Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:04 pm
skinsfan#33 wrote:Hey he did leave off a top five tallent,ey!
About the only roster spots where we have a ‘top 5′ player are defensive tackle, tight end, and middle linebacker
The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era
Washington football community discussions spanning the Redskins to Commanders era. 20+ years of game analysis, player discussions, and fan perspectives.
https://the-hogs.net/messageboard/
Ultimately, It IS the owners fault
Page 3 of 3
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:09 pm
skinsfan#33 wrote:Countertrey wrote:You know, BossHog has something to say on this in his latest blog, right here... Redskin Fallacies and Misconceptions
Good stuff... check it out!
What a bunch of drivel. He states a whole bunch of oppions as fact and then begs us "try to understand that it is difficult to point to any one news source" even though he has apparently swallowed the "media" vie of the Skins hook, line and sinker!
All I have to say, if you hate the Danny then good, but at least know why. Don't go on reports from unnamed sources and venom spewed by the talking heads. Try to form a clear thought process based solely on facts, not things that are thought to be true.
No one can say the Danny pick all of the players there are only a few people on Earth that know. The Danny, Vinny, current coaches and former coaches.
Please people think for yourselves, don't swallow the bait.
Hey he did leave off a top five tallent,
I thought he hit it on the nose. and he did include
ey as a top 5 talent. Another huge fallacy is that this team is good on paper… why? About the only roster spots where we have a ‘top 5′ player are defensive tackle, tight end, and middle linebacker;
Snyder isn't worried about giving up control. He has a cash cow franchise and he can overpay for players and coaches often enough to keep us excited.
You know, if I weren't a lifelong Skins fan, I would see this franchise as the deplorable NY Yankees of football. But it's kind of like the old saying, "you can't choose your family".
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:11 pm
sorry missed it.DEHog wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:Hey he did leave off a top five tallent,About the only roster spots where we have a ‘top 5′ player are defensive tackle, tight end, and middle linebacker
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:21 pm
Countertrey wrote:You know, BossHog has something to say on this in his latest blog, right here... Redskin Fallacies and Misconceptions
Good stuff... check it out!
I feel this kind of clarity was missing from the board for a while.
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:24 pm
Redskin in Canada wrote:Countertrey wrote:You know, BossHog has something to say on this in his latest blog, right here... Redskin Fallacies and Misconceptions
Good stuff... check it out!
I feel this kind of clarity was missing from the board for a while.
Its only clearer to you because he said pay cheque.
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:44 pm
skinsfan#33 wrote:Countertrey wrote:You know, BossHog has something to say on this in his latest blog, right here... Redskin Fallacies and Misconceptions
Good stuff... check it out!
What a bunch of drivel. He states a whole bunch of oppions as fact and then begs us "try to understand that it is difficult to point to any one news source" even though he has apparently swallowed the "media" vie of the Skins hook, line and sinker!
All I have to say, if you hate the Danny then good, but at least know why. Don't go on reports from unnamed sources and venom spewed by the talking heads. Try to form a clear thought process based solely on facts, not things that are thought to be true.
No one can say the Danny pick all of the players there are only a few people on Earth that know. The Danny, Vinny, current coaches and former coaches.
Please people think for yourselves, don't swallow the bait.
Hey he did leave off a top five tallent,
Did you know that you can add a comment right at the bottom of the blog? Ain't technology grand?
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:56 pm
And, how about this as something new to chew on?"
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcspor ... l#comments
The Cryptkeeper himself chiming in. Take it as you will.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcspor ... l#comments
The Cryptkeeper himself chiming in. Take it as you will.
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:52 pm
There have only been two consistent things with the Redskins the past 10 years.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:57 pm
wormer wrote:There have only been two consistent things with the Redskins the past 10 years.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 11:29 pm
skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:There have only been two consistent things with the Redskins the past 10 years.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?
Well, I'd say the 6 before Snyder were bad. They won a playoff game in 1992. All teams have bad patches and one could just chalk it up to that but here are a few potential reasons.
As a starting point, Beathard leaving in 1989 could be seen as significant. Every season, more players not drafted by BB are added to the team.
Gibbs leaving unexpectedly.
Pettibone was obviously a disaster.
Norv also seemed to be a bad fit as a head coach, but I remember many NFL "insider" types at the time saying, the Skins record would have been much worse if not for Norv. Meaning, his offensive genius covered a lot of player personnel issues.
The failing health and death of JKC and the resulting ownership fiasco.
Anyway, I'm not defending anything or making excuses. All I did was state 2 things. That Snyder has been the owner and, IMHO, they have pretty much sucked for the entire time he has owned them.
Make of it what you will.
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 11:54 pm
wormer wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:There have only been two consistent things with the Redskins the past 10 years.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?
Well, I'd say the 6 before Snyder were bad. They won a playoff game in 1992. All teams have bad patches and one could just chalk it up to that but here are a few potential reasons.
As a starting point, Beathard leaving in 1989 could be seen as significant. Every season, more players not drafted by BB are added to the team.
Gibbs leaving unexpectedly.
Pettibone was obviously a disaster.
Norv also seemed to be a bad fit as a head coach, but I remember many NFL "insider" types at the time saying, the Skins record would have been much worse if not for Norv. Meaning, his offensive genius covered a lot of player personnel issues.
The failing health and death of JKC and the resulting ownership fiasco.
Anyway, I'm not defending anything or making excuses. All I did was state 2 things. That Snyder has been the owner and, IMHO, they have pretty much sucked for the entire time he has owned them.
Make of it what you will.
That is fair if you want to feal that way. I was just pointing out that this team didn't turn bad when Snyder got it. It was already bad and had been for a while.
