More dislike of Snyder: John Kent Cooke

[freddyg12]

This article was already posted on the links - Burgundy & Old Pain - but after reading it I felt such a sense of bitterness that I had to vent w/a new thread. I know that many said John Kent Cooke wasn't cut out to own the team, but it's clear from the article that he not only has a passion for the team, but also a great sense of appreciation for the fans & the team's reputation and standing in DC. He cares about the organization's tradition & how it treats people, both things that Snyder shows little regard for.

Profile of John Kent Cooke, son of former Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke - washingtonpost.com

[CRedskinsRule]

One of the few football related people I have little respect for is John Cooke. At the time of the sale, he came off as disinterested in the Skins, and as the opening line of the article says wanted to be sailing or doing anything but running a team his father had made into a proud and story-filled franchise. I could care less about his moanings, or some media spin from the post to hammer snyder from yet another angle. I hope john enjoys his boat trips but he has no credible reason for being attached to the Skins in any way shape or form.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

One of the few football related people I have little respect for is John Cooke. At the time of the sale, he came off as disinterested in the Skins, and as the opening line of the article says wanted to be sailing or doing anything but running a team his father had made into a proud and story-filled franchise. I could care less about his moanings, or some media spin from the post to hammer snyder from yet another angle. I hope john enjoys his boat trips but he has no credible reason for being attached to the Skins in any way shape or form.

I realize the story is largely a sour grapes tale by JKC, but at the same time, if what he said is true about how the danny treated him, that speaks volumes. I certainly won't argue whether JKC was ready to be an owner.

Think about the paradox; lifelong fan (danny) wants to buy the team that gave him memories since childhood and a tradition of winning. Yet as a business man the lifelong fan doesn't seem to care about the actual people and methods that established the tradition.

So in the end, the lifelong fan buys the team, fair and square, yet guts virtually all remnants of the product that gave him all the great memories. He changes the business model, the image, the marketing, etc. and today we have an organization that is almost entirely based on his business decisions, and virtually void of the tradition that made him want the team in the first place.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

One of the few football related people I have little respect for is John Cooke. At the time of the sale, he came off as disinterested in the Skins, and as the opening line of the article says wanted to be sailing or doing anything but running a team his father had made into a proud and story-filled franchise. I could care less about his moanings, or some media spin from the post to hammer snyder from yet another angle. I hope john enjoys his boat trips but he has no credible reason for being attached to the Skins in any way shape or form.

My thoughts exactly. Why come out now? F him and Snyder

[cpayne5]

Jack Kent Cooke was a smart man. If he had wanted his son to have the team when he died, he would have made that possible. But, he knew his son too well to let that happen.

Originally Posted by WaPo Article

Sonny Jurgensen, the Hall of Fame quarterback who now broadcasts the team's games, said: "John is a good man. But if his dad thought he was capable of running the franchise, I think he would have given it to him. They could have taken care of the charitable trust when John sold the team."

[irish]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

Jack Kent Cooke was a smart man. If he had wanted his son to have the team when he died, he would have made that possible. But, he knew his son too well to let that happen.

This is a very interesting article but IMO, Sonny's quote says it all.

[redsk1]

Jack Kent Cooke was a demanding guy. Not meddlesome, but demanding. Good article.

I remember reading some articles at the time that John Kent Cooke might not be the best guy for the job. Who knows though? The meeting b/n DS and JKC doesn't really make DS look bad. He wanted to be the majority owner just like JKC. Of course, they hated each other b/c they were battling for ownership of the team.

[MTK]

I'm not going to defend Snyder at all, he is what he is. But would we be that much better off with John as owner? I'm really not sure. The Redskins as we knew them died with Jack.

I feel for what happened to John, but c'mon, his discontent for Snyder seems to be a cover up for the real issue, the fact his Dad passed him over and made it difficult for him to retain the team.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm not going to defend Snyder at all, he is what he is. But would we be that much better off with John as owner? I'm really not sure. The Redskins as we knew them died with Jack.

I feel for what happened to John, but c'mon, his discontent for Snyder seems to be a cover up for the real issue, the fact his Dad passed him over and made it difficult for him to retain the team.

