OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS: Team with worst management? (1 Viewer)

Cookiemonster said:

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

'Skins offer C.Samuels (pro-bowl LT) and their 5th overall pick (S.Taylor) for the Raiders 2nd overall (Gallery) when Oakland had complete crap at the safety position. Samuels AND Taylor for that long-haired turnstile @ LT.

Click to expand...

Where'd you get that one from?

Click to expand...

'Kid Dan' was very interested in Gallery on draft day and knew the Raiders were planning to take him. The 'Skins offered to swap the 5th overall pick and Chris Samuels for the Raiders 2nd overall pick but Al Davis turned down the offer. That 5th pick for the 'Skins was S.Taylor.

Click to expand...

I call B.S. on that one. If you have a link show it. Dan has certainly not run draft day since Gibbs returned (that was Gibbs' first year ), and the only dilemma I knew of was whether the 'Skins wanted to get Winslow (which might have required them to trade up a spot IIRC) or get Taylor. Even before Gibbs, Cerrato was the guy making draft decisions. Snyder really only gets personally involved in attempting to close the deal on FA's, but again those are players who the football people want. It sounds to me like you're going off of a myth or stereotype. Why on earth would a team that has been widely regarded over the last five years as having one of the top tackle tandems in the league trade away the LT, who going off of Pro Bowls is regarded as the better of the two, in order to get a guy who played RT in college? That makes no sense even on a theoretical level.

BlueOnion said:

This could really be a fun 8-franchise tournament bracket for voting:

1) Detroit -

8) Buffalo - $ super bowl appearances

5) NY Jets - Won SBIII

4) New Orleans

3) Oakland - Multiple SB wins

6) San Francisco - Multiple SB wins

7) Houston - Still pretty new

2) Tennessee - SB appearance

Click to expand...

I am talking historically versus present day, but what Detroit and New Orleans represent for long term futility is staggering.

1a Chicago Cubs

1b Chiago Blackhawks

... oh football? Minnesota should get some consideration. Trading away their star receiver and then letting their franchise QB walk? hmmm.

S.K.A. said:

mhrutkowski said:

Jets don't belong in here

Click to expand...

Until they win something, hell yeah they belong here. As does New Orleans, Arizona, Detroit, and Houston

Click to expand...

By win something do you mean the Superbowl? Because only one team wins that per year, which means that even if every team was run brilliantly, a team could legitimately go 30 years without winning the Superbowl and yet not be a badly-run team.If you're talking about consistently making the playoffs, the Jets don't belong in this conversation. Playing in the same division as the Patriots, the Jets made the playoffs in three of the last five years, once as the winners of their division. Any of the other teams mentioned in this thread don't have that recortd of success. Since Parcells came on and took the Jets to the AFC Championship in 1998 the Jets have been a very respectable team. Last year's disaster was largely the result of injuries, and for all that the Jets have had uneven success with their trades, they were lauded for good moves including signing Jay Fiedler to abck up Pennington (Fiedler got hurt in the same game as Pennington though, so that didn't work out), signing Pete Kendall after Arizona cut him for disciplinary reasons, signing Eric Barton from the Raiders (also injured last year), and discovering P Ben Graham.

3nOut said:

Minnesota should get some consideration. Trading away their star receiver and then letting their franchise QB walk? hmmm.

Click to expand...

There are a few Minnesota regimes that deserve ridicule; Red McCombs, Jeff Diamond and 12-headed monster before them. I cannot recall there ever being good management in Minnesota. Fortunately, the franchise has been consistently successful.Since 1985, the franchise has only had 3 losing seasons.

Before Art Blank bought the Falcons from Jed & Jethro, I would've said the Falcons would definitely deserve an honorable mention under the stewardship of our beloved, yet buffonish, Clampetts.

But just as Art Blank took an idea and turned it into a multi billion dollar mega company, so he is turning around the Falcons...and rather quickly at that.

Dan Reeves deserves some of the credit too.

Green Bay is an interesting team that has been brought up. Because of the way the team is now I can't completely disagree, but most of that blame can be put on lower management (specifically Mike Sherman and his era) but it was bound to happen at some point.

Green Bay does not have an "Al Davis" kind of owner that can really screw things up like other teams have to deal with. They have an Executive Committee headed by Bob Harlan, the Chairman and CEO, and he has done a fantastic job. Harlan is the man responsible for hiring Ron Wolf and making him the Executive Vice President and GM. These two brought back Green Bay football and made it what is was throughout the 90's. It was after Ron Wolf stepped down that things started to head off in the other direction. Bob Harlan is also retiring after this year so there will be some changes in the top office, but because this team is not owned by one person, I don't see top managament ever being a major problem like it can be for other teams.

Sherman was in a tough spot taking over for Wolf, and the team took a step back after he left. Sherman did make some choices that turned out bad and was the cause for quite a bit of the problems we have seen these past few years. Thompson sort of walked into a bomb ready to explode when he arrived, and while trying to build his team he has also has a lot of clean-up to do as well. It's too early for me to make a decision one way or the other on Thompson, and it may be a couple of years before we can really see what kind of progress he has made. The way I see it is that Thompson is making a new franchise, cleaning out many of Sherman's picks and players and starting over, where as Sherman just took over Wolf's and tried to keep it going. This is definitely not going to be an easy job for Thompson, and we all know how it is starting off for him.

McCarthy I'm not the most thrilled about right now. I know it is early (1 total games coached), but I never got that kind of hard nose vibe from him like I did when Wolf hired Holmgren. He just seems like a "Yes, Sir" and won't have the balls to challenge Thompson on anything, and if things do go bad Thompson can easily point a finger at McCarthy and put all the blame on him. I'm just hoping that if the McCarthy experiment does not work out, that Thompson has the balls to own up to his mistake and find a new coach. I'm not sure Thompson is the kind of guy to easily swallow his own pride, and that might scare me the most.

CalBear said:

redman said:

Beergogglz said:

San Fran -- Dr. and Mrs. Dork have ruined that franchise.....

Click to expand...

