The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

[Califan007 The Constipated]

4 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Edit: And please miss me with the "...but this is the best 3 year stretch the team has had in decades".  I don't see middling as an accomplishment.  In fact, only here is that an accomplishment.  Now if middling turns to leading, then we are talking.

2

 

We weren't talking about fans being happy with "accomplishments", though. I responded to the idea that Bruce has Snyder "fooled". I said the problem with that is, as far as records go anyway, the last three seasons are the best three seasons Snyder has experienced as an owner. It would be hard for Snyder to tell himself the team sucks under Bruce Allen when pretty much nobody has done better before him lol...it also makes Allen's firing of Shanahan and hiring of Gruden look like the right move. And if the initial reports were indeed true and Allen was on board for starting Cousins in 2015, that's just another thing Snyder can look to Allen that helped the franchise improve (the Skins had double-digit losses 5 out of 6 seasons before that). So, yeah...if the Redskins do well with Alex Smith while saving $$ by not signing Cousins, then that's yet another decision Allen will get credit for. If that happens, like i said, that dude is staying put.

 

 

1 hour ago, Wildbunny said:

I put this stretch more on Jay than anything else.

Considering what he've been given you can tell the guy is doing a good job.

1

 

58 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I agree that it's definitely more about Jay and to a certain extent Kirk's play.  We've had one thing going for us since Jay got here and that's the ability to move the ball on offense.  It's primarily responsible for this decent stretch.

 

 

Yeah, but who hired Jay? lol...(a move that quite a few Skins fans here derided as nothing more than the "Tampa Connection" at the time).

[Skinsinparadise]

I guess we shall see, the beat guys have suggested the vibe they get is Bruce Allen is out if they don't make the playoffs.  I recall one report that the minority owners aren't fans of Bruce these days.

 

The Kirk-Alex dynamic should be interesting.   Some of the beat guys have suggested because Bruce's thing wasn't just to lock in Alex but also his negotiation tactics ultimately led to Kirk leaving -- that if Redskins fans are watching Kirk play in the playoffs and the Redskins are at home for the 4th year in a row -- that dichotomy adds to the idea that making the playoffs matters to the bottom line as opposed hey at least we don't stink.

 

Having said that, like Cooley likes to say no one really knows since that's about what Dan actually thinks and does and he's a mystery to us all.  But I guess as to whomever talks from within the FO to the beat guys, they don't leave the impression that Dan is thrilled with this mediocrity streak but instead his patience is running out.

 

In the scheme of things, no way to know, it just has to play out.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

4 hours ago, Peregrine said:

The problem with THAT is that 2 of those 3 seasons, the only winning seasons, were also the only years where Bruce Allen WASNT GM.

 

 

Ok, and who hired that GM? lol...Again, guys, whatever good you can point out about the Redskins over the last several years, Allen's gonna get credit for it just like he gets the blame for all the bad over that same timespan.

 

Bruce Allen, 11 years as a football GM and:

 

1. 2 seasons over 9-7.

2. A record of 73-103

3. A most recent 3 season record of 14-34.  

 

Unlike a fine wine, hes getting worse with age. 

 

You realize he's not the GM now, right? lol...I mean, if you're only going by official titles, that is. If you count 2017, then you should count any season in which Allen was a top executive in the front office and had some level of say-so over personnel.

 

Because Allen was as much a "GM" during Shanahan's time here as he was during his time with the Raiders--whose records are missing from your list.

 

But this is all moot...you'll come back and say the Raiders' success and SB appearance and Allen winning NFL Executive of the Year was really just due to Al Davis, i'll say Davis was senile at that point and wasn't able to accomplish these same things without Allen and it's disingenuous to disregard his time there as irrelevant, you'll point out that Allen was behind the McNabb and RG3 trades and how Shanahan never had that stretch of crappy seasons before working with Allen, I'll point out that the team has improved noticeably after Shanahan left and Bruce has been completely in charge, you'll chalk it up to Scot again, I'll point out that Allen hired Scot again and point out Scot's list of blunders while here, you'll say it's cloudy outside and I'll say it's sunny, dogs and cats will be living together...it'll be a mess.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

45 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I guess we shall see, the beat guys have suggested the vibe they get is Bruce Allen is out if they don't make the playoffs.  I recall one report that the minority owners aren't fans of Bruce these days.

 

The Kirk-Alex dynamic should be interesting.   Some of the beat guys have suggested because Bruce's thing wasn't just to lock in Alex but also his negotiation tactics ultimately led to Kirk leaving -- that if Redskins fans are watching Kirk play in the playoffs and the Redskins are at home for the 4th year in a row -- that dichotomy adds to the idea that making the playoffs matters to the bottom line as opposed hey at least we don't stink.

 

Having said that, like Cooley likes to say no one really knows since that's about what Dan actually thinks and does and he's a mystery to us all.  But I guess as to whomever talks from within the FO to the beat guys, they don't leave the impression that Dan is thrilled with this mediocrity streak but instead his patience is running out.

