure, made here recently.

we deserve better than that, but that is what we are certainly assured of with these 2 bozos - tell me how happy we are after this season

that will leave a mark

Oh!!! You have DEFINITELY joined the Force against the Dark Side.

CLL, DEHog, Joko and RiC together. They cannot stop us now around here. THEY will definitely get calls to join the Rebellion from us SOON, REAL SOON.

SkinsJock wrote:not really - as I said, I'm a former Snyder 'fan' - now I understand that while I was prepared to think most of the stuff that the DC media was putting in print was just a bunch of BS, I'm begining to think, maybe most of it is factual.

I think you and I "converted" right around the same time, SkinsJock. I'd be willing to bet that Br. RiC had something to do with it in both cases, too.

Bob 0119 wrote:Seriously, how smart do Cooke have to be with Gibbs and his front office staff, really?

The only year where I can see that he might have fired them was 1981 after they went 8-8 in their first year.

10 out of 12 winning seasons, and three Super Bowls makes it hard to fire anybody.

He had to be smart enough to:
1) Hire Gibbs & Beathard
2) Let them run the team.

yupchagee wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:Seriously, how smart do Cooke have to be with Gibbs and his front office staff, really?

The only year where I can see that he might have fired them was 1981 after they went 8-8 in their first year.

10 out of 12 winning seasons, and three Super Bowls makes it hard to fire anybody.

He had to be smart enough to:
1) Hire Gibbs & Beathard
2) Let them run the team.

3) Hire Richie Pettibone - He did well with the hand he was delt as def. coordinator

yupchagee wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:Seriously, how smart do Cooke have to be with Gibbs and his front office staff, really?

The only year where I can see that he might have fired them was 1981 after they went 8-8 in their first year.

10 out of 12 winning seasons, and three Super Bowls makes it hard to fire anybody.

He had to be smart enough to:
1) Hire Gibbs & Beathard
2) Let them run the team.

So does that same level of genius apply to Turner and the five miserable years he had before he got lucky and won the division with a 10-6 record (two years after Mr. Cooke died)?

Does that same level of genius apply to the one year of Petitbon?

Does that same level of genius apply to all the complaints about FedEx field, it's location, and limited parking resources?

I'm not trying to take anything away from Mr. Cooke, but people tend to compare him unfairly to Snyder.

Mr. Cooke put together a good coaching and FO staff, sure, and they put together a great team back in the days before free agency when you could build a dynasty and live off it for a decade.

You should notice that the Redskins decline from their decade of greatness happend just a little more than coincidentally with the start of free agency.

Too many people want to put on blinders and say the Redskins didn't really get bad until the year 2000 when actually, they got bad back in 1992.

How are people comparing Cooke to Snyder?

Cooke had previous experience as the owner of a sports franchise before he invested in the Skins.

He made his wealth very differently than Snyder.

And most importantly, he invested in the Skins when he was more than 50 years old, considerably older than Snyder.

One of them was flat out crazy but had a nose for money, the other one just cares about cash.

I just don´t see how they are similar.

Bob 0119 wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:Seriously, how smart do Cooke have to be with Gibbs and his front office staff, really?

The only year where I can see that he might have fired them was 1981 after they went 8-8 in their first year.

10 out of 12 winning seasons, and three Super Bowls makes it hard to fire anybody.

He had to be smart enough to:
1) Hire Gibbs & Beathard
2) Let them run the team.

So does that same level of genius apply to Turner and the five miserable years he had before he got lucky and won the division with a 10-6 record (two years after Mr. Cooke died)?

Does that same level of genius apply to the one year of Petitbon?

Does that same level of genius apply to all the complaints about FedEx field, it's location, and limited parking resources?

I'm not trying to take anything away from Mr. Cooke, but people tend to compare him unfairly to Snyder.

Mr. Cooke put together a good coaching and FO staff, sure, and they put together a great team back in the days before free agency when you could build a dynasty and live off it for a decade.

You should notice that the Redskins decline from their decade of greatness happend just a little more than coincidentally with the start of free agency.

Too many people want to put on blinders and say the Redskins didn't really get bad until the year 2000 when actually, they got bad back in 1992.

or
Jack Pardee never understood that one but I was only 11 then.

Irn-Bru wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:not really - as I said, I'm a former Snyder 'fan' - now I understand that while I was prepared to think most of the stuff that the DC media was putting in print was just a bunch of BS, I'm begining to think, maybe most of it is factual.

I think you and I "converted" right around the same time, SkinsJock. I'd be willing to bet that Br. RiC had something to do with it in both cases, too.

You too???

My, I thought I was fighting a guerrilla warfare here. I should plan for a storm attack on Redskins Park.

HEROHAMO wrote:The Lavar fiasco is a perfect example of what is wrong with this front office.

No continuity. You do not let go of one of your marquee players in his prime. A player who already was well entrenched in the community and was loved by fans.

Ten years of mediocrity. This has everything to do with Snyder. No denying it. You reap what you sow. What Snyder has sown has come to fruition. Profit , profit and more profit. Sad but true.

Now if you do not mind guys I will put my blinders back on. It feels better that way.

I remember it quite differently. Lavar was mostly potential IMO. He had a couple great years, but was mostly known for being undisciplined and out of position. He of course usually showed flashes of brilliance to cover those things up tho...

And let's not forget what a frickin drama queen he was. Worse than Owens I think. Brought all the negatives off the field and didn't perform nearly as well as Owens on it.