They haven't hurt the franchise in my mind the way that Adams has in Tennessee. Mike Nolan is at least being allowed to control or heavily influence what players they are taking in the draft and acquiring through FA. It's his team on the field, but you can't say the same thing about Jeff Fisher in Tennessee.

Click to expand...

If that's the case, then they also get credit for hiring a moron at coach.In 2001-2002, they won 22 games. In 2004-2005, they won 6. They got rid of virtually every player from those winning teams, not to mention the coach. No one has destroyed a franchise so rapidly and completely.

Click to expand...

Nolan is no moron. He and Scot McCloughan have replaced a heartless, injury-plagued roster (thanks Terry Donahue) with young, tough-minded athletes. The talent on the roster is just beginning to materialize.No question, the Yorks were a debacle until they gave the reins over to Nolan. They could use a veteran decision-maker in the front office, but this is a team that will be on the rise in the next year or two.

To Blue Onion, I would look at both the Oakland and SF situation more closely before saying that you would give an edge to the Raiders management.

hacman said:

To Blue Onion, I would look at both the Oakland and SF situation more closely before saying that you would give an edge to the Raiders management.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I think the Yorks are even worse than the Bidwells. You had the video\asian fiasco of a year agoThey continually find themselves in salary cap hell while rebuilding (not after like most teams)They have been 'building' a new stadium for 10 years. What is going with the stadium?Other than forfieting decision making responsibility to others, what have the Yorks done for that franchise?

hacman said:

CalBear said:

redman said:

Beergogglz said:

San Fran -- Dr. and Mrs. Dork have ruined that franchise.....

Click to expand...

They haven't hurt the franchise in my mind the way that Adams has in Tennessee. Mike Nolan is at least being allowed to control or heavily influence what players they are taking in the draft and acquiring through FA. It's his team on the field, but you can't say the same thing about Jeff Fisher in Tennessee.

Click to expand...

If that's the case, then they also get credit for hiring a moron at coach.In 2001-2002, they won 22 games. In 2004-2005, they won 6. They got rid of virtually every player from those winning teams, not to mention the coach. No one has destroyed a franchise so rapidly and completely.

Click to expand...

Nolan is no moron. He and Scot McCloughan have replaced a heartless, injury-plagued roster (thanks Terry Donahue) with young, tough-minded athletes. The talent on the roster is just beginning to materialize.No question, the Yorks were a debacle until they gave the reins over to Nolan. They could use a veteran decision-maker in the front office, but this is a team that will be on the rise in the next year or two.

To Blue Onion, I would look at both the Oakland and SF situation more closely before saying that you would give an edge to the Raiders management.

Click to expand...

I hope they sell the team before they get TOO good. I don't want to see York and his #### wife accepting a Superbowl trophy. Too bad they didnt sell the team to Steve Young and Brent Jones a number of years back.Seriously though, bring back Eddie. He did nothing but good things for this team and the sport.

BlueOnion said:

You had the video\asian fiasco of a year agoThey continually find themselves in salary cap hell while rebuilding (not after like most teams)They have been 'building' a new stadium for 10 years. What is going with the stadium?Other than forfieting decision making responsibility to others, what have the Yorks done for that franchise?

Click to expand...

On the stadium: They originally managed to use extortion (threatening to move the team to LA) to get a 51% majority to vote public money for a new stadium/mall complex. That was in 1997 when the Niners were good and the economy was booming, and the Debartolo family was in charge. When the Yorks took over in 1998, they didn't like the deal, and then the Niners started sucking and the economy went south, so the deal died.Now they're trying to revive it with a completely different plan and a different developer, doing housing rather than a mall. They don't want public money anymore but they do want public land which has gone up in value quite a bit since 1997, and they want the initial ballot approval of the stadium/mall complex to apply to their stadium/housing complex. They're going to lose on that one, so they won't be doing any better in the courtroom than they are on the field.

CalBear said:

BlueOnion said:

You had the video\asian fiasco of a year ago

They continually find themselves in salary cap hell while rebuilding (not after like most teams)

They have been 'building' a new stadium for 10 years. What is going with the stadium?

Other than forfieting decision making responsibility to others, what have the Yorks done for that franchise?

Click to expand...

On the stadium: They originally managed to use extortion (threatening to move the team to LA) to get a 51% majority to vote public money for a new stadium/mall complex. That was in 1997 when the Niners were good and the economy was booming, and the Debartolo family was in charge. When the Yorks took over in 1998, they didn't like the deal, and then the Niners started sucking and the economy went south, so the deal died.Now they're trying to revive it with a completely different plan and a different developer, doing housing rather than a mall. They don't want public money anymore but they do want public land which has gone up in value quite a bit since 1997, and they want the initial ballot approval of the stadium/mall complex to apply to their stadium/housing complex. They're going to lose on that one, so they won't be doing any better in the courtroom than they are on the field.

Click to expand...

Thanks Cal Bears. I remember hearing in 1997ish that the 49ers were getting a new stadium; obviously it never came to fruition (sp??) and I always wondered why.Did find this link on ESPN, it does have a ranking of all owners (from all 4 major sports) combined.

linky dinky

...

30 San Francisco

31 Arizona

32 New Orleans

No contest. The Lions. From Wikipedia:

"In 1964, William Clay Ford, Sr. purchased a controlling interest in the team for $4.5 million. This began a 43-year period of futility that still continues today, during which the Lions have won just one playoff game."

Name another franchise that has had its stadium start a chant to Fire their GM.

Name another franchise that has had its security chase a fan carrying a "Fire {GM}" sign around their stadium and be unable to catch him, while other fans assist.

Now forget about Millen.

Name another franchise that can claim a character like this as the winningest coach in Franchise history:

'Fontes was coined the "Bill Clinton of the NFL" due to his seeming invincibility despite prolonged and relentless criticism from the media and fans. His 67 wins and 71 losses are the most for a head coach in team history.... Fontes took his firing graciously, calling Ford "the best owner in the National Football League." But then sued the Lions for injuries incurred as coach claiming it prevented him from ever being able to coach again.'

Could any other management have chased one of the greatest players in history (Barry Sanders) into a surprising early retirement with the League's greatest all-time record within reach? Could any other management team have lead him to do this on the day before training camp?