 

In the scheme of things, no way to know, it just has to play out.  

 

More or less, yeah...that's why I said "if" Alex Smith works out and the Skins do well, Allen is staying put for the foreseeable future. I conveniently left out what would happen if Smith bombs and things do NOT go well with the Skins lol...the worst optics in the world would be blowing the opportunity to keep Cousins and immediately seeing him knocking on the door of the SB while Smith stumbles all over the field while leading the Skins to yet another double-digit loss season. 

[Wildbunny]

41 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

Ok, and who hired that GM? lol...Again, guys, whatever good you can point out about the Redskins over the last several years, Allen's gonna get credit for it just like he gets the blame for all the bad over that same timespan.

 

Sure he does get credit for both Jay and Scott when he hired them. That's a point I rose when there was report of him being jealous of Scott. That was stupid in my opinion because he was the guy that hired him.

 

He's trying to look smart on every aspects of the team, instead on concentrating on what he's good at. Obviously, he's good at hiring the right behind the scene guys, and he's good at managing the cap. He still doesn't know when to open the wallet when he have to, to build a competent roster. And he's got to much of an ego to just admits to remain in the backseat and appreciate what he's constructing. He wants to be in the light of neons when his place is behind the curtain.

 

So he's filling his HC with JAG all over the rosters and asks him to win SB. Then he can say he's smart for hiring the HC and still deflect the blame on the HC if he fails.

[Skinsinparadise]

51 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

More or less, yeah...that's why I said "if" Alex Smith works out and the Skins do well, Allen is staying put for the foreseeable future. I conveniently left out what would happen if Smith bombs and things do NOT go well with the Skins lol...the worst optics in the world would be blowing the opportunity to keep Cousins and immediately seeing him knocking on the door of the SB while Smith stumbles all over the field while leading the Skins to yet another double-digit loss season. 

 

I don't get the vibe from the beat guys that it needs to be that dramatic though to lead to Bruce's exit.  Addressing your point about hey the last three years have been the best run in Dan's career...the vibe from the beat guys if they are right (and they might not be) is Dan isn't celebrating they hey we aren't that bad as that much of an accomplishment.  So Alex can have a good year but if the team goes 8-8 and misses the playoffs -- Bruce might be a goner.  His reputation isn't purely on the Qb but the whole roster.

 

Personally I am not rooting for that though because I think Jay heads out with Bruce in that case. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

 

We weren't talking about fans being happy with "accomplishments", though. I responded to the idea that Bruce has Snyder "fooled".

My statement wasn’t directed at anyone in particular.  My apologies if it seemed that way.  It was more in general to what I’ve seen here quite a few times of late in numerous threads. 

 

Folks tend to get the impression that because we’re hard on Bruce that we believe he’s literally the worst GM in all of football.  That’s not the case at all.  In fact, his middling approach is what frustrates me the most.  He’s not the worst, but far from the best.  I’d rather he go big or go home, literally. 

[TSO]

37 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Ok, and who hired that GM? lol...Again, guys, whatever good you can point out about the Redskins over the last several years, Allen's gonna get credit for it just like he gets the blame for all the bad over that same timespan.

 

Yes, obviously you’re right, but then who fired him and didn’t replace him? We are talking about the current situation we’re in. I know you said he’ll get the blame “over that same time span”, but I think that kind of downplays where we’re at currently, as if it’s all one state of being. Maybe I’m reading you wrong, though. 

 

If Scot was still here or we hired a legitimate replacement for him with the same title/role, no one here is complaining. Or, at least, it wouldn’t be the ones you’re responding to right now. I can tell you that for sure. So the context of our situation NOW is not the same as it was when those good hires were made. 

 

Bruce did good hiring a GM and structuring the organization in the most provenly effective way by giving him final say on personnel (supposedly), then he failed miserably by firing him in an ugly manner and not replacing that position. 

 

That’s where we are currently.

 

So it makes sense to be more concerned than anything else and not just praise him for that past good as if it all equals out with the current bad. It doesn’t. And that’s the problem. We haven’t sustained what is good under Bruce Allen, it eventually deteriorates. Now, that’s something that has happened under Snyder pre-Allen, so maybe it’s just a function of his inability to lead more than it is Allen. That’s possible. 

 

Now, currently, presently, we just went through an ordeal where we will have paid $115 million of guaranteed cap space to the QB position over a period of 5 years (2016-2020) along with a 3rd round pick this year and arguably the best defensive player we had last season who was still on a cheap rookie deal for a couple more years in Fuller. Losing the guy we developed at that position in the process and having to start over with an older vet (hopefully he picks it up quickly, but there’s a chance it’ll take more time than we like). 