I also wanted to point out that Casserly, while he is good on TV, wasn't good for the Skins.
The Bone wasn't an obvious disaster, he just never had a chance.
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:22 am
wormer wrote:Anyway, I'm not defending anything or making excuses. All I did was state 2 things. That Snyder has been the owner and, IMHO, they have pretty much sucked for the entire time he has owned them.
Make of it what you will.
Oh! I don't knooooow. This is a tough one to figure out ... hmmmm
Snyder, potentially defining Incompetence?
Snyder, potentially defining Failure?
Snyder, potentially defining Greed?
IFG ?
Naaaaaaahhh !!! Impossible. It is a fortuitous coincidence that the ownership and the RECORD are what they are over the last decade. Wormer's statement is one of those that MAY APPEAR to suggest guilt by association in the same sentence.
As he correctly puts it: He's ONLY giving us his
One cent = Snyder
The other cent = Team sucks
Sheer coincidence if you ask me.
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:56 am
skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:There have only been two consistent things with the Redskins the past 10 years.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?
Well, I'd say the 6 before Snyder were bad. They won a playoff game in 1992. All teams have bad patches and one could just chalk it up to that but here are a few potential reasons.
As a starting point, Beathard leaving in 1989 could be seen as significant. Every season, more players not drafted by BB are added to the team.
Gibbs leaving unexpectedly.
Pettibone was obviously a disaster.
Norv also seemed to be a bad fit as a head coach, but I remember many NFL "insider" types at the time saying, the Skins record would have been much worse if not for Norv. Meaning, his offensive genius covered a lot of player personnel issues.
The failing health and death of JKC and the resulting ownership fiasco.
Anyway, I'm not defending anything or making excuses. All I did was state 2 things. That Snyder has been the owner and, IMHO, they have pretty much sucked for the entire time he has owned them.
Make of it what you will.
That is fair if you want to feal that way. I was just pointing out that this team didn't turn bad when Snyder got it. It was already bad and had been for a while.
I also wanted to point out that Casserly, while he is good on TV, wasn't good for the Skins.
The Bone wasn't an obvious disaster, he just never had a chance.
I likedhow you picked 7 years...why didn't you go back further??
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:04 am
DEHog wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:There have only been two consistent things with the Redskins the past 10 years.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?
Well, I'd say the 6 before Snyder were bad. They won a playoff game in 1992. All teams have bad patches and one could just chalk it up to that but here are a few potential reasons.
As a starting point, Beathard leaving in 1989 could be seen as significant. Every season, more players not drafted by BB are added to the team.
Gibbs leaving unexpectedly.
Pettibone was obviously a disaster.
Norv also seemed to be a bad fit as a head coach, but I remember many NFL "insider" types at the time saying, the Skins record would have been much worse if not for Norv. Meaning, his offensive genius covered a lot of player personnel issues.
The failing health and death of JKC and the resulting ownership fiasco.
Anyway, I'm not defending anything or making excuses. All I did was state 2 things. That Snyder has been the owner and, IMHO, they have pretty much sucked for the entire time he has owned them.
Make of it what you will.
That is fair if you want to feal that way. I was just pointing out that this team didn't turn bad when Snyder got it. It was already bad and had been for a while.
I also wanted to point out that Casserly, while he is good on TV, wasn't good for the Skins.
The Bone wasn't an obvious disaster, he just never had a chance.
I likedhow you picked 7 years...why didn't you go back further??
Hi DEHog, not sure if your question was for me or not but I went back 6/7 years because skinsfan#33 replied to my initial post with, "They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?"
I was just addressing his question.
-Wormer
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:20 am
wormer wrote:DEHog wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:wormer wrote:There have only been two consistent things with the Redskins the past 10 years.
1. Snyder as the owner.
2. Them sucking.
And that's all I have to say about that. - F. Gump.
They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?
Well, I'd say the 6 before Snyder were bad. They won a playoff game in 1992. All teams have bad patches and one could just chalk it up to that but here are a few potential reasons.
As a starting point, Beathard leaving in 1989 could be seen as significant. Every season, more players not drafted by BB are added to the team.
Gibbs leaving unexpectedly.
Pettibone was obviously a disaster.
Norv also seemed to be a bad fit as a head coach, but I remember many NFL "insider" types at the time saying, the Skins record would have been much worse if not for Norv. Meaning, his offensive genius covered a lot of player personnel issues.
The failing health and death of JKC and the resulting ownership fiasco.
Anyway, I'm not defending anything or making excuses. All I did was state 2 things. That Snyder has been the owner and, IMHO, they have pretty much sucked for the entire time he has owned them.
Make of it what you will.
That is fair if you want to feal that way. I was just pointing out that this team didn't turn bad when Snyder got it. It was already bad and had been for a while.
I also wanted to point out that Casserly, while he is good on TV, wasn't good for the Skins.
The Bone wasn't an obvious disaster, he just never had a chance.
I likedhow you picked 7 years...why didn't you go back further??
Hi DEHog, not sure if your question was for me or not but I went back 6/7 years because skinsfan#33 replied to my initial post with, "They were worse the seven years befor Snyder, so who do you blame that on?"
I was just addressing his question.
-Wormer
Was directed at 33 becuase if you go back 8 you get a SB trophy. If you're going to judge someone look at their entire body of work. IMO The Skins got bad when the NFL changed we didn't.
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:23 am
DEHog wrote: IMO The Skins got bad when the NFL changed we didn't.
BING!! Excellent point. I also think that was one of the reasons Gibbs left. He saw the writing on the wall and did not want to be part of that type of league.