ESPN the Magazine ranks the best & worst franchises in america. Redskins ranked 121 out of 122.

[mlmdub130]

i honestly don't know enough about other sports franchises to know exactly where we should fall, but like sportscrumudgen said i do beleive we are in the bottom 25%. especially when you look at the past 10 years. all we have done is spend with no results, and not until recently have they made any attempts to make watching a game at fedex enjoyable. while i don't see how we are the second worse franchise in sports i could easily see us in the bottom 10 or 15.


on a side note it does get rather annoying when people bring up the championships that were won nearly two decades ago. i understand that we have won them and it's a great accomplishment, but is there even one person who was a part of those teams still with the redskins in any capacity? i can see where you can say we have more than other teams, but to keep going back to them as an example of how great this franchise once was just shows how far it has fallen. i would much rather claim a nfc east title that we have won in the past year or two rather than go back to the early 90's to claim an old superbowl victory.

[MTK]

Nothing wrong with bringing up past championships, they will always be on the team's resume and are the ultimate goal for every team. Are we supposed to pretend they didn't happen?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mlmdub130]

not saying that at all, maybe it's cause i'm under 30 and was here for the superbowls but wasn't really if you know what i mean. god forbid we are still in the same place in another 5 or 10 years, do we still do the superbowl scoreboard then too. i'm not trying to make less of the superbowls in any way, but it seems like when they are brought up all is does is make the redskins of now look that much worse. at least thats the way i see it, and i feel like the team is starting to see it the same way by not bringing the trophies to press conferences anymore. but in no way am i trying to take anything way from those superbowl victories and championships.

[NLC1054]

All things considered, we did make the playoffs in 2005 and 2007. We have had some moderate success; it's just the last two seasons have been really hard. 2009 and 2010 were tough, but...come on.

The Jacksonville Jaguars can't fill their stadium (and they tend to win more). The Panthers have done jacksquat and went 2-14. That's to say nothing of the dozens of other sports teams out there that do worse financially and do far for their community.

I mean yeah, Snyder hasn't been the best owner in the world by any means. But the Redskins still do a lot of charity events, players visit local area schools, they feed the needy during Thanksgiving.

The players and the fans do have a mostly good repoire; the fans love the players (except for the lazy and overpaid ones) and the players love the fans (except the ones that boot hem when they make a mistake).

Our head coach may have had a spat with two big time players (one who he traded for, which was his fault, one who he inherited, which wasn't), but he also managed to bring in a lot of young guys and fresh talent. He turned one move in the first round of the draft in 12 players, and seven players have a pretty realistic chance of making the team. The one offseason signing he made, O.J Atogwe, was pretty good; it was fair deal, Atogwe is still relatively young, and beneficial for both sides, after years of over spending. And despite our overall cruddiness, the Redskins still sell a crap ton of merchandise and tickets, even though feelings on Fed Ex are mixed.

By every metric, there is no way we are 121 out of 122 amongst sports franchises. Bottom half? Sure. I can deal with that.

But worse than the Panthers? Worse than the Bengals? The Raiders have one good season and they're better all the sudden? Worse than the Clippers, worse than some MLB and NHL teams? No fuggin' way.

That's bull, and everyone that feels like that way deserves be told it's bull, and I'm not saying that because I'm a homer.

[MTK]

Bringing up the fact the team has 3 SB wins as part of it's overall history makes us look bad? Guess I'm just not getting what you're saying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SmootSmack]

Well it's just that how often can you say we won 3 Super Bowls within 10 years to talk about the state of the team today when the last SB was nearly 20 years ago.

I didn't have anything to do with this survey, but I wonder (and I guess I could just ask) how much of it was related to expectation vs. result. Meaning ownership has invested so much in the team for little return, while the Jaguars (for example) have put not so much into the team so what they've gotten out of it is somewhat comparable to what they're putting in. I'm probably not explaining it exactly right.

[MTK]

I guess I just don't get the notion that recent failure means you can't acknowledge past success. They both go hand in hand when talking about the overall history of the team. I know I'm getting a little away from the original topic. As far as the state of the team right now I agree it's bad, but 2nd to last is still too low.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

There are at least a dozen or so pro franchises in much worse shape than the Skins. Having them next to last is ridiculous.

I blame George Bodenheimer aka Smootsmack.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I guess I just don't get the notion that recent failure means you can't acknowledge past success. They both go hand in hand when talking about the overall history of the team. I know I'm getting a little away from the original topic. As far as the state of the team right now I agree it's bad, but 2nd to last is still too low.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, except I don't think this survey was about the history of the team.

