Snyder Trying to Change Image?

One of many experimental iterations ...

Chris

The Owner's Favorite
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
6,350
Reaction score
191
Points
143
Location
Boynton Beach, FL


NY writers don't carry cell phones with cameras?

Epic fail.
 

Neophyte

GM
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
8,526
Reaction score
168
Points
218
Location
Dallas


I have thought for some time that he has been working on it. Actually since Gibbs returned.

Which brings up another thing that struck me in the last couple of days...

The wrap on Snyder has always been that he is too involved the football part of running a football team and yet we have nearly everyone in the Colts organization deferring openly to Irsay on the choice of who they pick at #1. It is pretty obvious that he will be making the decision there so why doesn't he get blasted too?

For that matter, Steven Ross in Miami and the new guy in Jax also both seem to be seriously involved in choosing players. All while Dan is moving away from that end of the business.
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


I have thought for some time that he has been working on it. Actually since Gibbs returned.
Well, he took some huge steps backwards during the Zorn era then. And frankly, looking back on the Gibbs era I see way too many Snyder-esque moves to think he wasn't involved ... too much.

I agree that since hiring Allen and Shanahan he's made an obvious concerted effort to stay out of the way.

The wrap on Snyder has always been that he is too involved the football part of running a football team and yet we have nearly everyone in the Colts organization deferring openly to Irsay on the choice of who they pick at #1. It is pretty obvious that he will be making the decision there so why doesn't he get blasted too?
The Colts have won a ton of games including a superbowl over the past decade. Nobody cares what you do if you win.

For that matter, Steven Ross in Miami and the new guy in Jax also both seem to be seriously involved in choosing players. All while Dan is moving away from that end of the business.
Those guys haven't been around nearly as long as Snyder. Give them time. Reputations, once they are established, are really tough to shake.

I suspect if the Shanahan/Allen Redskins start winning consistently noone will care what the hell Snyder does. I know I won't. :)
 

riggins44

The Franchise Player
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
4,181
Reaction score
56
Points
78
Location
Yorktown, VA


I remember reading or hearing that Irsay is a former GM, so guess he feels qualified to make the pick. If he is listening to fans on who to draft, then Colts are in serious trouble.

Snyder is viewed differently to Irsay and Ross due to jealousy. Synder was young and brash when bought the team. He had an attractive wife and tons of money. Snyder started his ownership off on the wrong foot in every imaginable way.
 

TomE

The Pro Bowler
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
3,686
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth MD


The Gibbs 2 era bothered me some as well.

Having been out of the league so long, he may have depended on and more critically, trusted the minds of those already in place too much.

With free agency and an open wallet, He could get pretty much whomever he wanted but the info he needed to make the decisions may have been tainted by the less than erudite football folk closest to him.

I think he also discovered that many players were more interested in bling and self adulation than the type of players he was around in times past.

Harder to motivate these types.
 

Lanky Livingston

The Commissioner
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
27,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Houston, TX

Florida Atlantic

And frankly, looking back on the Gibbs era I see way too many Snyder-esque moves to think he wasn't involved ... too much.
It was well known that they employed the "3-headed monster" strategy during Gibbs 2. Vinny, Snyder & Gibbs all discussed players and voted. Now, you can speculate all you want about how much power Snyder & Vinny actually wielded when it came to discussing players with Joe, but that was the set up nonetheless.

I do agree Snyder is trying to back away from personnel decisions - and it makes me happy. :)
 

Bulldog

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
15,399
Reaction score
352
Points
363
Location
Bethesda Md


Well, Henry just because the Colts won a Super Bowl with Bill Polian making the decisions and Irsay in the room doesn't mean that Irsay is going to know what to do now that he is on his own.

Just like the Cowboys under Johnson made some great personnel moves but we saw that once he was out in Dallas the quality of the acqusitions the team made with Jones acting on his own have been less than optimal in many cases.

Let's face it, the 1995 Cowboys that won were a team constructed by Johnson and run on autopilot. Aikman and Smith admitted as much when asked how much Barry Switzer contributed to that year's championship run.