The answer is clear, because all this happened soon after the Lions went through 4 Championship appearances and 3 titles in 6 years during the 1950's.

The Lions are the Cubs of the NFL.

The Lions are 1-10 in playoff games since they last won a championship in 1957, over 49 years. That is the long term.

Since Matt Millen got here 5 years ago, the Lions are 21-59. That is the short term.

If anyone can top that, go ahead. Good luck.

lions327 said:

The Lions are 1-10 in playoff games since they last won a championship in 1957, over 49 years. That is the long term.Since Matt Millen got here 5 years ago, the Lions are 21-59. That is the short term.If anyone can top that, go ahead. Good luck.

Click to expand...

Arizona is right there with you. At least the Lions weren't run out of town. AT least you've made it to 11 playoff games.

BlueOnion said:

hacman said:

To Blue Onion, I would look at both the Oakland and SF situation more closely before saying that you would give an edge to the Raiders management.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I think the Yorks are even worse than the Bidwells. You had the video\asian fiasco of a year agoThey continually find themselves in salary cap hell while rebuilding (not after like most teams)They have been 'building' a new stadium for 10 years. What is going with the stadium?Other than forfieting decision making responsibility to others, what have the Yorks done for that franchise?

Click to expand...

I'd forgotten about the video/asian fiasco . . . which is why I think it's irrelevant to this discussion. It made for an embarrassing week, but nothing more. It certainly didn't affect the team's direction. The Yorks suck as owners, to be sure, but there's no team in the NFL that is sunk in a quagmire worse than the Raiders, and as long as Al Davis is calling the shots there I give them zero chance of extracting themselves. They need a strong coach but Davis doesn't want anyone so strong or successful that it takes away from his prestige apparently. It's as perverse as it gets. Bidwell and the Yorks have at least hired coaches who look to be turning their teams around. I agree that the Lions are a close second (to last) in this category.

I do think that it's hard to beat the Lions' long-term acheivement in this category, although Arizona, which hasn't managed 10 wins since 1976, and has 9 wins only twice in that time, at least is in the conversation.

But in terms of current activity, the Niners are every bit as bad as Detroit. I really don't see the Raiders as competing in the "bad management" category; do you really think Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were mistakes? Those are two of the biggest free-agent acquisitions in the NFL in the last couple years.

Kingfish in PLF

CalBear said:

I do think that it's hard to beat the Lions' long-term acheivement in this category, although Arizona, which hasn't managed 10 wins since 1976, and has 9 wins only twice in that time, at least is in the conversation.

But in terms of current activity, the Niners are every bit as bad as Detroit. I really don't see the Raiders as competing in the "bad management" category; do you really think Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were mistakes? Those are two of the biggest free-agent acquisitions in the NFL in the last couple years.

Click to expand...

Do you really think Art Shell and Tom Walsh (out of football for the last ten years) are some type of solution? Do you think they should be getting more out of proven talent like Moss and good player in Jordan? Really, what are your projections for these guys given their home opener? Are you ready to back Brooks for this season and/or next- or are you of the mind that Walter should get his shot? These are the questions that Raiders fans can't answer themselves. The 49ers have at least been moving in a forward direction since game one of last year, whether you care to admit it or not.

Here is something I don't get about TEN. When they passed on Randy Moss in favor of another WR, they made a big deal about how they only draft character guys. I mean a huge deal--as though they would never knowingly draft someone they suspected would be a character problem.

Then, a few years later, they draft Pac Man Jones. Same people running the front office but they abandoned their principles.

hacman said:

CalBear said:

I do think that it's hard to beat the Lions' long-term acheivement in this category, although Arizona, which hasn't managed 10 wins since 1976, and has 9 wins only twice in that time, at least is in the conversation.

But in terms of current activity, the Niners are every bit as bad as Detroit. I really don't see the Raiders as competing in the "bad management" category; do you really think Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were mistakes? Those are two of the biggest free-agent acquisitions in the NFL in the last couple years.

Click to expand...

Do you really think Art Shell and Tom Walsh (out of football for the last ten years) are some type of solution? Do you think they should be getting more out of proven talent like Moss and good player in Jordan? Really, what are your projections for these guys given their home opener? Are you ready to back Brooks for this season and/or next- or are you of the mind that Walter should get his shot? These are the questions that Raiders fans can't answer themselves. The 49ers have at least been moving in a forward direction since game one of last year, whether you care to admit it or not.

Click to expand...

I am not a big fan of the Shell and Walsh signings, but I'm going to wait more than one game before declaring them failures. I don't think Walter will ever be a success in the NFL; the only secondary he's ever looked good against is the Niners in the preseason. Brooks will put up some numbers this year and win some games; he's probably not a long-term solution. They maybe should have grabbed Leinart. I think the Raiders have made some bad decisions, sure, but I don't think they have the consistent record of bad decision-making that some of these other teams do.

If you view finishing #32 in both offense and defense as "moving in a forward direction," I'm not sure where you think the 49er franchise is trying to get to.

twistd said:

fenwah said:

Oakland...hands down

Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly. I don't even think the others are in the race. Do you think the other teams would be turned down, more than once, by coaching candidates? Oakland is offering a head coaching job to guys who have dreamed of getting that opportunity, and they were turned down. That should tell you something.

Click to expand...

Gets my vote also.

CalBear said:

I do think that it's hard to beat the Lions' long-term acheivement in this category, although Arizona, which hasn't managed 10 wins since 1976, and has 9 wins only twice in that time, at least is in the conversation.

But in terms of current activity, the Niners are every bit as bad as Detroit. I really don't see the Raiders as competing in the "bad management" category; do you really think Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were mistakes? Those are two of the biggest free-agent acquisitions in the NFL in the last couple years.

Click to expand...

FA acquisitions work when they're paired with sound drafting, and signing and development of UDFA's. Without those critical ingredients, those premier skill position players start looking like chrome rims on a jalopy.I think as it relates to teams like the 49'ers, the Saints, and some others, there are certainly teams that sport better talent on the roster, but those teams to their credit are ripping out the underperforming players who may be more talented in theory and trying to build a solid core to their team. Do you really see that happening with the Raiders?