 

That is absolutely HORRIFIC resource management. I mean, historically horrific. One can argue it’s the worst ever, and it wouldn’t be hyperbole. It certainly is unprecedented, to say the least. We can judge that right now. That’s not even getting into which QB is better, just simply on an economical level. Whatever “good” done in the past is currently being negated by these actions. 

 

Does it mean they’ll fail? Nope. They’ve got good people in that building that can and have overcome a lot already. 

 

Which brings us to Jay. He was a good hire, but that can be separate from the hiring process itself. If the hiring process was simply a “Tampa connection” thing more than anything else, that’s bad in terms of Snyder/Allen’s hiring process. It’s not a sound philosophy. It is only an undeserved blessing that Jay happened to be qualified anyway and would’ve been a good hire no matter what. 

 

Furthermore, with all the bad that’s been done, Jay hasn’t been set up for success. He’s had to overcome more things from within the building than actually being enabled and supported in the way good FOs do for their staffs. 

 

Either way, it gets annoying to continue to harp on these things. We all want them to succeed, but we also want the success to be sustainable versus temporary. Sustainable success comes from sound practices.

 

This is what all of these arguments about our FO boil down to. Are they operating in a way conducive to success? Are they structuring their organization properly so that everyone is enabled and supported, the titles are given to their respective experts, and no one is undermined unwarrantedly where they can fulfill those roles? What are they doing compared to the most consistently successful organizations, what is different?

 

If it’s different, is it because they’re smarter, more effective in their approach and are paving the way? The results haven’t shown that to be the case, that’s for sure. 

 

Like I said, I really do despise focusing on this. Part of why I do and think it’s important others have is actually because I’m VERY POSITIVE, and want to see the success of, many within that building. It’s really in defense of them that I think it’s important to target the FO as it is, and not downplay the negative impact of their leadership in everything, which permeates throughout the entire staff and player personnel. 

 

So with that said, and to not continue being a source of bringing us down about everything, you can have the last word. 

 

Lift me up about it. I want to be.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, Wildbunny said:

 

Sure he does get credit for both Jay and Scott when he hired them. That's a point I rose when there was report of him being jealous of Scott. That was stupid in my opinion because he was the guy that hired him.

 

He's trying to look smart on every aspects of the team, instead on concentrating on what he's good at. Obviously, he's good at hiring the right behind the scene guys, and he's good at managing the cap. He still doesn't know when to open the wallet when he have to, to build a competent roster. And he's got to much of an ego to just admits to remain in the backseat and appreciate what he's constructing. He wants to be in the light of neons when his place is behind the curtain.

 

So he's filling his HC with JAG all over the rosters and asks him to win SB. Then he can say he's smart for hiring the HC and still deflect the blame on the HC if he fails.

6

 

Truer words have never been spo...um, typed lol (part in bold). Allen would be great for the Skins if someone would just tell him:

 

 

 

 

 

 

He is in no way qualified enough to be taking on as much as he's taking on. Snyder will have to step out of his comfort zone with Allen and make changes, but I don't see that happening.

[bh32]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I guess we shall see, the beat guys have suggested the vibe they get is Bruce Allen is out if they don't make the playoffs.  I recall one report that the minority owners aren't fans of Bruce these days.

 

The Kirk-Alex dynamic should be interesting.   Some of the beat guys have suggested because Bruce's thing wasn't just to lock in Alex but also his negotiation tactics ultimately led to Kirk leaving -- that if Redskins fans are watching Kirk play in the playoffs and the Redskins are at home for the 4th year in a row -- that dichotomy adds to the idea that making the playoffs matters to the bottom line as opposed hey at least we don't stink.

 

Having said that, like Cooley likes to say no one really knows since that's about what Dan actually thinks and does and he's a mystery to us all.  But I guess as to whomever talks from within the FO to the beat guys, they don't leave the impression that Dan is thrilled with this mediocrity streak but instead his patience is running out.

 

In the scheme of things, no way to know, it just has to play out.  

That's what is baffling to me..Why not be aggressive with adding talent in FA if your job is on the line?..As of now this team is no better than last year and there is so many holes to fill that the draft is not gonna do it...Still won't be able to stop the run or run the ball,big hole at LG and depth at LB..Just don't get the Allen's thinking

[Califan007 The Constipated]

57 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I don't get the vibe from the beat guys that it needs to be that dramatic though to lead to Bruce's exit.  Addressing your point about hey the last three years have been the best run in Dan's career...the vibe from the beat guys if they are right (and they might not be) is Dan isn't celebrating they hey we aren't that bad as that much of an accomplishment.  So Alex can have a good year but if the team goes 8-8 and misses the playoffs -- Bruce might be a goner.  His reputation isn't purely on the Qb but the whole roster.

 

Personally I am not rooting for that though because I think Jay heads out with Bruce in that case. 