The only owner that had a successful track record as the de facto GM was Al Davis back in the 1960's to early 1980's.

He was able to work the draft, trades and veteran free agency to win 3 Super Bowls.

Over time as information on small college players and veterans became more diffused through mass media and the use of computers and the internet for pro scouting the advantages that he enjoyed in the past were diminished.

The new model of success in the NFL is the Giants and the Packers. They don't spend mega-bucks on free agents. They don't resign players at top of the market prices if they don't play 'must have' positions - hence the decision by the Giants to let Kevin Boss and Aaron Ross go despite being #2 and #1 picks - and the decision by Green Bay to let Matt Flynn go rather than franchise him and keep him as the #2 for another year or two.

The Redskins?

Unfortunately, we are going against the grain. We are signing free agents that were originally low round picks like Garcon and Morgan because we can't find them ourselves.

Meanwhile, in the draft we are gambling ALL on the ability to take a franchise qb this year in Griffin and hoping that he not only becomes a productive NFL quarteback but a star-maker because he will need to compensate with his talent like an Elway for the lack of talent at RB, OL and WR that the loss of all those picks means in pratical terms.
 

Neophyte

GM
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
8,526
Reaction score
168
Points
218
Location
Dallas


The Redskins?

Unfortunately, we are going against the grain. We are signing free agents that were originally low round picks like Garcon and Morgan because we can't find them ourselves.

Meanwhile, in the draft we are gambling ALL on the ability to take a franchise qb this year in Griffin and hoping that he not only becomes a productive NFL quarteback but a star-maker because he will need to compensate with his talent like an Elway for the lack of talent at RB, OL and WR that the loss of all those picks means in pratical terms.
I'm pretty we have been over this ground, BD, but like the glutton for punishment I am, I will go there one more time.

It's way too damn early to determine if Shanahan and Allen can or can't find late round talent. They have only had two drafts and so far, the returns on guys like Helu, Royster and Riley look promising. Not conclusive certainly but good enough for some optimism.

As to your second point, if any of the late round picks or this years free agents work out, the cupboard isn't nearly as bare at WR and RB as you seem to indicate. OL maybe but not the other two positions and I think OL remains to be seen as well.
 

Bulldog

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
15,399
Reaction score
352
Points
363
Location
Bethesda Md


To be fair Neophyte, I am looking at the span of time from 2000 to the present once Charley Casserly was relieved as GM and the team progressed under Snyder, I am not limiting myself to the Shanahan years.

So, yes there is a chance that the record will change somewhat with the presence of middle and late round picks on this team from 2011 and hopefully 2012.

It just burns me that Polian was able to find Garcon in Round 6 and pay him peanuts to start a Super Bowl but the Redskins to get a receiver have to pay him $42M.

Somewhere in there we need to find some bargains - the #5 pick that comes in and is an all-pro cornerback or pro bowl tackle.

When we see that starting to happen you know we will be on the right track as an organization.

The mega trade of picks for a Griffin happens once every 10-15 years for a team, but the constant drafting of middle to late rounders that keeps the team going at many positions happens every April :)
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


Well, Henry just because the Colts won a Super Bowl with Bill Polian making the decisions and Irsay in the room doesn't mean that Irsay is going to know what to do now that he is on his own.
Nobody gives a crap about that BD. Results matter. Wins matter. The process doesn't really. If the Colts continue to lose like they did in 2011 for awhile Irsay will feel the heat, and he'll be called a meddlesome owner that messed with team chemistry. Right now, nobody cares because the Colts won 12 games or more for a decade.

Just like the Cowboys under Johnson made some great personnel moves but we saw that once he was out in Dallas the quality of the acqusitions the team made with Jones acting on his own have been less than optimal in many cases.

Let's face it, the 1995 Cowboys that won were a team constructed by Johnson and run on autopilot. Aikman and Smith admitted as much when asked how much Barry Switzer contributed to that year's championship run.

The only owner that had a successful track record as the de facto GM was Al Davis back in the 1960's to early 1980's.

He was able to work the draft, trades and veteran free agency to win 3 Super Bowls.