Um yes we'd be MUCH better off. We'd have a qualified football man running the show, who doesn't undermine the coach and bring in a Bingo caller to run the offense, there never would've been a hiring of a college coach who didn't want to practice when it's cold and raining, there never would've been a hiring of a coach with no OC or HC experience. I could go on and on. Say what you want about Norv but he knows how to run a professional NFL offense. Leader of men? Hell no. But I'd much rather have him as my coach than Zorn.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Um yes we'd be MUCH better off. We'd have a qualified football man running the show, who doesn't undermine the coach and bring in a Bingo caller to run the offense, there never would've been a hiring of a college coach who didn't want to practice when it's cold and raining, there never would've been a hiring of a coach with no OC or HC experience. I could go on and on. Say what you want about Norv but he knows how to run a professional NFL offense. Leader of men? Hell no. But I'd much rather have him as my coach than Zorn.

You're calling John Kent Cooke a qualified football man? Based on what, being the son of the owner?

Norv is a joke as a head coach. He's no better than Zorn. Chargers won the division last year...at 8-8. He's 2-3 this year.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You're calling John Kent Cooke a qualified football man? Based on what, being the son of the owner?

Norv is a joke as a head coach. He's no better than Zorn. Chargers won the division last year...at 8-8. He's 2-3 this year.

No John Cooke was not a qualified football man but neither was his father. That's why Casserly and Bobby B. were here. To handle the football side of things. The only owners that are somewhat football men are Jones, Davis and maybe Richardson.

Let me ask you this...and again I don't think much of Norv as a HC. But what is the problem w/ San Diego? It's their defense. The defense has just been terrible, partly cause of injuries...to Merriman and J. Williams, but some of it is performace based. That's not his side of the ball is it? It's his responsibility cause he's the head man and he'll take the fall for it, but as someone who can run an NFL offense I'll take Norv over almost anyone in the NFL.....and especially Jim Zorn or Steve Spuirrer

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

No John Cooke was not a qualified football man but neither was his father. That's why Casserly and Bobby B. were here. To handle the football side of things. The only owners that are somewhat football men are Jones, Davis and maybe Richardson.

Let me ask you this...and again I don't think much of Norv as a HC. But what is the problem w/ San Diego? It's their defense. The defense has just been terrible, partly cause of injuries...to Merriman and J. Williams, but some of it is performace based. That's not his side of the ball is it? It's his responsibility cause he's the head man and he'll take the fall for it, but as someone who can run an NFL offense I'll take Norv over almost anyone in the NFL.....and especially Jim Zorn or Steve Spuirrer

Fair points on the first paragraph.

As for the second, Norv has made some seriously questionable play calls in recent weeks. Draw to LT on 4th and 2 at the end of the game against the Ravens. Almost the same situation near the goal line the other day, but to Sproles instead.

I think he's a bit overrated as an offensive coordinator. But anyhow, this was mainly about Norv as a head coach in which case I think he's one of the worst.

[skinsguy]

I honestly don't know much of the story behind John Kent Cooke. To be honest, I never even thought about Jack's children until after Jack had passed away. I guess after ten years of putting up with Daniel Snyder, it's tough to compare that to the two years that John owned the team. I don't doubt one bit what John was saying in the article was true. For one thing, it is about patience and continuity. And at the time when Snyder bought the team, I really felt that Norv was finally starting to turn the team around. Also, it is true that Snyder has turned the Redskins into nothing more than a cash cow for him first and a football team second. I'm not saying that things would have been better under John, but I don't see how things could have been worse. But, it's probably a moot point. If Snyder ever does decide to sell the Redskins, I doubt he would make it easy for John Kent Cooke to purchase it. Cooke probably wouldn't have the money in the first place.

[MrSpectre]

In comparison to Danny, John Kent Cooke was a model of effective ownership.

On the other hand, this would be true of Beulah the Witch.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by MrSpectre

In comparison to Danny, John Kent Cooke was a model of effective ownership.

On the other hand, this would be true of Beulah the Witch.

Well when John was owner his record was 14/17 sticking with a coach with a 49/59 record. DS record is 78/88 which while not great is better then John's record of 14/17. Its real easy when a team fails to come out and point out the problems so it sounds like sour grapes to me. I also don't see how people can say that DS is more interested in making money then having a great football team with all the money he has spent on this team. I think the correct way to look at the past 10 yrs is that Snyder has done a better job at marketing then building a winning team. DS has been willing to spend what ever it takes to try and build a team he has just not gone about it in the correct ways. Thats a big difference then just not carring about the product on the field.