As already discussed: yes Jordan and Moss were good acquisitions (although you could argue Moss for various reasons) - but nearly EVERY other move they've made has been bad. They are worthy of the title, as is TEN.

Somewhere out there Robert Irsay is snickering.

CalBear said:

I do think that it's hard to beat the Lions' long-term acheivement in this category, although Arizona, which hasn't managed 10 wins since 1976, and has 9 wins only twice in that time, at least is in the conversation.

But in terms of current activity, the Niners are every bit as bad as Detroit. I really don't see the Raiders as competing in the "bad management" category; do you really think Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were mistakes? Those are two of the biggest free-agent acquisitions in the NFL in the last couple years.

Click to expand...

Agreed completely. I almost added that the Cardinals give the Lions a run for the money (long term).Currently, the Niners do mirror the Lions in part because their big failure followed great success. At least the Niners can point to the creation of the salary cap as one large cause of their decline.

The pain of the Lions is that the city continues to absolutely love the team. They're also a cornerstone franchise of the NFL:

"Thanksgiving Day in Detroit is a tradition like none other. It is older than 24 NFL franchises and dates back to the Depression-era.

Simply stated, no other professional sports franchise can claim to be a part of an American holiday as can the Detroit Lions and Thanksgiving Day. Four generations of Americas enjoy their turkey, stuffing and pumpkin pie with a side of Detroit Lions football."

redman said:

CalBear said:

I do think that it's hard to beat the Lions' long-term acheivement in this category, although Arizona, which hasn't managed 10 wins since 1976, and has 9 wins only twice in that time, at least is in the conversation.

But in terms of current activity, the Niners are every bit as bad as Detroit. I really don't see the Raiders as competing in the "bad management" category; do you really think Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were mistakes? Those are two of the biggest free-agent acquisitions in the NFL in the last couple years.

Click to expand...

FA acquisitions work when they're paired with sound drafting, and signing and development of UDFA's. Without those critical ingredients, those premier skill position players start looking like chrome rims on a jalopy.I think as it relates to teams like the 49'ers, the Saints, and some others, there are certainly teams that sport better talent on the roster, but those teams to their credit are ripping out the underperforming players who may be more talented in theory and trying to build a solid core to their team. Do you really see that happening with the Raiders?

Click to expand...

I think the Raiders are something of a joke, but I just don't think they're as consistently bad as some of the others being discussed.Ripping out underperforming players doesn't help when you replace them with players who perform even less.

BlueOnion said:

This could really be a fun 8-franchise tournament bracket for voting:1) Detroit8) Buffalo5) NY Jets4) New Orleans3) Oakland6) San Francisco7) Houston2) Tennessee

Click to expand...

You do realize Buffalo nearly made the playoffs in 2004 right? When McGahee came in and never lost his job which resulted in Travis Henry going to the Titans. Why not toss the Browns in there instead...

If you view finishing #32 in both offense and defense as "moving in a forward direction," I'm not sure where you think the 49er franchise is trying to get to.

Click to expand...

Glib response that doesn't take into account the progress of the offense this year. The plan all along was to build through the draft and to surround Smith with protection and then provide him with some playmakers. I'm fine if you think drafting Smith was a mistake, but they have followed thier initial blueprint. If you don't think they look better on offense this year, then you haven't been watching. They decided to address their defense secondly, because in Nolan's opinion it takes less time to develop a cohesive defense, plus that is his area of expertise. The jury is still out on that...It's not a quick fix plan, but one that is building a foundation. I've said it multiple times here, but I see them as on a similar curve as the Chargers, but much earlier on that curve.

hacman said:

If you view finishing #32 in both offense and defense as "moving in a forward direction," I'm not sure where you think the 49er franchise is trying to get to.

Click to expand...

Glib response that doesn't take into account the progress of the offense this year.

Click to expand...

You mean the offense that failed to score a first-half TD in the entire pre-season? The offense that failed to convert a single third down against the Arizona Cardinals (as long as we're talking about pathetic franchises)? I don't see falling behind 21-7 in the first quarter and having to heave it all day (40 pass attempts) as offensive progress.

CalBear said:

redman said:

CalBear said:

I do think that it's hard to beat the Lions' long-term acheivement in this category, although Arizona, which hasn't managed 10 wins since 1976, and has 9 wins only twice in that time, at least is in the conversation.

But in terms of current activity, the Niners are every bit as bad as Detroit. I really don't see the Raiders as competing in the "bad management" category; do you really think Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were mistakes? Those are two of the biggest free-agent acquisitions in the NFL in the last couple years.

Click to expand...

FA acquisitions work when they're paired with sound drafting, and signing and development of UDFA's. Without those critical ingredients, those premier skill position players start looking like chrome rims on a jalopy.I think as it relates to teams like the 49'ers, the Saints, and some others, there are certainly teams that sport better talent on the roster, but those teams to their credit are ripping out the underperforming players who may be more talented in theory and trying to build a solid core to their team. Do you really see that happening with the Raiders?

Click to expand...

I think the Raiders are something of a joke, but I just don't think they're as consistently bad as some of the others being discussed.Ripping out underperforming players doesn't help when you replace them with players who perform even less.

Click to expand...

Mike Nolan's is beginning his second season. It's way too early to call him a failure. I actually like what he's doing there. Regarding the Raiders, over the last 20 years there's really only one era that stands out as being successful, and that was the one presided over by Gruden . . . who of course was essentially run out of there by Davis. Shell got the team to the championship game one year, but largely was mediocre during his first run.

I think Al Davis loves his control of the team so much and guards it so jealously that he only hires coaches who he believes will never have so much prestige that they challenge his authority and stature. Check out the list of Raiders coaches over the years who coached after Davis did, and you'll see there were only two exceptions:

John Rauch (who?)

John Madden (Exception #1, but he's a humble guy who to this day loudly praises Davis and he wasn't an obvious success story when hired, much less did he appear charismatic)

Tom Flores (is there a more anonymous winner of two Super Bowls?)