And yes I agree that 2nd to last is too low

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I guess I just don't get the notion that recent failure means you can't acknowledge past success. They both go hand in hand when talking about the overall history of the team. I know I'm getting a little away from the original topic. As far as the state of the team right now I agree it's bad, but 2nd to last is still too low.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

not saying don't acknowledge it, just saying that when polls or things come out now about the current team everyone likes to say well we won back in the day, me included, i just feel it's getting old. we need something relevant to counter with hopefully it's coming soon.

and 2nd to last is a joke your completely right there, i can see being in the bottom 15 or so, but 2nd to last is ruhtarded, especially given the recent changes made. we may have only won 6 games last year, but i'll take 6 over 4 any day of the week. espescially with all new coaches and a new qb, and all the other crap we had going on. then you add in our draft, which i think could be the best in a long while, i just don't get it. if this poll was done after zorn's last year i can see bottom 5 maybe but still not 2nd to last

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by saden1

If I use "bang for the buck, players, fan relations, affordability, stadium experience, ownership, title track, and coaching" to measure the Redskins I would be hard pressed not to place them at the bottom of the pile.

Don't fool yourselves die-hard Skins fans...they stink in pretty much all those areas.

I think your fooling yourself. I'll agree with you on coaching and over spending on players, but I'd bet the Skins probably still have a list of people who want season tickets and a lot of the regular season ticket holders continue to buy their seats. But you can't argue that even though you think they are horribly run they are one of the teams to bring in the most money in the NFL.

To me if the team is doing well financially and still can fill their seats even with the piss poor management and piss poor coaching then they should clearly close to the top of the list.

Worse teams.....

Jaguars- not filling their stadium, losing money, wanting to move all screams bad franchise.

Bills- losing money, wanting to play in Canada of all places screams of a worse franchise then the Skins.

Raiders- moving every 5-10 yrs, firing HC's every other year, players leaving, stadium not filled screams of bad franchise.

There probably is other NFL teams I could list before even getting to other sports so whoever came up with the list is an idiot.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I think your fooling yourself. I'll agree with you on coaching and over spending on players, but I'd bet the Skins probably still have a list of people who want season tickets and a lot of the regular season ticket holders continue to buy their seats. But you can't argue that even though you think they are horribly run they are one of the teams to bring in the most money in the NFL.

To me if the team is doing well financially and still can fill their seats even with the piss poor management and piss poor coaching then they should clearly close to the top of the list.

Worse teams.....

Jaguars- not filling their stadium, losing money, wanting to move all screams bad franchise.

Bills- losing money, wanting to play in Canada of all places screams of a worse franchise then the Skins.

Raiders- moving every 5-10 yrs, firing HC's every other year, players leaving, stadium not filled screams of bad franchise.

There probably is other NFL teams I could list before even getting to other sports so whoever came up with the list is an idiot.

You confuse "financially successful franchise" with "good franchise". This poll looked at "good" and "bad" from a fan perspective and not from a CPA's perspective.

In addition, if you look at the Redskins, they NEVER fill FedEx Field and NEVER have; they do NOT have a waiting list for season tix; they have had 7 different head coaches in the 11 years that Danny Boy has owned the team.

With regard to Buffalo and your assertion of its lack of success, can you ever recall a home game in Buffalo where the Steelers' fans outnumbered the Bills' fans? Even in December when the Bills were mathematically eliminated? Happened here... on MNF no less.

Players leave the Raiders because Al Davis no longer recognizes who he needs to pay to stay there. Players do not leave the Redskins because they are already overpaid here and they know they will take pay cuts to go elsewhere.

The Redskins should NOT be the 121st team on this list; they are better than that. But pretending that this is and has been a well-run franchise from a football perspective or from a fan perspective for the last 15 years is living in a delusion.

[GTripp0012]

Interesting that we're comparing the Redskins to the dregs of the AFC, the stronger football conference, with all the dynasty teams (Colts, Patriots, Chargers, Ravens, Steelers) that are shaping the perception of the have-nots in the AFC. Whereas in the NFC, a different team has represented the conference in the super bowl every year between 2001 and 2010. And with their resources, I think a super bowl appearance was a bare minimum expectation. And while I feel the Redskins were very close in 2005, the NFC "have nots" include the Cowboys, Vikings, Lions, 49ers, Falcons, and Redskins, the only six remaining teams who didn't win the conference at some point in the last ten years. And the Lions and Falcons appear set for the next decade.

Excluding the Cowboys as a classic underachiever who does actually compete a lot (not totally unlike the Redskins), it will be interesting to see whether the Vikings, 49ers, or Redskins drag themseleves up to prominence first. I think the expectation is that the Redskins will be the last of these three teams to make a super bowl in the next decade. If that's right, then it's because despite all the resources, the Skins are one of the worst organizations in sports. If it's wrong, well, there's not a whole lot preventing the Redskins from making the super bowl in 2012, 2013, or 2014. Except themselves.

[SBXVII]

^ out of all the teams mentioned I think the Lions and Falcons are best guesses for success. I think the Skins are close since they had beaten the play off teams in regular season but the Vikes are on the decline or so I think, the 49ers are lost and are starting with a new HC, I feel the Cowboys are on the decline also but I could be wrong on that aspect.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

The Redskins should NOT be the 121st team on this list; they are better than that. But pretending that this is and has been a well-run franchise from a football perspective or from a fan perspective for the last 15 years is living in a delusion.

I don't normally agree with sportscurmudgeon, but when I do...it's now #themostinterestingmodintheworld