 

Well, I drummed up the drama for showmanship purposes lol....I remember some reporter (or reporters), may have been beat guys, not sure, can't remember...but they said right after the season that Gruden was safe because Bruce and Dan fully understood the massive role injuries played in the season record, so they weren't blaming the head coach nearly as much as people were thinking they might. It left me feeling that they won't look at things in such black and white terms--I think a lot of the "Will Gruden remain coach" talk at the time was due to many in the media assuming Snyder would indeed look at the season in black and white terms, see 7-9 and another missed playoff berth, and start calling for heads. There are a lot of moving parts to this...imagine if the Smith does play well but the Skins end up 7-9 again. Now imagine if the Vikings also end up 7-9 lol...that might play a role in Snyder's mind in how he perceives the moves Allen made.

[Skinsinparadise]

18 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Well, I drummed up the drama for showmanship purposes lol....I remember some reporter (or reporters), may have been beat guys, not sure, can't remember...but they said right after the season that Gruden was safe because Bruce and Dan fully understood the massive role injuries played in the season record, so they weren't blaming the head coach nearly as much as people were thinking they might. It left me feeling that they won't look at things in such black and white terms--I think a lot of the "Will Gruden remain coach" talk at the time was due to many in the media assuming Snyder would indeed look at the season in black and white terms, see 7-9 and another missed playoff berth, and start calling for heads. There are a lot of moving parts to this...imagine if the Smith does play well but the Skins end up 7-9 again. Now imagine if the Vikings also end up 7-9 lol...that might play a role in Snyder's mind in how he perceives the moves Allen made.

 

Sure but 2018 season and 2019 are apples to oranges. But yeah to your point the beat guys go yeah Jay and Bruce are safe because of the context of the 2017 season as for the 2018 season.  But 2019 is a different story.  They give the vibe that Dan isn't celebrating the new found mediocrity of the team but there is a playoff or bust mindset for the 2018 season. 

 

In other words, the 2018 season is a no excuses allowed season.  But who knows will see.  The end of the year was the first one I recall with rumblings about some discontent about Bruce and it was coming from different places, too.  So maybe there is something to that smoke.  

 

None of this is wishful thinking on my end because the vibe is Jay and Bruce both are tied to the 2018 season.  And the vibe for what its worth is if they go 8-8 it won't be taken in a good way from Dan where its like hey at least we don't stink.  But who knows -- Dan is like a hermit so its hard to have a sense of what he thinks about anything since he's so camera shy. 

 

Some of the people who say Bruce might be safer than people think actually cite this point which is that Bruce is sort of Dan's social crutch. Bruce is willing to act the Jerry Jones part socially for Dan at events including the owner meetings and do all the things that Dan is awkward about dealing with socially.   Chris Russell who is no friend of Bruce Allen likes to talk about how Bruce is the ultimate networker at the owner meetings and practically becomes the defacto face of the franchise as opposed to Dan.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

My statement wasn’t directed at anyone in particular.  My apologies if it seemed that way.  It was more in general to what I’ve seen here quite a few times of late in numerous threads. 

 

Folks tend to get the impression that because we’re hard on Bruce that we believe he’s literally the worst GM in all of football.  That’s not the case at all.  In fact, his middling approach is what frustrates me the most.  He’s not the worst, but far from the best.  I’d rather he go big or go home, literally. 

 

In a way, that part in bold kinda sums up the whole McCloughan era lol...we went big, we have now gone home.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

36 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

In a way, that part in bold kinda sums up the whole McCloughan era lol...we went big, we have now gone home.

 

That was big but it was kind of a facade too.  I can not believe I fell for it when Bruce said Scot would have full control of personnel.  Then when they said Scot was going to keep things as is, while skeptical, I still wanted to believe. Then when it came out that there were problems, I was shocked.  But why? I don’t even know.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Yes, obviously you’re right, but then who fired him and didn’t replace him? We are talking about the current situation we’re in. I know you said he’ll get the blame “over that same time span”, but I think that kind of downplays where we’re at currently, as if it’s all one state of being. Maybe I’m reading you wrong, though. 

 

If Scot was still here or we hired a legitimate replacement for him with the same title/role, no one here is complaining. Or, at least, it wouldn’t be the ones you’re responding to right now. I can tell you that for sure. So the context of our situation NOW is not the same as it was when those good hires were made. 

 

Bruce did good hiring a GM and structuring the organization in the most provenly effective way by giving him final say on personnel (supposedly), then he failed miserably by firing him in an ugly manner and not replacing that position. 

 

That’s where we are currently.

 

So it makes sense to be more concerned than anything else and not just praise him for that past good as if it all equals out with the current bad. It doesn’t. And that’s the problem. We haven’t sustained what is good under Bruce Allen, it eventually deteriorates. Now, that’s something that has happened under Snyder pre-Allen, so maybe it’s just a function of his inability to lead more than it is Allen. That’s possible. 

