John Kent Cooke
 

Not that it really matters today but being the 10th year since his father passed, I was wondering had John Kent Cooke won the bidding and became owner of the team, how different do you think things would have been today? Do you think that he would have been more successful as an owner or so broke from buying the team that he would have been "franchise poor"

Your thoughts.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

Unfortunately, the son generally runs into ruin, what the father has built

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

Say what you want about Dannyboy but u can't accuse him of not trying. I don't know if Cooke would have tried nearly as hard and he may have been content with being mediocre. Its not like we had great teams those first few years and Snyder messed things up. I think that we [I]may[/I] have developed some talent if Snyder hadn't messed around with FA so much but its not like anything is guaranteed. U still have to scout, draft and develop players which requires a good FO and coaching staff.

The bottom line is that hindsight is 20-20. I would take an owner who wants to win any day over an owner who is dead broke and is satisfied with mediocrity (and its possible that Cooke would have been content with just being competitive after spending that much on the team).

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

I never did understand why John Cooke did not inherit the team from his Dad? Estate taxes? Did his dad not love him? What happened!

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[quote=scowan;368547]I never did understand why John Cooke did not inherit the team from his Dad? Estate taxes? Did his dad not love him? What happened![/quote]

The team was left to the Jack Kent Cooke foundation with instructions to sell the team. Most of JKC's estate was left to the foundation, but I don't know what the percentage was. I do know his wife was taken out of the will. My guess is that he thought John had enough money and the estate would do more good in the foundation's hands. I was truly glad the foundation didn't have the option to hold ownership and appoint a "CEO". A multi head dragon like that, just interested in milking the franchise for money, would have been a hard pill to swallow.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[quote=REDSKIN2;368530]Not that it really matters today but being the 10th year since his father passed, I was wondering had John Kent Cooke won the bidding and became owner of the team, how different do you think things would have been today? Do you think that he would have been more successful as an owner or so broke from buying the team that he would have been "franchise poor"

Your thoughts.[/quote]


Although the "Danny" is good at business,I believe that you guys would have been better off with John Cooke.I did then and do so now beleive he had a better head for football and the business of football.You've had the talent and you 've had the coaching .

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[QUOTE=Hijinx;368581]The team was left to the Jack Kent Cooke foundation with instructions to sell the team. Most of JKC's estate was left to the foundation, but I don't know what the percentage was. I do know his wife was taken out of the will. My guess is that he thought John had enough money and the estate would do more good in the foundation's hands. I was truly glad the foundation didn't have the option to hold ownership and appoint a "CEO". A multi head dragon like that, just interested in milking the franchise for money, would have been a hard pill to swallow.[/QUOTE]

I believe you're right. I don't think old man Cooke had any idea what the team would end up selling for and the foundation had to take the best offer.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

Maybe young John wasn't as passionate about the Redskins as his dad? We know Danny is passionate/irrational, but he's learning the hard way. Credit should go to Danny for trying to do everything under the sun to make the team better whether it was a good or bad decision.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;368594]Maybe young John wasn't as passionate about the Redskins as his dad? We know Danny is passionate/irrational, but he's learning the hard way. Credit should go to Danny for trying to do everything under the sun to make the team better whether it was a good or bad decision.[/quote]

Don't get me wrong ,The Danny is a fan but I still don't think he has a Football sense yet.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[quote=scowan;368547]I never did understand why John Cooke did not inherit the team from his Dad? Estate taxes? Did his dad not love him? What happened![/quote]

Basically his own dad screwed him. From what I have heard from some sources around town is that the Redskins were not John's passion and his dad saw that. John's passion is wine and sailing, not the Redskins. The foundation was to take the highest bid and accept John's bid only if it was in the neighborhood as the other bids. John was left somewhere around 40-50 million, not anywhere near enough to buy the team. He was trying to take a loan out from Nations Bank but it fell through cause the price had gone through the roof. He did get a few more million when the team sold.

When the team sold all that $ built the JKC foundation which gives $ for kids to go to college. John is still fighting with the people in the foundation about how the $ is distributed. From what I have heard it's a real mess to this day. All these people ( the foundation) all worked for Jack Kent Cooke, and a few actually worked for the Redskins. One was a Redskins accountant and one was a lawyer. They all got a piece when the team sold.

I wish he had kept the team. John was running the team anyway when his dad died and we would have had stability and a GM. We were right on track in 99 and Snyder came in a messed everything up.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

Mr Cooke's will is now a staple of law classes around the country. You can read it here along with all the various codiciles he added as various people around him fell in and out of favor:

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/library/cooke/"]WashingtonPost.com: Jack Kent Cooke's Will: Index Page[/URL]

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

I heard from a couple of people who would know as well as anybody that Jack Kent Cooke used to give John a lot of busywork projects to keep him away from being involved in the key decisions of the franchise. When it came time to close deals with players for example, Papa Cooke allegedly used to have his son in at the beginning and then send him off to find things like the best bottle of champagne, and while he was gone the deal would actually be negotiated. Apparently, it was a running inside joke that as long as John was in the room it meant Jack wasn't planning on doing anything.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[quote=SmootSmack;368838]I heard from a couple of people who would know as well as anybody that Jack Kent Cooke used to give John a lot of busywork projects to keep him away from being involved in the key decisions of the franchise. When it came time to close deals with players for example, Papa Cooke allegedly used to have his son in at the beginning and then send him off to find things like the best bottle of champagne, and while he was gone the deal would actually be negotiated. Apparently, it was a running inside joke that as long as John was in the room it meant Jack wasn't planning on doing anything.[/quote]

It seems like he had a greater affection for Ralph, the son that died. I always thought he should have left the team to Joe Gibbs. I suspect the fact the Snyder is now the owner has been the source of a lot of grave spinning. Or ashes as the case may be.

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;368844]It seems like he had a greater affection for Ralph, the son that died. I always thought he should have left the team to Joe Gibbs. I suspect the fact the Snyder is now the owner has been the source of a lot of grave spinning. Or ashes as the case may be.[/QUOTE]

WOW, just think about if Grandpa Joe did get the team.... interesting thoughts keep flowing, but alas, woulda shoulda coulda, no wait it wasnt our decision..... can we please just beat the pats this weekend so another football story can start monopolizing my tv

Re: John Kent Cooke
 

[quote=Giantone;368586]Although the "Danny" is good at business,I believe that you guys would have been better off with John Cooke.I did then and do so now beleive he had a better head for football and the business of football.You've had the talent and you 've had the coaching .[/quote]
Well if we had the talent and the coaching how can you put the blame on the owner because his job is to get the players and the coaches. The owners do not coach the team.