Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

Snyder isnt a very good owner and I agree with what they say about him, but to have Rooney at 15 is just plain crazy. Rooney is the best owner in the NFL. The Skins will never go anywhere as long as DS is running the show.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=irish;557044]Snyder isnt a very good owner and I agree with what they say about him, but to have Rooney at 15 is just plain crazy. Rooney is the best owner in the NFL. The Skins will never go anywhere as long as DS is running the show.[/quote]

From the article you mentioned here are the reasons why the Rooneys are at 15th. Not that I'm justifying the ranking but here are the reasons:

[quote]For one thing, [B]Rooney owns just 16 percent of the Steelers[/B], while the NFL requires the primary owner to have at least a 30-percent share. In addition, [B]the Rooney family runs race tracks in New York and Florida that now offer video slot machines and other forms of gambling that violate the league’s requirements for owners.[/B] With four younger brothers who each own 16 percent of the franchise having retained an investment firm to weigh offers and billionaire Steelers fan Stanley Druckenmiller showing interest, [B]Dan is in danger of no longer being The Man.[/B] It doesn’t help that he fired one of the brothers who may control his fate, personnel guru Art Rooney II, 21 years ago. “I think the commissioner will try to figure out a way to let Dan remain in charge,” one owner says. “It wouldn’t bother me so much that he’s breaking the rules, except that he’s so self-righteous about everything else.” With all of that said, Rooney’s departure would not be a good thing for Pittsburgh or for the league.[/quote]

Funny that in the SI article no ones mention the Colts as being snubbed in the top 5. Also, they could have easily replaced Snyder with the Browns, but I guess the article is not as interested to the mindless masses. Oh and the next time someone says that Snyder is a bad owner, I'm going to repeatedly post that the sky is blue.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;557024]






All that spending in search of winning - - as opposed to the stingy Jeffrie Lurie in Phhilly - - and the Skins have two playoff wins in 10 years while the Eagles have been to a Super Bowl once and to the NFC Championship Game five times. Yeah, I'd really rather change owners if I were a Philly native...


[/quote]
i didnt say the eagles didnt run their team well. but if you look at the ONE season they went out of their norm, and picked up T. Owens, they made it to the big dance. and it makes people wonder if it wasn't always about the money with the eagles, how many more super bowls they would have been playing in? at least with Snyder, we know we would definitely NOT have that problem

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

We don't just watch football in hopes of our team winning a championship. You watch because it's so frustratingly entertaining. And i enjoy this website primarily during the offseason as a fix to tide me over until August. So Dan, keep making offseason splashes, we are watching, and blogging.

And it's certainly better to talk about the Redskins overspending, then to not talk about the Redskins.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=dmek25;557068]i didnt say the eagles didnt run their team well. but if you look at the ONE season they went out of their norm, and picked up T. Owens, they made it to the big dance. and it makes people wonder if it wasn't always about the money with the eagles, how many more super bowls they would have been playing in? at least with Snyder, we know we would definitely NOT have that problem[/quote]

True, maybe if the Eagles spent just a little bit more they would have a ring or two.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=dmek25;557068]i didnt say the eagles didnt run their team well. but if you look at the ONE season they went out of their norm, and picked up T. Owens, they made it to the big dance. and it makes people wonder if it wasn't always about the money with the eagles, how many more super bowls they would have been playing in? at least with Snyder, we know we would definitely NOT have that problem[/quote]Even that year, they got over the hump...i.e. past where they had been before and have been since, while T.O. was sidelined. I remember Jeremiah Trotter being a big piece of that playoff run, and he was more of a typical Eagles move than the one-time brash get-T.O.-while-hes-in-his-prime move.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

it wasnt really about his ability, although he had tons. it was about his brashness, cockiness, arrogance. what ever you want to call it. all the eagle players are clones of Reid. all are so predictable. he had them wanting more. im not sure if im saying this right

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

Actually what this all highlites to me is this...the only thing that matters in the NFL is Superbowls.