 

Now, currently, presently, we just went through an ordeal where we will have paid $115 million of guaranteed cap space to the QB position over a period of 5 years (2016-2020) along with a 3rd round pick this year and arguably the best defensive player we had last season who was still on a cheap rookie deal for a couple more years in Fuller. Losing the guy we developed at that position in the process and having to start over with an older vet (hopefully he picks it up quickly, but there’s a chance it’ll take more time than we like). 

 

That is absolutely HORRIFIC resource management. I mean, historically horrific. One can argue it’s the worst ever, and it wouldn’t be hyperbole. It certainly is unprecedented, to say the least. We can judge that right now. That’s not even getting into which QB is better, just simply on an economical level. Whatever “good” done in the past is currently being negated by these actions. 

 

Does it mean they’ll fail? Nope. They’ve got good people in that building that can and have overcome a lot already. 

 

Which brings us to Jay. He was a good hire, but that can be separate from the hiring process itself. If the hiring process was simply a “Tampa connection” thing more than anything else, that’s bad in terms of Snyder/Allen’s hiring process. It’s not a sound philosophy. It is only an undeserved blessing that Jay happened to be qualified anyway and would’ve been a good hire no matter what. 

 

Furthermore, with all the bad that’s been done, Jay hasn’t been set up for success. He’s had to overcome more things from within the building than actually being enabled and supported in the way good FOs do for their staffs. 

 

Either way, it gets annoying to continue to harp on these things. We all want them to succeed, but we also want the success to be sustainable versus temporary. Sustainable success comes from sound practices.

 

This is what all of these arguments about our FO boil down to. Are they operating in a way conducive to success? Are they structuring their organization properly so that everyone is enabled and supported, the titles are given to their respective experts, and no one is undermined unwarrantedly where they can fulfill those roles? What are they doing compared to the most consistently successful organizations, what is different?

 

If it’s different, is it because they’re smarter, more effective in their approach and are paving the way? The results haven’t shown that to be the case, that’s for sure. 

 

Like I said, I really do despise focusing on this. Part of why I do and think it’s important others have is actually because I’m VERY POSITIVE, and want to see the success of, many within that building. It’s really in defense of them that I think it’s important to target the FO as it is, and not downplay the negative impact of their leadership in everything, which permeates throughout the entire staff and player personnel. 

 

So with that said, and to not continue being a source of bringing us down about everything, you can have the last word. 

 

Lift me up about it. I want to be.  

 

I had to switch browsers just to respond to your post lol...But to sum up:

 

"So it makes sense to be more concerned than anything else and not just praise him for that past good as if it all equals out with the current bad."

 

I don't think anyone is doing or even advocating that, not here, not Snyder, anyone. I do, though, think there are some who dismiss the "good" as irrelevant, which it may be to them. My point was that you can't just think Snyder is under some Rasputin-like spell by Allen or else he'd see things just the way fans do. I believe Allen has given Snyder some definite positives that he notices and appreciates, regardless of how we fans may or may  not feel. Doesn't mean Dan doesn't notice the bad as well or that we shouldn't talk about it. God knows we do lol ...but the need to make sure the bad of Bruce Allen is being put front and center causes a lot of fans to view him unrealistically. 

 

As for the way the FO is currently operating and set up...it doesn't exactly inspire confidence, no lol...then again, being from California I remember all the hate spit out by fans and the media towards Georgia Frontiere as owner of the Rams. Weee, doggie! lol...here's a small taste of what the general point of view was around her in L.A.:

 

With Dickerson Trade and Irvin Suspension, Mediocrity Is Attained

 

The Rams were once a tremendous football organization, dedicated to winning a Super Bowl championship. That was before Georgia Frontiere took over. In the eight seasons that Carroll Rosenbloom ran the team, the Rams placed first seven times, were in the NFC championship games five times, the Super Bowl once, and could have made it several more times with some breaks.

 

Since Georgia took over, however, except to mention her dedication to a championship in the Ram media guide, her only dedication has been to making a lot of money. Any disgruntled star athlete looking for a higher salary would suffer the wrath of Georgia--forget the impact on the team. Jack Reynolds, Bob Brudzinski, Vince Ferragamo and now Eric Dickerson are let go....

 

[...]It's obvious Georgia is more interested in the bottom line than the offensive line. She should sell the team to someone who really cares about winning.

 

 

Then..THEN...she had the audacity to move the Rams to St. Louis! lol...it would have been hard at the time to find anyone more hated or seen as more inept an owner than this woman, at least in southern California anyway. Then she got Vermeil and Warner and Martz and went to Super Bowls (plural). I don't ****ing know how that happened lol...I just saw the face of mediocrity and incompetence holding up the Lombardi trophy and smiling like a jackass.