Mike Shanahan (a young assistant when hired; Davis underestimated him a gave him the boot when he couldn't bend him to his will)

Art Shell (a loyal, humble soldier to this day)

Mike White (who?)

Joe Bugel (famous for the Hogs, but not exactly leading man material, and even he kowtows to Davis to this day)

John Gruden (Exception #2 - hired when very young, and Davis again underestimated his level of independence, which led to their inevitable parting)

Bill Callahan (truly a deer in the headlights)

Norv Turner (there hasn't been a softer head coach in the NFL in the last 10 years; a "players coach" in every negative sense of the word)

Do you see the pattern? Frankly, Shanahan could be the third exception. Any time with the exception of Madden (who retired, BTW, and wasn't fired) that Davis hired a guy with a little spine who had his own vision for the team Davis quickly gave him the boot.

The point is that this dysfunction is longstanding and attributable to one person and one person only: Al Davis.

redman said:

The point is that this dysfunction is longstanding and attributable to one person and one person only: Al Davis.

Click to expand...

I agree that Al Davis is a control freak and very much someone who doesn't want his decisions questioned by his coach or GM. But I also think he has some football smarts, certainly more than York or Ford, and I also think he really cares about winning, though his own tendencies get in the way. (They'd certainly be better off if they'd kept Gruden).

No mention of the Browns? One playoff win since 1990. Blew 1st overall picks in 99 and 00 on Tim Couch and Courtney Brown, 3rd overall in 01 on Gerrard Warren, 16th overall in 02 on William Green and 21st overall in 03 on Jeff Faine.

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

'Skins offer C.Samuels (pro-bowl LT) and their 5th overall pick (S.Taylor) for the Raiders 2nd overall (Gallery) when Oakland had complete crap at the safety position. Samuels AND Taylor for that long-haired turnstile @ LT.

Click to expand...

Where'd you get that one from?

Click to expand...

'Kid Dan' was very interested in Gallery on draft day and knew the Raiders were planning to take him. The 'Skins offered to swap the 5th overall pick and Chris Samuels for the Raiders 2nd overall pick but Al Davis turned down the offer. That 5th pick for the 'Skins was S.Taylor.

Click to expand...

I call B.S. on that one. If you have a link show it. Dan has certainly not run draft day since Gibbs returned (that was Gibbs' first year ), and the only dilemma I knew of was whether the 'Skins wanted to get Winslow (which might have required them to trade up a spot IIRC) or get Taylor. Even before Gibbs, Cerrato was the guy making draft decisions. Snyder really only gets personally involved in attempting to close the deal on FA's, but again those are players who the football people want. It sounds to me like you're going off of a myth or stereotype.

Why on earth would a team that has been widely regarded over the last five years as having one of the top tackle tandems in the league trade away the LT, who going off of Pro Bowls is regarded as the better of the two, in order to get a guy who played RT in college? That makes no sense even on a theoretical level.

Click to expand...

Ease up Redman. I don't know what your problem is with my post, but since you didn't want to look for any history on this, I found some.link

I'll put up a couple more as I find them, apologies if it is not my top priority.

IIRC, including Samuels was more about saving themselves the huge cap hit they were going to take on him in the near future (near the end of the article).

Cookiemonster said:

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

'Skins offer C.Samuels (pro-bowl LT) and their 5th overall pick (S.Taylor) for the Raiders 2nd overall (Gallery) when Oakland had complete crap at the safety position. Samuels AND Taylor for that long-haired turnstile @ LT.

Click to expand...

Where'd you get that one from?

Click to expand...

'Kid Dan' was very interested in Gallery on draft day and knew the Raiders were planning to take him. The 'Skins offered to swap the 5th overall pick and Chris Samuels for the Raiders 2nd overall pick but Al Davis turned down the offer. That 5th pick for the 'Skins was S.Taylor.

Click to expand...

I call B.S. on that one. If you have a link show it. Dan has certainly not run draft day since Gibbs returned (that was Gibbs' first year ), and the only dilemma I knew of was whether the 'Skins wanted to get Winslow (which might have required them to trade up a spot IIRC) or get Taylor. Even before Gibbs, Cerrato was the guy making draft decisions. Snyder really only gets personally involved in attempting to close the deal on FA's, but again those are players who the football people want. It sounds to me like you're going off of a myth or stereotype.

Why on earth would a team that has been widely regarded over the last five years as having one of the top tackle tandems in the league trade away the LT, who going off of Pro Bowls is regarded as the better of the two, in order to get a guy who played RT in college? That makes no sense even on a theoretical level.

Click to expand...

Ease up Redman. I don't know what your problem is with my post, but since you didn't want to look for any history on this, I found some.link

I'll put up a couple more as I find them, apologies if it is not my top priority.

IIRC, including Samuels was more about saving themselves the huge cap hit they were going to take on him in the near future (near the end of the article).

Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm not attacking you, and rereading my last post obviously I came across as pretty direct. It's probably the result of the constant bashing of Dan Snyder personally that is based upon either stuff that hasn't been true for years or was never true at all. This isn't Jerry Jones - he doesn't wear the GM hat and in fact never has. That link doesn't work for me. I paid pretty close attention to the team during that time and heard no such rumor during that time. I'll check the archives on Extremeskins.com for that information though to see if I missed.

CalBear said:

hacman said:

If you view finishing #32 in both offense and defense as "moving in a forward direction," I'm not sure where you think the 49er franchise is trying to get to.

Click to expand...

Glib response that doesn't take into account the progress of the offense this year.

Click to expand...

You mean the offense that failed to score a first-half TD in the entire pre-season? The offense that failed to convert a single third down against the Arizona Cardinals (as long as we're talking about pathetic franchises)? I don't see falling behind 21-7 in the first quarter and having to heave it all day (40 pass attempts) as offensive progress.

Click to expand...

Yes, the same offense that scored a TD on their first series this season. We definitely see the glass of water differently. I saw a good performance from their rb (despite losing two o-lineman) & a legitimate performance by Smith. This counts as progress from last year, I think even you'll agree. It's no matter what I think; the Raiders & the Niners square off in week 5. Feel free to bump this thread after that game. I'll be man enough to respond if the Niners get skunked.