He definitely was loved by the fans at first. I was a HUGE fan of his. But after awhile, the act started to get old, and by the end it was compeletely unbearable.

I was so happy to get rid of that guy, that it actually probably made me like Snyder more at the time.

Snyder definitely has his problems, but letting Lavar go was not one his negatives IMO.

Worse than Owens I think

Stopped reading right there!

Scottskins wrote:

HEROHAMO wrote:The Lavar fiasco is a perfect example of what is wrong with this front office.

No continuity. You do not let go of one of your marquee players in his prime. A player who already was well entrenched in the community and was loved by fans.

Ten years of mediocrity. This has everything to do with Snyder. No denying it. You reap what you sow. What Snyder has sown has come to fruition. Profit , profit and more profit. Sad but true.

Now if you do not mind guys I will put my blinders back on. It feels better that way.

I remember it quite differently. Lavar was mostly potential IMO. He had a couple great years, but was mostly known for being undisciplined and out of position. He of course usually showed flashes of brilliance to cover those things up tho...

And let's not forget what a frickin drama queen he was. Worse than Owens I think. Brought all the negatives off the field and didn't perform nearly as well as Owens on it.

He definitely was loved by the fans at first. I was a HUGE fan of his. But after awhile, the act started to get old, and by the end it was compeletely unbearable.

I was so happy to get rid of that guy, that it actually probably made me like Snyder more at the time.

Snyder definitely has his problems, but letting Lavar go was not one his negatives IMO.

I think that Lavar gets a bad rap by a lot of people. For three years, from 2001-2003, he played extremely well for us and the idea of him being undisciplined and always out of position is vastly overblown. Even in 2005 when he finally got a chance to start, his performance, despite supposedly not knowing the system, was far superior to Warrick Holdman's. As for the drama between Lavar and the team, that didn't really start until the whole fiasco with his contract.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Scottskins wrote:

HEROHAMO wrote:The Lavar fiasco is a perfect example of what is wrong with this front office.

No continuity. You do not let go of one of your marquee players in his prime. A player who already was well entrenched in the community and was loved by fans.

Ten years of mediocrity. This has everything to do with Snyder. No denying it. You reap what you sow. What Snyder has sown has come to fruition. Profit , profit and more profit. Sad but true.

Now if you do not mind guys I will put my blinders back on. It feels better that way.

I remember it quite differently. Lavar was mostly potential IMO. He had a couple great years, but was mostly known for being undisciplined and out of position. He of course usually showed flashes of brilliance to cover those things up tho...

And let's not forget what a frickin drama queen he was. Worse than Owens I think. Brought all the negatives off the field and didn't perform nearly as well as Owens on it.

He definitely was loved by the fans at first. I was a HUGE fan of his. But after awhile, the act started to get old, and by the end it was compeletely unbearable.

I was so happy to get rid of that guy, that it actually probably made me like Snyder more at the time.

Snyder definitely has his problems, but letting Lavar go was not one his negatives IMO.

I think that Lavar gets a bad rap by a lot of people. For three years, from 2001-2003, he played extremely well for us and the idea of him being undisciplined and always out of position is vastly overblown. Even in 2005 when he finally got a chance to start, his performance, despite supposedly not knowing the system, was far superior to Warrick Holdman's. As for the drama between Lavar and the team, that didn't really start until the whole fiasco with his contract.

Agreed...go back and look at one of the last games (Tampa playoff game) he played for us...one of his best!!

I never thought of Lavar as ever being "out of position" when he played.

Unless you count nearly two years being injured and sitting on the bench.

My problem with Lavar was just that; his injury.

It wasn't his fault he got hurt.

But after the injury, I felt he went about things the wrong way.

He blamed the coaches when he reaggrivated his injury.

He blamed the coaches when they didn't start him as soon as he felt he was ready (after he had sat out nearly a year and a half.)

He blamed the team when he and his agent signed a contract that didn't have the bonus in it he was expecting.

When he did finally play he admitted that maybe (just maybe) the coaches were right not to have played him.

He said he was looking forward to getting some "payback" on the Redskins when he was traded to NY, but he only lasted 8 games there before he was out for the rest of the season.

Is it any wonder why another team hasn't snatched him up?

I think they showed good instincts getting rid of him when they did. They recognized that his knee was going to continue to be a problem (I know I did), and hey looky-there, they were right.

BRING BACK LAVAR!!!














[/sarcasm]

He blamed the coaches when they didn't start him as soon as he felt he was ready (after he had sat out nearly a year and a half.)

He was dead right about the team not playing him right away in 2005. Warrick Holdman was an absolute embarrassment as a starting linebacker that season. Probably the worst play from an individual linebacker that I have EVER seen.

He blamed the team when he and his agent signed a contract that didn't have the bonus in it he was expecting.

Both parties were at fault. Arrington's agent should have read the final version of the contract, however, I believe that they hurried up and signed it because the Skins had to meet the deadline to be under the cap. [/quote]

Both Arrington and the team were to blame.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Both Arrington and the team were to blame.

True. But following with the main topic of the thread ...
He served his purpose under the Snyder/Cerrato scheme of things:

He was USED to bring the fans to the stadium at a time when he was the "main attraction".

The marketing formula works often in Holywood: bring big names to make mediocre movies and the public will rush to the ticket office. Only problem is: a mediocre movie is a mediocre movie with or without Tom Cruise (pun intended).