 

So, yeah, I dunno lol...how much of it is having the right structure and how much of it is lucking into the right coach/QB combo. Shmups like her can do it and have a really good 5-year run, the Browns can keep switching owners and keep trying the right structure and win 1 game in two years. Jerruh can be the most inane GM west of Vinny Cerrato, hire Parcells for a few years and somehow luck into finding Romo among the undrafted free agents. A senile old fart like Al Davis can hire a "Name-only" bum like Allen and they go to the Super Bowl together. So I look at the moves being made moreso than the men making them. I'm done having confidence in March, and I won't lose confidence in March, either. There is no "In Scot I Trust" or "In Shanahan I Trust"...If they brought in Polian and Ron Wolf there would be no "In Polian/Wolf I trust", either. There would only be "What moves did they make? Do I like those moves? Let's see what happens."

 

I do know this: Allen gets a lot of respect around the league among owners, GMs and executives. It's a little surreal to read lol...I don't remember Vinny getting anything close. And while I'm hardly celebrating it, I'll take the last three seasons over the 4-12, 6-10 and 5-11 Zorn-Shanahan-Campbell-Grossman-Beck **** show every single day of the year. it feels, to me anyway, that we have solidly, decisively, moved on past that. So thanks, Kirk, Bruce Scot, Jay, Snyder, whoever. Hopefully your moves will work out. 

 

 

5 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

That was big but it was kind of a facade too.  I can not believe I fell for it when Bruce said Scot would have full control of personnel.  Then when they said Scot was going to keep things as is, while skeptical, I still wanted to believe. Then when it came out that there were problems, I was shocked.  But why? I don’t even know.

 

But again...what personnel moves did Scot not get to make?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

13 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

But again...what personnel moves did Scot not get to make?

That’s a great question we’ll never get the answers to.  But we do know for certain that he didn’t bring in any of his own guys and had to answer to Bruce on personnel moves.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

18 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

That’s a great question we’ll never get the answers to.  But we do know for certain that he didn’t bring in any of his own guys and had to answer to Bruce on personnel moves.  

 

True, and I guess you could actually add Cousins since he wanted the Skins to try and sign him earlier in the 2015 season but Bruce balked (I think it was Bruce anyway).

 

I think our scouts keep getting the short shrift (that's the term, right? lol)...they have been hanging on with the Redskins through several different coaching and FO regimes. 

[Wyvern]

12 hours ago, Califan007 said:

But again...what personnel moves did Scot not get to make?

From what I've read, when he arrived, McCloughan was planning to make changes to the scouting department-- bring on a few scouts, change the structure slightly and maybe release a Skins' scout who was someone he'd let go while in San Francisco.  This was something McCloughan had done in the past with other franchises, it was something he planned to do when he was hired as the Skins GM --- but Scot's progress in area went very slowly, and it's very likely that Allen had a role in that slow progress.

 

However, I suspect things came to a head, when the 49ers, under new ownership, were letting go of quite a few quality scouts that had worked with McCloughan in the past. Traditionally Scott would have picked up a few of the better ones, but in the end he must have been blocked from bringing any of them onboard.  Those scouts were subsequently snapped up by other franchises, notably the Packers, and others.  Skins wound up keeping their old scouting team intact, and the old structure.  (I'd have to spend a day comparing names, but I wouldn't be surprised if some of these ex-49er scouts are now following the ex-Packer execs over to the Browns scouting network.)

 

You mention how the Redskins scouts are getting a "short-shrift" on all this, mentioning how they've been in place since Snyder took over.  Frankly, considering the Skins talent acquisition record over the Snyder era, maybe the scouting networks were part of the problem -- and maybe that some turnover in their ranks was actually required.  (After all, there was a time, when even Bruce Allen must have felt the need, Because he was the one who started contracting the scouting resources of McCloughan.)

 

One can only assume that granting a "traditional-style" NFL GM, their traditional power to overhaul the Skins scouting structure and personnel, eventually didn't sit well with Allen's penchance to hoard his FO power.  That's probably why Bruce reneged on that element of arrangement developed when McCloughan was brought onboard.  And this would be just the beginning of Allen's machinations.

[bedlamVR]

I also have the feeling some of the people who had worked with Scott in the past may not have wanted to work for him again . ( I have work with a boss with the same issues as Scott and it really wasn’t fun) 

 

The notable name we tried to get was Highsmith (I think) from green bay but that was blocked not by Bruce but by the packers FO .. 

 

Also people are kind of forgetting that Scott isn’t really in the Browns fo per sey but brought in specifically to run this draft and his association with the Browns ends there ...  . His consultancy is still offering scouting services to other teams and to be honest from Scott’s point of view I can see how this is a role that suits him better . 

[skins island connection]

On ‎3‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 7:33 AM, Califan007 said:

 

The problem with that is, the last three years under Allen have been the 2nd best 3-year stretch for the Redskins (in terms of records) since the Skins won the Super Bowl. The best 3-year stretch occurred during Snyder's first three years as owner. During that stretch, though, there were three different "GMs" handling each offseason: Casserly, Vinny and Schottenheimer. Also, regardless of what more recent accounts have said, back in 2015 when Gruden wanted Cousins to start, it was said that Bruce Allen didn't need convincing, he was already on board and supported the idea. The only person alleged to have needed convincing at the time was Snyder. So if we want to chalk up the last three years to Cousins being the starter, he was one of the reasons it happened.