Being an AZ Cardinals fan I am pleasantly surprised to not see their name on here. It shows we are making good progress.

Thanks for the support all---go Cards!!

hacman said:

Yes, the same offense that scored a TD on their first series this season. We definitely see the glass of water differently. I saw a good performance from their rb (despite losing two o-lineman) & a legitimate performance by Smith. This counts as progress from last year, I think even you'll agree. It's no matter what I think; the Raiders & the Niners square off in week 5. Feel free to bump this thread after that game. I'll be man enough to respond if the Niners get skunked.

Click to expand...

I'm not a Raider fan, and the Niners succeeding in beating a bad team wouldn't prove much. But given the still-woeful Niners secondary, that is one of the games where the Brooks acquisition will look good.

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

redman said:

Cookiemonster said:

'Skins offer C.Samuels (pro-bowl LT) and their 5th overall pick (S.Taylor) for the Raiders 2nd overall (Gallery) when Oakland had complete crap at the safety position. Samuels AND Taylor for that long-haired turnstile @ LT.

Click to expand...

Where'd you get that one from?

Click to expand...

'Kid Dan' was very interested in Gallery on draft day and knew the Raiders were planning to take him. The 'Skins offered to swap the 5th overall pick and Chris Samuels for the Raiders 2nd overall pick but Al Davis turned down the offer. That 5th pick for the 'Skins was S.Taylor.

Click to expand...

I call B.S. on that one. If you have a link show it. Dan has certainly not run draft day since Gibbs returned (that was Gibbs' first year ), and the only dilemma I knew of was whether the 'Skins wanted to get Winslow (which might have required them to trade up a spot IIRC) or get Taylor. Even before Gibbs, Cerrato was the guy making draft decisions. Snyder really only gets personally involved in attempting to close the deal on FA's, but again those are players who the football people want. It sounds to me like you're going off of a myth or stereotype.

Why on earth would a team that has been widely regarded over the last five years as having one of the top tackle tandems in the league trade away the LT, who going off of Pro Bowls is regarded as the better of the two, in order to get a guy who played RT in college? That makes no sense even on a theoretical level.

Click to expand...

Ease up Redman. I don't know what your problem is with my post, but since you didn't want to look for any history on this, I found some.link

I'll put up a couple more as I find them, apologies if it is not my top priority.

IIRC, including Samuels was more about saving themselves the huge cap hit they were going to take on him in the near future (near the end of the article).

Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm not attacking you, and rereading my last post obviously I came across as pretty direct. It's probably the result of the constant bashing of Dan Snyder personally that is based upon either stuff that hasn't been true for years or was never true at all. This isn't Jerry Jones - he doesn't wear the GM hat and in fact never has. That link doesn't work for me. I paid pretty close attention to the team during that time and heard no such rumor during that time. I'll check the archives on Extremeskins.com for that information though to see if I missed.

Click to expand...

Don't know what I did to screw up the link, but Samuels was due a $1mil roster bonus and was going to cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $15mil over the next two years. He was refusing to restructure @ the time. All 'Skins reports at the time were denying the offer, but several sources were writing it and Raiders news and local reports were that Davis nixed the offer of swapping picks and getting Samuels. I remember it well, thinking that Roy Williams or Sean Taylor + Samuels would have been worth more than Gallery could have potentially been (he was looked at as the sure-fire replacement to Wisnewski). I was pretty steamed about it at the time and it has been burned into my memory as it would have been in yours if it were consumated.

Houston should win this one just for passing on Reggie Bush, but they aren't the worst. I like Jeff Fisher, but by all accounts, Fisher and Chow wanted Leinart while the Houston "management" wanted Vince Young. But no, Tennesse is not the worst. The York regime in San Francisco once looked to be the worst in football, but that team seems to be turning the corner.

Let's be clear, Oakland is the most awful franchise in football, and it's all about Al Davis. Examine the crime scene:

HORRIFIC DRAFTING

- Al Davis is one of the brightest minds in football, but everyone can tell you he has lost his feel for talent evaluation. The Raiders' draft picks over the last several years have been a joke. The NFL landscape is scattered with the horrific players that Al Davis picked. Philip Buchanon, Sebastian Janikowski, Ricky Dudley, Marques Tuiasosopo, Chester McGlockton, Napoleon Harris, Todd Marinovich, and a host of various headcases. Even when Oakland picks a talented player (Woodson), they pick a guy with attitude problems.

THE JON GRUDEN DEBACLE

- Al Davis cost the Raiders a Super Bowl by letting Jon gruden leave. Anyone believe that Gruden would have PREVENTED the Raiders from reaching the Super Bowl? Some in the media like to point out that Gruden refused to work with Davis and left for Tampa. Not according to Hall of Fame NFL writer Ira Miller. Miller states that Gruden would have stayed in Oakland if Davis had been willing to pay a fair wage. Davis never pays coaches top dollar. Why should he? No coach knows more than Davis.

THE INMATES RUN THE ASYLUM

- Raiders players love Al Davis. Why? He pays them top dollar, and he often offers jobs to former players after they retire. But Davis seems to respect the opinions of his player a bit too much, because Davis always has players on the team that report to him on a regular basis. Since Davis doesn't respect his head coaches, he constantly undermines his coach by allowing his players to ignore the coach and report directly to the team owner.

Very interesting and entertaining thread.

Many people have made passionate cases for one team or another to be declared the worst, but the conditions and terms of such declarations aren't clear.

For example...the worst DRAFTING...Detroit. Does that make them bad management? Not by my thinking. EVERY NFL TEAM DRAFTS BUSTS! WITHOUT EXCEPTION! The difference with Detroit is that they have had an inordinate amount of high first round busts. Problem with blaming management is that most of those picks were touted as good at the time, and were generally in line with the thinking of most scouts and draftnicks. Frustrating as that is to Lions fans, it's ridiculous to criticize management as harshly as some jaded fans would like to.

