Skins Win By Losing

Anything that means less Vinny is good

View Comments ()
|
Email
|
Print

    NEWSLETTERS

    Getty Images
    Hasta la vista, baby.

    Is it OK for you to root for your team to lose?

    More specifically, should Skins fans be rooting for the burgundy and gold to tank?

    Thom Loverro makes the case that the best thing for this franchise would be to completely lay down in their remaining games -- something many others have argued before.

    The basic argument is this: If the team does an absolute El Stinko down the stretch -- something where there's no hope of a short-term fix -- it will finally be enough of an impetus for Dan Snyder to show Vinny "Mumbles" Cerrato the door.

    You can't fire the owner, but you sure as heck can fire his incompetent stooge sidekick. And with Vinny gone, the Skins can begin the long slog of building.  (There's no re- here; the Skins have never built in the first place.)

    Says Thom:

    "When you put your business - especially a business that operates in the public eye like a sports team - in the hands of someone who doesn't just fail at his job but inspires repulsion and ridicule both inside and outside of the industry, it results in damage that needs time to repair. You basically have to prove to your customers and your colleagues that you can operate a professional sports franchise again." 

    Losing means dumping Vinny, which means -- as Thom argues the Nats have done -- bringing in actual adults to run these franchises smartly and efficiently.

    The Skins are obviously ruthless and sharp when it comes to the business/marketing side of football.  Just imagine if they had the same focus and resolve when it comes to the football side.

    Sure, the losses will hurt a bunch in the short term, but if it means it brings us five years closer to a Super Bowl, won't it be worth it?