Over time as information on small college players and veterans became more diffused through mass media and the use of computers and the internet for pro scouting the advantages that he enjoyed in the past were diminished.
All very interesing, but beside the point. The point wasn't whether or not Irsay deserved to be scrutinized for being meddlesome. The point was why he hasn't been yet. If the Colts crash and burn, he will be. Just like Snyder.

The new model of success in the NFL is the Giants and the Packers. They don't spend mega-bucks on free agents. They don't resign players at top of the market prices if they don't play 'must have' positions - hence the decision by the Giants to let Kevin Boss and Aaron Ross go despite being #2 and #1 picks - and the decision by Green Bay to let Matt Flynn go rather than franchise him and keep him as the #2 for another year or two.

The Redskins?

Unfortunately, we are going against the grain. We are signing free agents that were originally low round picks like Garcon and Morgan because we can't find them ourselves.

Meanwhile, in the draft we are gambling ALL on the ability to take a franchise qb this year in Griffin and hoping that he not only becomes a productive NFL quarteback but a star-maker because he will need to compensate with his talent like an Elway for the lack of talent at RB, OL and WR that the loss of all those picks means in pratical terms.
Ah, now your post is starting to make sense. :)

This is about how we can't find a pro-bowler with a 6th rounder again. I should have known. Again, I think your conclusions are completely faulty. First, we are not going against the grain. We signed Garcon to a contract relative to what several other teams offered him, including the Colts. Morgan is a warm body. He didn't get a huge contract and he'll be competing with our own draftees for playing time. PLENTY of teams sign players like Morgan to contracts like Morgan's.

Secondly, you don't know that we 'can't find them ourselves.' You are making this assumption based on the fact that none of our rookies immediately became elite players at their positions, as if this is a common practice for other teams. It's not. When it does happen, it's the exception not the rule. That the Redskins current front office, after two drafts, haven't stumbled upon one such exception is not proof that they can't find quality players themselves in the later rounds.

Sorry, I'm not going to lose a ton of sleep because the Redskins' front office can't live up to your fantastical expectations.

Lastly, the price for Griffin (or Luck) is steep. But if a first round QB busts, it sets a team back years regardless of what else the team does. If he pans out, the cost in draft picks is mitigated. We made plenty of picks the year we drafted Shuler. We made 10 picks the year we got Ramsey. Doesn't matter if the kid can't play.

If he can ... ask the Panthers what a difference a QB makes.

EDIT: And lastly lastly ... lack of talent at RB? Upon what do you base that assumption?

And, of course, none of this has to do with whether or not Snyder is currently a meddlesome owner.
 
Last edited:

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

Secondly, you don't know that we 'can't find them ourselves.' You are making this assumption based on the fact that none of our rookies immediately became elite players at their positions, as if this is a common practice for other teams. It's not. When it does happen, it's the exception not the rule. That the Redskins current front office, after two drafts, haven't stumbled upon one such exception is not proof that they can't find quality players themselves in the later rounds.

Sorry, I'm not going to lose a ton of sleep because the Redskins' front office can't live up to your fantastical expectations.
I think the highlighted statements are an interesting argument because what we ultimately want is to win like the Colts, who drafted Garçon in the 6th round, the Saints with Colston, Victor Cruz in NY...

Those teams are the exception to the rule, yes! But they are the teams who are winning Super Bowls so the argument that it's the exception to the rule is moot. The teams that are winning Super Bowls are the teams that are acquiring players, like those mentioned, for little to no investment, teams who are the "exception".

The fantastical expectation is the same for all of us, we want to win the Super Bowl so we need to go about it like the teams that are winning. Maybe we can have our own little twist to the formula for winning, but we must get more production from the later round picks if we expect to win a Super Bowl, especially now that we have no 1st round pick for the next 2 drafts.
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


The Colts, Saints and Giants also have (had) something else in common that we didn't.

I'll give you three guesses as to what that was. :)

And as I've mentioned about half a dozen times in other threads. Both Cruz and Garcon had very unspectacular, if not non-existent, rookie seasons at the WR position. They are actually not the exceptions to which I'm referring. They are part of the fantastical notion about rookie WRs that doesn't actually exist, and assuming our draftees are failures based on rookie seasons is holding them up to standards even the guys we are trying to emulate couldn't match.
 
