Quote:
Originally Posted by NC_Skins
Well, whether you like to admit it or not, Daniel Snyder is the Redskins and the Redskins is Daniel Sndyer. They are one in the same even though the actions done by one doesn't directly relate to the other.
When the franchise suffers as much as it's have, you have only one place to look at. The top. Quite simply, we've been through different GMs, coaches, players, systems, and the one thing that's constant this whole time has been the owner. That would narrow the problem down to being with the owner and the decisions he's making. You can't think positive about your club when the man in charge is making horrible decisions on the side. They are indirectly related whether you see it or not.
It's not like Dan Snyder has this switch that goes ON- I'll be a complete twit in public and other businesses OFF- I'll be the best owner in the NFL. I think this has been shown over the course of his tenure with the Skins. Chances are, if he's making horrible decisions in in public relations and other businesses, then there is a huge chance he's making horrible decisions with the Skins as well.
That's why they are one and the same.
|
If he makes such horrible decisions (in general), how does he stay so wealthy?
You want to look at an owner that makes horrible decisions that directly affect the team? Take a look at the Maloof brothers in Sacramento.
Snyder has made terrible football decisions that have affected this team. But as I said, I don't really see this particular issue with him suing the paper as a football decision that is affecting the Redskins.