Lets overpay for Jared Allen

You don't see the point in looking at the total number of wins and losses as a measure of success or failure? Interesting.

Upon what then, do you base the success of an owner who by all accounts has an important role in determining the team's overall makeup?

If you agree that the numbers "aren't great" but disagree with the manner by which I arrived at those numbers, then we differ by degree, but not in principle.

But you're not even looking at the total numbers because you're pulling numbers out.

Besides you know that wins and losses isn't all it comes down to.

Team A:

Year 1: 12-4
Year 2: 8-8
Year 3: 4-12

Team B:

Year 1: 4-12
Year 2: 8-8
Year 3: 12-4

So who's the better owner?

Tell you what, SS -- I'll concede 2001 and give you that 8-8 record. But I stand by my omission of 1999 because Snyder didn't take over until just before training camp began and the team was already assembled by Charley Casserly. So that brings us to ... what, 58-70?

And yes, winning and losing is basically what it comes down to. As Parcells used to say, you are what your record says you are. But since your not looking at wins and losses, I guess we're just not going to see eye to eye on this one are we?

Tell you what, SS -- I'll concede 2001 and give you that 8-8 record. But I stand by my omission of 1999 because Snyder didn't take over until just before training camp began and the team was already assembled by Charley Casserly. So that brings us to ... what, 58-70?

And yes, winning and losing is basically what it comes down to. As Parcells used to say, you are what your record says you are. But since your not looking at wins and losses, I guess we're just not going to see eye to eye on this one are we?

Well answer my question about Team A vs. Team B

Interesting couple of posts on this page. I would kind of agree with not counting '99 since Danny had basically zero say in the personnel that season. But you have to count 2001 w/ Marty. It was Snyder's 3rd season as owner. It counts, regardless of who was pulling the strings.

On a side note, are there any FA WR's who have experience in the WCO?

Interesting couple of posts on this page. I would kind of agree with not counting '99 since Danny had basically zero say in the personnel that season. But you have to count 2001 w/ Marty. It was Snyder's 3rd season as owner. It counts, regardless of who was pulling the strings.

On a side note, are there any FA WR's who have experience in the WCO?

DJ Hackett. Maybe Javon Walker

How are those numbers wrong?

1999 -- Casserly's team, I don't count that
2000 -- 8-8
2001 -- Marty's year, not counting that either
2002 -- 7-9
2003 -- 5-11
2004 -- 6-10
2005 -- 10-6
2006 -- 5-11
2007 -- 9-7

Grand total = 50-62

Wow! Talking about skewed. You're just going to pick and choose which seasons to count and which to not? By your logic, we should also not count 2004 - 2007. After all to suggest that Gibbs didn't have at least the majority of the say over personnel is just not paying attention.

DJ Hackett. Maybe Javon Walker

Walker is oft injured and a complainer. Hackett is only 26 but played in just 6 games last year. In those 6 games he did manage about 400 yards and 3 TDs. He could be had for cheap and knows Zorn's stuff well. Walker will cost a lot more, gets hurt a lot, and turns 30 this year.

Well answer my question about Team A vs. Team B

OK, I'll play along. A 24-24 record over three years says mediocrity. On a year-by-year basis, some good seasons, some bad ones.

A 50-62 record, (or 58-70, or 68-76, if you prefer) says that you're in the range of .446 to .472, depending on how you look at it. Either way, as you said earlier the numbers "aren't great".

Wow! Talking about skewed. You're just going to pick and choose which seasons to count and which to not? By your logic, we should also not count 2004 - 2007. After all to suggest that Gibbs didn't have at least the majority of the say over personnel is just not paying attention.

*Sigh.*

If you take away the years of 2004-07, the record is 28-36 (or 38-42 if you count Casserly's '99 team.) Any way you slice it, it's a less than enthusing track record.

But go ahead, go on and tell us how Lil' Danny walks on water and gives presents to starving children every Christmas while off duty as the best owner in the history of sports.

OK, I'll play along. A 24-24 record over three years says mediocrity. On a year-by-year basis, some good seasons, some bad ones.

A 50-62 record, (or 58-70, or 68-76, if you prefer) says that you're in the range of .446 to .472, depending on how you look at it. Either way, as you said earlier the numbers "aren't great".

Really? So if one team were to show improvement over the course of an owner's first three years while the other were to show a gradual decline your argument is "numbers are numbers."

Fascinating