Ross Tucker weighs in on Zorn

Hiring season is finally over and the NFL head coaching carousel has mercifully come to a stop. The fact that only four head coaching positions were open this year only makes it more likely that there will be at least double that many in January 2009.

Link: SI.com - Writers - Ross Tucker: Assessing each new coach from a player's perspective - Tuesday February 12, 2008 12:46PM (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/ross_tucker/02/11/new.coaches/)

I just pulled this out from the article.

If the Redskins do not get off to a quick start, things could get ugly in a hurry


When is that not the f'ing case?! This guy is really going out on a limb....

Who cares? I want to know what he thinks about Chris Meidt. Thanks for wasting our time Matty ;)

Seriously though, former player/current media man weighing the pros and cons. Not bad, not bad at all

Good article.

Tucker is a smart smart guy and generally has a really good flavor for what the players are thinking. Interesting that from his perspective it seems that the Zorn hire was the most supportable from the players perspective other than Sparano in Miami. After reading this I get the feeling that we may have made the best hire of the offseason. That doesn't mean it will work per se, just based on the other hires, Zorn certainly looks qualified, respected, and a good fit from a player perspective.

I like Tucker so far. He hasn't gotten the "my name's more important than the writing" attitude that seems to affect most of the newer sportswriters. He definitely seems to be putting in the work.

WOW, that was insightfull.

I hate it when people say things like "Dan Snyder is willing to do whatever it takes to win". Nonsense. He's not willing to hire a G.M. (a real one, not a Smithers), he's not willing to excuse himself from decisions, he's not willing to detox our cap process, he's not willing to eschew easy publicity. I could go on like this for days.

The other line we hear is that Dan Snyder really "wants to win". What the hell does that mean? Are there some owners that "want to lose". Because that would be a story: "Owner Finally Admits He Never Wanted To Win!" Billy Bidwell "wants to win". Let's stop equating this abstract desire for success with genuine competence, because they are entirely unrelated.

I hate it when people say things like "Dan Snyder is willing to do whatever it takes to win". Nonsense. He's not willing to hire a G.M. (a real one, not a Smithers), he's not willing to excuse himself from decisions, he's not willing to detox our cap process, he's not willing to eschew easy publicity. I could go on like this for days.

The other line we hear is that Dan Snyder really "wants to win". What the hell does that mean? Are there some owners that "want to lose". Because that would be a story: "Owner Finally Admits He Never Wanted To Win!" Billy Bidwell "wants to win". Let's stop equating this abstract desire for success with genuine competence, because they are entirely unrelated.

I think most mean he'll do whatever HE THINKS he needs to do to win. And in the end there are some owners that winning is not their main priority. Bidwell for example. It is simply a business for them. I am pretty sure DS wnats to win more than he wants to make money. But he doesn't have to choose...he could do both and he tries.

I hate it when people say things like "Dan Snyder is willing to do whatever it takes to win". Nonsense. He's not willing to hire a G.M. (a real one, not a Smithers), he's not willing to excuse himself from decisions, he's not willing to detox our cap process, he's not willing to eschew easy publicity. I could go on like this for days.

So he's not doing what you want him to do basically, and that makes it nonsense?

The other line we hear is that Dan Snyder really "wants to win". What the hell does that mean? Are there some owners that "want to lose". Because that would be a story: "Owner Finally Admits He Never Wanted To Win!" Billy Bidwell "wants to win". Let's stop equating this abstract desire for success with genuine competence, because they are entirely unrelated.

At the very least Snyder puts his money where is mouth is. You can't say that about every owner. I do think there are owners in this league that aren't 100% commited to winning and are content with just coasting.

I'm just saying people should be more precise. Clearly, there are things Snyder is not willing to do in order to win. so, don't say that he is willing to do "anything". And when you say he "wants to win", think about how empty that statement really is. It's meaningless. It's boilerplate that sports media figures fall back on in a pinch. If you mean Snyder spends money freely, say that. If you mean he works tirelessly, say that. Spare us the cliches, though.