The worst Cap management: Tennessee. They sold out much like the Niners did a few years earlier in their quest to win a super bowl....but they failed when the Niners succeeded. The salary cap crucified them afterwards, as it did to San Fran. San Fran is JUST NOW recovering from that mistake. To be sure, Tennessee has not helped it's case with sub-par draft results, but much like Detroit, it's unfair to judge a franchise too harshly on that basis alone. They did get a good coach (Even the most virulant Tennessee basher somehow likes Fisher.) It might take several more years, but they'll recover.

Most futile on gamedays: Houston. They've been horrid. But they are also young, and even if they've not shown much success on the field yet, it isn't very practical to judge them this harshly. With a brand new franchise, it would take 2 or 3 years just to fairly judge whether the initial personel decisions were the right ones, let alone try to correct the wrong ones. They simply haven't had enough time. Agree with it or not, they had legit reasons to pass on Bush and take a stud DE, and that decision alone is not enough to crucify management there. In fact, it showed guts going with their convictions instead of popular opinion. (Think Donovan McNabb!)

Buffalo: I can't figure out how they've even made it on this list as a candidate. I like many of the choices Buffalo has made, and the effort to improve is readily obvious.

Jets: Only a few years removed from a deep playoff run, and with a devastating injury history in the last couple of years, they don't deserve serious consideration for this dubious title. They ditched what may have been the worst head coach in football, and that alone tells me they aren't the worst managed club.

Niners: I touched on them with the Titans, although I think their window of excuse is now closed. The salary cap issues are gone, and it's time for them to perform. They seem to lack direction, but don't seem to have made many truly bad decisions lately. Although they still stink, they are also young and SEEM to be improving.

Green Bay: ???????HOW ARE THEY EVEN MENTIONED IN THIS THREAD?????? Yes, they've hung with Favre too long, but can you really blame them? He defined the franchise for over 10 years.

Cardinals: With so many huge and obvious improvements there in the last few years, how can they be considered the worst managed club RIGHT NOW? Five years ago...maybe. Not now. This team may be playoff caliber now.

I think that only leaves one nominated club in here...the Oakland Raiders. If there HAS to be winner of this debate among mentioned teams, it has to be Oakland. Not because they've had the worst drafts, because they haven't. Not because of FA gaffs, because they've had some successes just as big as a couple of their failures. Not because of salary cap mismanagement, because they have been at worst average in that regard. Not even because they ran off a great coach in Gruden. Davis would be the only reasonable reason. It's his way or the highway. He trusts his own judgement above any others.

But then again.....he's won a few superbowls in his tenure, is only a few years removed from a deep playoff run, and although this year's Raiders are terrible, there's no significant issues to prevent them from improving over the next couple of years.

I'm surprised that Washington hasn't been nominated. They have another ego-centric owner who's spent millions trying to buy a Super-bowl with FA's. He's overpaid for many who've under-delivered. Of course, the team has been at least competitive most of the last 6 years (NOT good...but competitive). They've had poor to mediocre success with their drafts ( not as bad as Detroit or Tennessee, but hardly stellar). Are they the worst? Probably not....they've hired a HOF coach and before the season started were considered a legit playoff contender. They probably aren't, but the effort has been sincere, and very few of their decisions have been OBVIOUSLY bad at the time they were made.

The bottom line is that most of these franchises have been the worst in one regard or another, but all of them have either positive things that can also be said, or legit excuses.

It would be easier to point out the best franchises in football and why they're the best: Philly and New England. Terrific salary cap management. Good, stable coaching staffs. Terrific scouting. Astute player evaluations leading to solid drafts.

renesauz said:

The worst Cap management: Tennessee. They sold out much like the Niners did a few years earlier in their quest to win a super bowl....but they failed when the Niners succeeded. The salary cap crucified them afterwards, as it did to San Fran. San Fran is JUST NOW recovering from that mistake. To be sure, Tennessee has not helped it's case with sub-par draft results, but much like Detroit, it's unfair to judge a franchise too harshly on that basis alone. They did get a good coach (Even the most virulant Tennessee basher somehow likes Fisher.) It might take several more years, but they'll recover.

Click to expand...

The last time the 49ers won a Super Bowl (or been to a Super Bowl) was 1995. However, they are still in Salary Cap hell? Something doesn't compute and I suspect you are combining the work of DeBartolo\Policy and the Yorks.

BlueOnion said:

renesauz said:

The worst Cap management: Tennessee. They sold out much like the Niners did a few years earlier in their quest to win a super bowl....but they failed when the Niners succeeded. The salary cap crucified them afterwards, as it did to San Fran. San Fran is JUST NOW recovering from that mistake. To be sure, Tennessee has not helped it's case with sub-par draft results, but much like Detroit, it's unfair to judge a franchise too harshly on that basis alone. They did get a good coach (Even the most virulant Tennessee basher somehow likes Fisher.) It might take several more years, but they'll recover.

Click to expand...

The last time the 49ers won a Super Bowl (or been to a Super Bowl) was 1995. However, they are still in Salary Cap hell? Something doesn't compute and I suspect you are combining the work of DeBartolo\Policy and the Yorks.

Click to expand...

San Fran's Salary cap excuse is dead, as I had mentioned. The problem with both is that the salary cap problems were so massive that they were (San Fran) or are (Tennessee) starting out much like an expansion team would...with nothing worth a crap. DO you crucify an expansion team just three years into it's existance when it's early player choices don't pan out as expected? Look at Tenn roster now, and San Frans a couple of years ago, and you'll see the same type of players. Compare that to Houstons roster 3 years ago...San Fran has proved that it isn't really such a hot much to mortgage your ENTIRE foreseeable future to "win now". Tennessee followed that path and are paying dearly. Philly and NE found a better path.

BigRed said:

Please. Despite numerous stupidities themselves, DET comes in 3d at most IMO. It's easy to bash in hindsight, but TEN and OAK have made many laughably bad moves that were obvious to seemingly everyone but them AT THE TIME. Nobody (or extremely few) thought Harrington, Rogers, Roy Wms (etc) picks were bad when they were made, in fact many of their picks the consensus was they were good. In fact I'm still PO'd friggin Colts let Shawn Rogers slide by in the 2d or 3d when they so desperately needed DL.

Click to expand...