Last edited:

Om

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
8,995
Reaction score
256
Points
239
Location
Montclair, VA

Virginia Tech

It's amazing to me, really, that the chasm-sized difference between teams with franchise QB's, and teams without, is still so easily and often ignored in discussions like this.

That is all.
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

The Colts, Saints and Giants also have (had) something else in common that we don't.

I'll give you three guesses as to what that was. :)

And as I've mentioned about half a dozen times in other threads. Both Cruz and Garcon had very unspectacular rookie seasons. They are actually not the exceptions to which I'm referring. They are part of the fantastical notion about rookie WRs that doesn't actually exist, and assuming our draftees are failures based on their rookie seasons is holding them up to standards even the guys we are trying to emulate couldn't match.

The second part of your statement will get no argument from me. I did not like how Niles Paul seemed to regress toward the end of the year, but he's a rookie so I won't cut him tomorrow for it.

I just find the exception to the rule argument moot in this regard. The teams that win are the teams who find diamonds in the rough.

Now as far as the QB issue that was common among them, well... What can I say there except we hired proven players to surround our new QB. This suggests our rookies may not be up to the task. We will have to wait and see.
 

Lanky Livingston

The Commissioner
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
27,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Houston, TX

Florida Atlantic

And as I've mentioned about half a dozen times in other threads. Both Cruz and Garcon had very unspectacular, if not non-existent, rookie seasons at the WR position.
To be fair, Cruz tore an ACL in training camp his rookie year, so that's why he didn't have any stats. Who knows how his rookie year actually would have gone though.

But yeah, those 3 teams have QBs.
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


The second part of your statement will get no argument from me. I did not like how Niles Paul seemed to regress toward the end of the year, but he's a rookie so I won't cut him tomorrow for it.

I just find the exception to the rule argument moot in this regard. The teams that win are the teams who find diamonds in the rough.
Two of the three diamonds you note didn't emerge until their second year in the league. Therefore, suggesting we can't find diamonds ourselves based on the FIRST year production of our own guys doesn't hold water.

The WRs who come out and produce immediately are the exceptions. Colston is an exception to the rule that includes both Garcon and Cruz. The rule that most WRs take a year or two (or sometimes more) before reaching their potential in the NFL.

Now as far as the QB issue that was common among them, well... What can I say there except we hired proven players to surround our new QB. This suggests our rookies may not be up to the task. We will have to wait and see.
It also suggests we traded draft picks for that new QB and are mitigating our loss in picks with some young vets. It also suggests that our older WRs may not be long for the roster and the team feels a veteran presence is a good idea on a young team with a rookie QB. It suggests lots of things, not all of which automatically point to the assumption that our second year WRs are all busts.
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


To be fair, Cruz tore an ACL in training camp his rookie year, so that's why he didn't have any stats. Who knows how his rookie year actually would have gone though.

But yeah, those 3 teams have QBs.
That's totally fair. I think we should be equally fair to Hankerson then. :)
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

Again Henry, I am not saying 1 year is enough time to evaluate a diamond in the rough, we pretty much agree there. What I have been saying is the teams that win have done so and we have not and like Bulldog has said, it is frustrating that we have not. I would like to see a point in time where our QB play is good enough that I could run routes and look good.

But we have done neither.

As for dropping Vets? Well, as it stands we have 10 receivers on our roster, it looks like some of the youngins and a vet or 2 will be gone. And if BB is right, we may even be looking to draft another one.
 

Lanky Livingston

The Commissioner
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
27,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Houston, TX

Florida Atlantic

As for dropping Vets? Well, as it stands we have 10 receivers on our roster, it looks like some of the youngins and a vet or 2 will be gone. And if BB is right, we may even be looking to draft another one.
Eh, they'll all go to camp and fight it out. Outside of Garçon & Hankerson, I don't think anyone is guaranteed a spot.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Chat 0
    Top