Snyder Interview

http://washingtontimes.com/sports/20050330-010800-4653r.htm

Crazy good interview

I mean, seriously, what did the interviewer leave out? He asked every single good question imaginable!

I must say, I was not a Dan Fan, but I look at him differently now!

I agree, great questions, very good interview

An interesting interview in many ways. It seems to me that Snyder takes several not so veiled jabs at the "media" - aka The Post. I had always understood that - from the quality of the stories, the lack of sources other than players, and a news blurb somewhere (ESPN ??) that the Skins only dealt with the Post - the Washington Times did not have the media access that the Post did. I cannot remember the last time there was any report from Snyder or anyone from the FO in the Times - it always seemed like they got their news second hand. I wonder if their is some other dynamic working here - Post not playing Snyder's lap dog and the Snyder going to the Times to tell "his side".

All in all - an interesting interview. It did seem to ignore the accusations that Snyder undercut some of his coaches by dealing directly with players he liked and Snyder sort of glossed over the Schottenheimer firing. Other than that, however, very interesting and informative.

it was a good interview. I like that they posted the interview as is and didn't protray Dan in one way or another. People never get the full story in the sports industry, They make heroes, and villians to sale off the shelves.

Perhaps the WT will become the Skins primary media outlet? The whole Nunyo/Coles story debacle had to have put a serious dent in Skins/WP relationship.

Perhaps the WT will become the Skins primary media outlet? The whole Nunyo/Coles story debacle had to have put a serious dent in Skins/WP relationship.

I think Snyder may have really soured on the Post - maybe that's why he gave the interview to the Times and revoked the Posts general admission seats.

I think Snyder may have really soured on the Post - maybe that's why he gave the interview to the Times and revoked the Posts general admission seats.
It seems that a lot of the misinformation in the media surrounding the Skins eminates from the Post. Almost every story that ends up being flat-out wrong or at least fundamentally wrong always seems to cite the Post. This didn't happen as much when Maske was the Skins beat reporter for WP. Now this apparent moron Demasio is the beat guy and it seems he is one of those types of journalists who thinks its his job to stir up trouble. There have been several stories of note. The whole Coles situation and the bogus 'Ryan Clark is cut story' come to mind. Snyder leads me to believe that Moss wasn't offered a new contract until recently yet the Post reported that the deal was done weeks ago. I wonder who Demasio's sources are. Apparently they aren't close enough to the decision makers to be right much. There's a big difference between "Well I have heard that Ryan Clark is probably going to get cut" to him actually being cut.

Extremeskins has been keeping track of some of Nunyo's inaccuracies, and some of them are quite disturbing for someone who is supposed to be the beat reporter for a major newspaper.

Extremeskins has been keeping track of some of Nunyo's inaccuracies, and some of them are quite disturbing for someone who is supposed to be the beat reporter for a major newspaper.
Doesn't he come off like a typical reporter with no regard for truth but rather values the sensational value of a story at the expense of accuracy? I mean Maske NEVER had these problems. Or at least he didn't have them to this degree.

Let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. The reason we read these guys is because they TRY to give us the scoop before it happens. They do the same thing we do only they get paid for it.