Make the playoffs every year, reach the conference finals a bunch, lose a SB, never win a ring...all of that is essentially equal to not making the playoffs. We're not happy, they're not happy. Why? Because nothing matters other than winning SBs. I wouldn't take what the Eagles have done over what we have done..it is similarly frustrating to me either way.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=FRPLG;557092]Actually what this all highlites to me is this...the only thing that matters in the NFL is Superbowls.

Make the playoffs every year, reach the conference finals a bunch, lose a SB, never win a ring...all of that is essentially equal to not making the playoffs. We're not happy, they're not happy. Why? Because nothing matters other than winning SBs. I wouldn't take what the Eagles have done over what we have done..it is similarly frustrating to me either way.[/quote]Would you say that ONE ring changes all that, or if you win one time in 25 years as an owner (like say, had Pat Bowlen only won a single SB with Elway), you are still thrown in the majority class of non-winners.

Because there's the Kraft's and the Rooney's, and they win consistently. But the Irsays, and the Biscotti's, and the Glazers of the world win periodically. And you don't often hear those names out in front of the Bowlens, Rooney's and Krafts of the world.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

imo DS is the most embarrassing aspect of being a skins fan. hes low class to no class and is tarnishing the skins long built tradition and reputation imo. but hey, hes a fan atleast he wants to win. win at any cost baby!! just win!!!

if you run a franchise like DS with that win at any cost approach and dont win, you tend to get bashed. when we do win or get to the SB perhaps the ends could justify the means for most, including the media.

go skins!!

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=over the mountain;557104]imo DS is the most embarrassing aspect of being a skins fan. hes low class to no class and is tarnishing the skins long built tradition and reputation imo. but hey, hes a fan atleast he wants to win. win at any cost baby!! just win!!!

if you run a franchise like DS with that win at any cost approach and dont win, you tend to get bashed. when we do win or get to the SB perhaps the ends could justify the means for most, including the media.

go skins!![/quote]

In my opinion, I have no idea what you mean by low class to no class. And I think think you have little concept of Redskins history or their owners. George Preston Marshall was an unabashed bigot who reportedly picked fights with opposing coaches, overruled his coaches on play calls during games, and even fired one coach at halftime of a game. And then there was Edward Bennett Williams, who represented some of the country's more dubious names (Hoffa, Milken), but I'm not hating-EBW was just doing his job.

And as for the franchise, over the course of more than 25 years until the Allen era they only had four winning seasons, and not to mention most of the 90s when they lost all home games one year, started 0-7 another year, and blew a 7-1 start yet another.

I love the Redskins but their tradition is full of questionable owners and poor performance on the field. Their history does not begin in 1972 and end in 1992.

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

Dannys 48 percent winning stat says it all. 10 years of ownership and that is his success rate

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

so youre sayin DS is just another name on the list of crappy skins owners? (sarcasm j/k)

but you have a point, my first hand knowledge of the skins franchise really begins with JKC. i can only comment or have an opinion on what ive experienced. im 30 not 80. my opinion of DS doesnt have to be based upon a comparison to owners 60 years ago. SS i get it, you like DS. I dont. you are not alone, nor am i.

go skins!!

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=over the mountain;557104]imo DS is the most embarrassing aspect of being a skins fan. [B]hes low class to no class [/B]and is tarnishing the skins long built tradition and reputation imo. but hey, hes a fan atleast he wants to win. win at any cost baby!! just win!!![/quote]You can question DS's player acquisition moves or how the FO is run, but to label him as low class to no class, that's flat out wrong. His handling of player's personal issues, caring for their families, and charitable support is far from low class. I also don't believe for a second that Joe Gibbs would've worked for an owner he saw as having "low or no class".

Re: SI's Best & Worst Owners
 

[quote=vallin21;556904]I just don't get why they're still hammering him for signings that happened almost a decade ago.[/quote]
Because they are out of topics and the most popular is to bash The Skins, because they can break down the run that Bought Bruce Smith and Co. in after the fact and look like they know what they are talking about. If I remember a lot of them had us ranked very high because of the signings...That Archulerta stings the most