Makaveli

The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

So much BS info pre-draft, I think any agents who take part in this kind of draft manipulation should be banned, its unethical and borderline criminal.

 

They cost Guice a few million dollars with the disparaging leaks and the kid still has a smile on his face.

 

 

He blocked KGskins, the guy that called him out on it draft day......Never did reveal his source.....

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/79956/57/nfls-best-gms-2018?pg=3

 

25. Bruce Allen/Doug Williams, Redskins

 

How has Bruce Allen held off would-be usurpers since his restoration to the Redskins’ throne? By not hiring any. The Redskins no longer have a general manager. It’s Allen, owner Daniel Snyder and VP of player personnel Doug Williams. With no Scot McCloughans to rock the boat, the Redskins apparently prefer a power vacuum to a power structure. Coach Jay Gruden presumably does his part to fill it, too. The Redskins’ first GM-less season was a dreary 7-9 affair punctuated by their exile of Kirk Cousins, a man Allen once called Kurt. Upset that Cousins continued to bet on himself and win, the Redskins let him walk, making sure to besmirch him on his way out. His replacement is Alex Smith, a perfectly-fine quarterback who comes with a ceiling so hard the Chiefs saw fit to trade him after a career year. The Redskins have a .406 winning percentage since first hiring Allen in 2010, a number that drops to .364 if you exclude McCloughan’s two seasons at the helm. If Allen deserves to lead Washington’s front office, he’s yet to provide proof. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to pump up anything to do with the Eagles, but here's a really good breakdown of how Howie Roseman built the bully that won the SB last year, and will likely be relevant for years to come.  We don't necessarily need to follow this formula to be successful, but it would be nice to have a GM leading this organization with the vision to start a few trends of his own.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

We don't necessarily need to follow this formula to be successful, but it would be nice to have a GM leading this organization with the vision to start a few trends of his own.

 

I’m glad you put this strawman killing statement in your post. Nice preemption. ;) 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/21/2018 at 6:14 AM, Rocky21 said:

Just wanted to link to this article to make sure you guys saw this.  Lots of good quotes in here including

Allen’s time in the front office has been disappointing and unacceptable.  Throughout the years, every decision made by Allen only made matters worse. 

https://riggosrag.com/2018/06/20/will-bruce-allens-last-year-washington-redskins/

:-)

 

Here comes the over-analytical, logic-obsessed part of me that's gonna be misconstrued as a Bruce Allen lover by some lol...but...

 

"Dan Synder seems like he’s finally reach his limit with Allen and it’s about time. ...It’s hard to pinpoint the exact reason Synder finally has voiced his frustrations."

 

What did Snyder say? What did I miss?...

 

"Eric Schaffer, who is the Senior Vice President of Football Operations/General Counsel, seems to be the favorite to be promoted to GM. He works closely with Williams, Allen, and Gruden along with the teams personnel staff to help shape the Redskins roster and has been one of the key individuals in negotiating contracts for Alex Smith, Paul Richardson, Orlando Scandrick, and Zach Brown. This move would be fantastic for the Redskins, especially since Shaffer has been with the team going on 16 years now."

 

No mention of Kyle Smith?...With many others chalking up this last draft to Kyle, I find it odd that this guy doesn't even mention him in the convo for possible new GMs for the Skins.

 

"The Redskins are one of the most valued NFL franchises in history. Once Allen is fired, the Redskins will stop being embarrassment of the league and be the prestigious franchise it was meant to be."

 

Hold up lol...is the Allen era actually worse than when Vinny was here? Are the Skins making worse decisions now? That's a hard sell that i'm not sure anyone would buy. Regardless of what anyone thinks of Allen, there have been definite improvements to how the team is run...more stability in the coaching ranks, less "big name" free agents with massive contracts to grab headlines, far, FAR more emphasis on the draft, better contracts that are easier to get out of if necessary, less keeping older vets on the roster due to avoiding dead cap space...But even if you say Vinny and Allen are equally bad, all that says is that the man who hired both (and apparently kept both on the payroll for too long) will still be making the decisions as to who to put in charge next. So why would firing Allen suddenly return the Skins to the prestigious franchise it was meant to be?...I mean, did firing Vinny lead to that? His conclusion doesn't make much sense considering the argument he gave leading up to it.

Edited by Califan007
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

Hold up lol...is the Allen era actually worse than when Vinny was here?