My impression is that at least a few people thought Harrington was a mistake at the time. Many questioned why they wasted so many 1st round picks on WRs while failing to adress their obvious weak spot - the OL.Ten and Oak also hit "salary cap hell" a few years back.

BigRed said:

Kiddnets said:

Look at the past few years - Harrington top 3 pick - no longer with team - bustC Rogers - top 3 pick - no longer with team - bustM Williams - top 10 pick - inactive week 1WOW - that is just awful!

Click to expand...

Yes it is, but again it's easy to say in hindsight. Only that last pick was really questioned at the time, and even then it was considered a good value pick, just not a need pick (course with the problems/injuries brewing with Rogers even then, you could argue that as well). Sorry DET cannot compete with OAK or TEN here. The Millen bashing isn't exactly undeserved but it's also overblown and tired thx to a lot of people riding the bandwagon.And Butt Adams is easily the worst POS owner out there. I'd love nothing better than seeing HOU win a title in his lifetime while TEN wins none....course at this rate he'd have to live to about 110 probably...

Click to expand...

It was pretty well-known around East Lansing that Rogers had some drug issues so I'm not letting Millen off the hook on that one.And with Millen, it goes way beyond all of those blown draft picks. It's the Bill Schroeder and Az Hakim signings. It's the Morhningweg and Marriucci debacles. It's the Johnnie Morton ###### incident. It's trading a draft pick for Ty Detmer and then watching him throw 7 interceptions later that week. Ugh.

renesauz said:

BlueOnion said:

renesauz said:

The worst Cap management: Tennessee. They sold out much like the Niners did a few years earlier in their quest to win a super bowl....but they failed when the Niners succeeded. The salary cap crucified them afterwards, as it did to San Fran. San Fran is JUST NOW recovering from that mistake. To be sure, Tennessee has not helped it's case with sub-par draft results, but much like Detroit, it's unfair to judge a franchise too harshly on that basis alone. They did get a good coach (Even the most virulant Tennessee basher somehow likes Fisher.) It might take several more years, but they'll recover.

Click to expand...

The last time the 49ers won a Super Bowl (or been to a Super Bowl) was 1995. However, they are still in Salary Cap hell? Something doesn't compute and I suspect you are combining the work of DeBartolo\Policy and the Yorks.

Click to expand...

San Fran's Salary cap excuse is dead, as I had mentioned. The problem with both is that the salary cap problems were so massive that they were (San Fran) or are (Tennessee) starting out much like an expansion team would...with nothing worth a crap. DO you crucify an expansion team just three years into it's existance when it's early player choices don't pan out as expected? Look at Tenn roster now, and San Frans a couple of years ago, and you'll see the same type of players. Compare that to Houstons roster 3 years ago...San Fran has proved that it isn't really such a hot much to mortgage your ENTIRE foreseeable future to "win now". Tennessee followed that path and are paying dearly. Philly and NE found a better path.

Click to expand...

I could understand if it is only three years, but I cannot recall a year since 1993 that the 49ers have not been in salary cap hell. Heck, they are still purging salary (Julian Peterson) and they are consistently losing.

BlueOnion said:

This could really be a fun 8-franchise tournament bracket for voting:1) Detroit8) Buffalo5) NY Jets4) New Orleans3) Oakland6) San Francisco7) Houston2) Tennessee

Click to expand...

Not including Minnesota here MUST be an oversight.

MelvinTScupper said:

BlueOnion said:

This could really be a fun 8-franchise tournament bracket for voting:1) Detroit8) Buffalo5) NY Jets4) New Orleans3) Oakland6) San Francisco7) Houston2) Tennessee

Click to expand...

Not including Minnesota here MUST be an oversight.

Click to expand...

Minnesota's last three years they were 9-7, 8-8, and 9-7. And they're 1-0 this year. That's not "league worst" territory, though you could certainly argue that they should have done better.

CalBear said:

MelvinTScupper said:

BlueOnion said:

This could really be a fun 8-franchise tournament bracket for voting:1) Detroit8) Buffalo5) NY Jets4) New Orleans3) Oakland6) San Francisco7) Houston2) Tennessee

Click to expand...

Not including Minnesota here MUST be an oversight.

Click to expand...

Minnesota's last three years they were 9-7, 8-8, and 9-7. And they're 1-0 this year. That's not "league worst" territory, though you could certainly argue that they should have done better.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I get this. The Vikings trade Moss and improve by a game. They trade Culpepper and they may improve their record again this year. How is that get them mentioned in the "league worst"?

CalBear said:

MelvinTScupper said:

BlueOnion said:

This could really be a fun 8-franchise tournament bracket for voting:1) Detroit8) Buffalo5) NY Jets4) New Orleans3) Oakland6) San Francisco7) Houston2) Tennessee

Click to expand...

Not including Minnesota here MUST be an oversight.

Click to expand...

Minnesota's last three years they were 9-7, 8-8, and 9-7. And they're 1-0 this year. That's not "league worst" territory, though you could certainly argue that they should have done better.

Click to expand...

and in one of those years, their QB threw 37 TDs. They also traded Culpepper and Moss away for a bag of stale chips. They also missed the playoffs in one of those years by losing on a last second play to the OLD Arizona. They also extended Mike Tice despite his inability to lead a Cub Scout troop.HORRIBLE.

Hinezer said:

CalBear said:

MelvinTScupper said:

BlueOnion said:

This could really be a fun 8-franchise tournament bracket for voting:1) Detroit8) Buffalo5) NY Jets4) New Orleans3) Oakland6) San Francisco7) Houston2) Tennessee

Click to expand...

Not including Minnesota here MUST be an oversight.

Click to expand...

Minnesota's last three years they were 9-7, 8-8, and 9-7. And they're 1-0 this year. That's not "league worst" territory, though you could certainly argue that they should have done better.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I get this. The Vikings trade Moss and improve by a game. They trade Culpepper and they may improve their record again this year. How is that get them mentioned in the "league worst"?

Click to expand...

Please. Strong management would have gotten something for 2 Pro-Bowl players in their prime years. I'm not saying the TEAM is the worst, I'm saying the mgmt is.