 

If the Skins do well with Alex Smith this year, Allen ain't going nowhere lol...

 

 The last 3 years' record was by the doings of Cousins, a QB that Allen and Snyder didn't even care for. Griffin was their guy from the get-go, and when he started tanking [ 2013 ] it never recovered. Allen is good at this "jump ship" mentality. He has a history of turning his back on veteran players who had deserved a pay raise and chose to let them walk, just as he did with Cousins.

 

Actually, they didn't care about Cousins being drafted, it was that mean-ass { sarcasm plug ]  Mike Shanahan who wanted and got Cousins; Snyder and Allen were happy go lucky with their guy they gave up the farm to get and figured Cousins wouldn't see the field and eventually would be a QB to trade off. Boy how THAT scenario turned out!

 

The Smith deal was a desperation move by Allen; he knew his job was on the line if Cousins goes and they don't have anyone comparable to put in place. I personally don't know if the Smith thing will be a hit or a bust, but if it does end up a bust, where does the blame go to? you and I know the blame will be placed on Gruden by Allen in some non-direct form.

This thread has turned from a 'Allen's fault' to a 'praise Allen' jamboree. It won't change anything though, Allen will still twist and manipulate any problems and direct them away from himself, like always, and the team will never get past the 9-7 plateau. The eyebrow-raising hires, the Redskin alum employee handbooks will continue to be printed, and the same psychological mentality of the FO will continue to end up scratching their heads on why this team cannot get over that hill called 9-7 season.

[Wyvern]

A true GM is usually going to be criticized by the results of many of his decisions.  Bruce Allen has taken on that role, and -for better or worse - Skins fans are now stuck with what he feels is best for us.

 

Okay, I can kind of get the part about him wanting to uber-frugal, and aggressively press for very FO-friendly contracts. (But oddly the blood he squeezes from those still willing to sign with the Skins, that never translates into lower prices for the fans.) Allen reels in budget bargains JAGS, BUT  oddly, the new fees to the fans keep mounting up, AND ITS STILL THE SAME DARN P.O.S. PLAYING FIELD.  

 

My take is Allen only cares about managing the team with a focus on maximizing the bottom line and how much profit does operating this team make for its shareholders.  His rare, "splashy" moves are whether they can put enough fans in the seats to maximize profitability on a tired-and-repeated wish that the "Skins are just around the corner from being playoff contenders".  He's a cheap, skinflint, "Six-Flags" operator and frankly Snyder's to blame for keeping him on, this long.  After all, as a "fan", Snyder's often expressed his fervent desire to bring back a Super Bowl trophy to Washington-- but, ironically,  Allen seems more about fielding the most profitable NFL franchise, willing to settle for 2nd or 3rd place in the NFC East.

[Wildbunny]

18 hours ago, Califan007 said:

So, yeah, I dunno lol...how much of it is having the right structure and how much of it is lucking into the right coach/QB combo. Shmups like her can do it and have a really good 5-year run, the Browns can keep switching owners and keep trying the right structure and win 1 game in two years. Jerruh can be the most inane GM west of Vinny Cerrato, hire Parcells for a few years and somehow luck into finding Romo among the undrafted free agents. A senile old fart like Al Davis can hire a "Name-only" bum like Allen and they go to the Super Bowl together. So I look at the moves being made moreso than the men making them. I'm done having confidence in March, and I won't lose confidence in March, either. There is no "In Scot I Trust" or "In Shanahan I Trust"...If they brought in Polian and Ron Wolf there would be no "In Polian/Wolf I trust", either. There would only be "What moves did they make? Do I like those moves? Let's see what happens."

In our case, the guy in charge just broke the HC/QB combo that we luckily stumble upon and didn't even tried to capitalize on it...

 

I believe that's the biggest point.

[zoony]

2 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

In our case, the guy in charge just broke the HC/QB combo that we luckily stumble upon and didn't even tried to capitalize on it...

 

I believe that's the biggest point.

 

[The Consigliere]

On 3/19/2018 at 11:25 AM, KDawg said:

But that’s the lay of the land. When you make mistakes you need to fix them.

 

The Skins corner group was the best position group on the team last year. But that didn’t help. Downgrading at corner to be more consistent in other spots (now or in the next couple of seasons) doesn’t kill the team.

 

I agree we need to shore up the DL more. Need to add a back. There are things this team still needs for sure. But keeping a strength at the expense of upgrading elsewhere can also be a mistake.