 

Cerrato's total win loss record as GM/DPP: 70-79

Allen's total win loss record as GM: 52-75-1

Cerrato's win loss record from 2002-2009 (same amount of seasons as Allen currently): 54-74

 

Allen's interview with JP Finlay made it abundantly clear that "wins" are the measuring stick for success.  So yes, it is worse.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

So why would firing Allen suddenly return the Skins to the prestigious franchise it was meant to be?...I mean, did firing Vinny lead to that? His conclusion doesn't make much sense considering the argument he gave leading up to it.

I don't think it will.  Snyder is the scourge of this organization and their is no way to get rid of him.  It's just an awful situation for a fan of the Redskins.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

Cerrato's total win loss record as GM/DPP: 70-79

Allen's total win loss record as GM: 52-75-1

Cerrato's win loss record from 2002-2009 (same amount of seasons as Allen currently): 54-74

 

Allen's interview with JP Finlay made it abundantly clear that "wins" are the measuring stick for success.  So yes, it is worse.  

 

yeah, he said that wins were the measuring stick for the janitors as well. Somehow I doubt he'd fire ol' Willie the janitor because the Skins went 4-12.

 

But beyond that, what Vinny orchestrated was in no way helpful to any type of sustainable success, and sabotaged future rosters. The franchise was not considered healthy during most of his time here, and there was no semblance of an executive plan in place for the direction of the team. One year they'd spend like a mf'er, the next year they'd bring in guys who were "cheap and available", or they'd trade away draft picks to score a backup RB, they'd trade future picks to have 2 1st rounders, then they'd have 2 draft picks in the first 5 rounds, they'd get rid of productive players and bring in guys who the current coach wanted, then they'd fire the coach the next year and give the new coach a roster screwed up by the last coach, then they'd break the bank on a free agent again.... There's a reason Allen and Shanny started cleaning up big mistakes of the past during the uncapped year...it was the only way the Skins could start recovering and become healthy again.

 

At any rate, when analyzing Vinny and Allen, there's so much involved in why they sucked or where they did well that boiling it down to win/loss records is lazy. In general, it's basically valid, but completely throws out any and all context.

 

13 minutes ago, HOF44 said:

I don't think it will.  Snyder is the scourge of this organization and their is no way to get rid of him.  It's just an awful situation for a fan of the Redskins.  

 

That's what the article ends up saying even though the writer doesn't seem to realize it lol...

Edited by Califan007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

yeah, he said that wins were the measuring stick for the janitors as well. Somehow I doubt he'd fire ol' Willie the janitor because the Skins went 4-12.

 

But beyond that, what Vinny orchestrated was in no way helpful to any type of sustainable success, and sabotaged future rosters. The franchise was not considered healthy during most of his time here, and there was no semblance of an executive plan in place for the direction of the team. One year they'd spend like a mf'er, the next year they'd bring in guys who were "cheap and available", or they'd trade away draft picks to score a backup RB, they'd trade future picks to have 2 1st rounders, then they'd have 2 draft picks in the first 5 rounds, they'd get rid of productive players and bring in guys who the current coach wanted, then they'd fire the coach the next year and give the new coach a roster screwed up by the last coach, then they'd break the bank on a free agent again.... There's a reason Allen and Shanny started cleaning up big mistakes of the past during the uncapped year...it was the only way the Skins could start recovering and become healthy again.

 

At any rate, when analyzing Vinny and Allen, there's so much involved in why they sucked or where they did well that boiling it down to win/loss records is lazy. zin general, it's basically valid, but completely throws out any and all context.

 

That's what the article ends up saying even though the writer doesn't seem to realize it lol...

Yeah and what portion of the W/L record do we attribute to Shanny? Or Scott? The difference in the types of players we go after between those two regimes is night and day. For example, why did Bruce Allen all of a sudden go from picking light weight OL up off the bargain bin like Chris Chester and Kory Licht to targeting 300+ behemoths up front  high in the draft? Did his approach over the years change that much? Or did the guy who ran the ZBS leave and no longer had a say in wanting smaller, more athletic OL? Shanny had his finger prints all over this roster. Just as Jay/Scott/Kyle do now. So taking the 9 year W/L record and comparing it to Vinny's who also had the fortune of being paired with a HOF coach who lead us to two of our best seasons under Snyder is a bit misleading. I bet the Bruce Allen police are about to come swarming, but really this is more about how bad Vinny was. No comparison between the two. We are 100% a better run football organization than we were under Vinny/Dan running the show.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