 

The argument is clearly “he doesn’t cost much and is young.” And that’s a good point. But my retort is: “but he would eventually cost quite a bit and in my honest opinion I believe Alex Smith to be an upgrade at quarterback. You may not and I certainly understand that point of view. But Smith and DL help along with getting Brown back and adding Richardson isn’t a bad start.”

 

Moreau can play. Dunbar re-signed. Norman is around for at least another year at the moment.

 

Losing Fuller blows. But I can understand it given the situation

I can't really accept that, I felt like all of this was PR, including the '87 redskins getting their rings just a touch before we lose Cousins. I don't think it's a coincidence that happened when it happened. Add in that we prioritized Alex Smith, rather than doing something more intelligent like:

 

1. Signing Cousins in '15 or '16

2. Doing what quite a few of us talked about in a variety of forums: when it became clear we had no shot at resigning him last year, we should have gone long and hard at Garoppolo. The comp ended up being ridiculously cheap compared to what was bandied about in the spring of '17, and it's clear he was well worth the spring 2017 asking price, let alone the rock bottom trade deadline price. I have NO idea why Allen wasn't working hard on a deal to trade for Garoppolo non-stop after the throw him under the bus presser he gave last July. He should have been going after Garoppolo from day 1 last spring. 

 

or as of 2018:

2. Take our medicine, realize we are coming off a 7-9 season, and have just lost our starting QB, and take our damn medicine, keep our pick, keep your young potential superstar corner, and instead sign one of the giant pile of QB's available in this rare QB heavy FA class.

 

Free Agent's available:

1. Drew Brees

2. Case Keenum

3. T. Bridgewater

4. McCarron

5. Mike Glennon

6. McCown

 

We could have signed virtually any of these guys (other than Brees) for less than half of what we're paying Alex Smith and kept our picks and might have gotten analogous production from some of them (I think Keenum in Denver will be as productive as Smith if not mores and if McCarron or Glennon had landed with us, I don't think they'd be far off either-both went to god awful situations, so I suspect both will accomplish little even if they're full time starters in '18) and of course McCown made a pro bowl caliber season out of the classic MacGyver "rubber bands, paperclips, tooth pick and a piece of gum" materials he had to work with NYJ last year.

 

I cannot fathom why Allen was unwilling to take his medicine and sign one of those 6, keep the top 75 third rounder, and the potential stud corner, and suck, like we're going to anyway, regardless of Smith, in 2018. It only makes sense as a PR move for season ticket holders and the local fan base to convince the easily gullible that what happened wasn't a gargantuan disaster, that the trade wasn't an epic owning by the chiefs as competent F.O.'s laughed their behinds off when the news struck, and that by having a Qb who was in the playoffs, and doesn't throw picks at inopportune times, we'll be just fine. 

 

It's just a colossal pile of horse manure and it puts us behind the 8 ball to boot. We lost two young and very valuable cheap assets in Fuller and that 3rd rounder, and what we got was an old stop gap QB whose production is likely to go off a cliff w/o the weapons he had in KC which allowed him to have the kind of career year that is a total and complete outlier from his production in any other year at any other time across a nearly 15 year long career. 

 

I just flat out can't accept the, "well, they had to do something" argument. I understand why some want to indulge it. It sucks to be miserable and infuriated and on the last sputtering gasps of a near 40 year fandom that's about to expire out of sheer fatigue, frustration, and a desire to move on from what has become a purely masochistic endeavor for three decades running. Who wants that? I don't, and I'm living it as a Redskins and hell, Capitals fan, and hell even to a degree Boulez and Nats fan (although in the former case, in spite of the total incompetence of the F.O., the team was able to parlay a gigantic pile of 1st rounders including oodles of top picks into 4 talented players and as a result are competitive, and in the latter case, I respect Rizzo as a superb, for the most part, architect w/team building, who unfortunately built a team of chokers through in my view, no major fault of his own). So I get the argument, but it just doesn't fly w/me because I'm a huge believer in process. Teams that use good process in decision making, even when a given result is poor, will still, win out over time, whereas teams that use bad process, even when a given result turns out really well, will over the long haul, fail, and fail spectacularly. That's why the redskins are so infuriating, even our successes are always temporal, the product of luck, and randomness, rather than insightful team building, wise decision making, and superb process from the top down and bottom up. One knows if we suddenly get a success, it won't last in the post JKC era, (see 1996-1997, 1999, 2005 and 2007, 2012, 2015), it won't be a part of a dynasty or at least an era of consistent competitiveness like we've seen over the years with NYG, GB, N.O., Sea, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, KC, and SD a few years back etc, instead it will be a flash in the pan, because at the end of the day, the people at the top, and the system they have in place are improvised solutions based on neither an intelligent plan, nor any kind of plan at all other than to spackle over problems as they inevitably appear over and over again. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

54 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

In our case, the guy in charge just broke the HC/QB combo that we luckily stumble upon and didn't even tried to capitalize on it...

 

I believe that's the biggest point.

 

They tried to capitalize on it, but failed....