Yeah and what portion of the W/L record do we attribute to Shanny? Or Scott? The difference in the types of players we go after between those two regimes is night and day. For example, why did Bruce Allen all of a sudden go from picking light weight OL up off the bargain bin like Chris Chester and Kory Licht to targeting 300+ behemoths up front  high in the draft? Did his approach over the years change that much? Or did the guy who ran the ZBS leave and no longer had a say in wanting smaller, more athletic OL? Shanny had his finger prints all over this roster. Just as Jay/Scott/Kyle do now. So taking the 9 year W/L record and comparing it to Vinny's who also had the fortune of being paired with a HOF coach who lead us to two of our best seasons under Snyder is a bit misleading. I bet the Bruce Allen police are about to come swarming, but really this is more about how bad Vinny was. No comparison between the two. We are 100% a better run football organization than we were under Vinny/Dan running the show.

 

Here's a question I have wondered at times: what would the Redskins look like today if Scot McCloughan had never been hired?

 

The easy answer to give is a slightly funny insulting remark about 3-13 records and a hobbled RG3 limping around on the sideline while his backup tries to bring the team back from a 27-3 deficit lol...but if you truly think about the possibilities, the question is an intriguing one. Would we have still drafted, say, Matt Jones and S'ua Cravens? would we have missed out on Jamison Crowder? Would we have selected Leonard Williams over Scherff? Would A.J. Smith be the GM? Would we have a GM? Would Scot have been a one-year consultant and that's it?

 

EDIT: almost forgot:

 

"...this is more about how bad Vinny was."

 

Exactly. The article makes it sound like the Skins were prestigious and avoided embarrassment before Allen came along. So it's not about sticking up for Bruce Allen at all. It's about pointing out that ignoring the Vinny Cerrato era when making the claims this guy was making is...let's just say, it's "curious" lol...

Edited by Califan007
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

But beyond that, what Vinny orchestrated was in no way helpful to any type of sustainable success, and sabotaged future rosters. The franchise was not considered healthy during most of his time here, and there was no semblance of an executive plan in place for the direction of the team. One year they'd spend like a mf'er, the next year they'd bring in guys who were "cheap and available", or they'd trade away draft picks to score a backup RB, they'd trade future picks to have 2 1st rounders, then they'd have 2 draft picks in the first 5 rounds, they'd get rid of productive players and bring in guys who the current coach wanted, then they'd fire the coach the next year and give the new coach a roster screwed up by the last coach, then they'd break the bank on a free agent again.... There's a reason Allen and Shanny started cleaning up big mistakes of the past during the uncapped year...it was the only way the Skins could start recovering and become healthy again.

 

At any rate, when analyzing Vinny and Allen, there's so much involved in why they sucked or where they did well that boiling it down to win/loss records is lazy. In general, it's basically valid, but completely throws out any and all context.

 

So this conservative, saving money and picks, over the past 8 seasons...has done what exactly?  It sounds good in theory, because everyone hated Cerrato.  But over the course of 8 years we, outside of cosmetically looking better from the outside ("we no longer waste money on washed up vets"), essentially have the same win-loss record under Cerrato.  We've had consistency with Gruden going on 5 seasons now.  Where is this improvement?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2018 at 10:32 AM, HTTRDynasty said:

Hate to pump up anything to do with the Eagles, but here's a really good breakdown of how Howie Roseman built the bully that won the SB last year, and will likely be relevant for years to come.  We don't necessarily need to follow this formula to be successful, but it would be nice to have a GM leading this organization with the vision to start a few trends of his own.


Well it seems like the front office has wizened up and realized that drafting players and investing along the O and D lines is the way to go.

They've spent quite a bit on both in recent years, in terms of draft capital. Allen, Ion, Payne, Settle, Kerrigan, Smith, Anderson are some of the notables drafted recently (Kerrigan being the "old man" of the bunch) Plus FA signings like McGee, McClain, Paea, Galette, McPhee, etc.

 

Obviously not all of them worked out for one reason or another either injury (Paea, McClain, Allen, Ion, Anderson Galette) or they just sucked (Mcclain, Paea, Knighton, etc)

We all know the Oline was absolutely devastated by injuries as well. Hopefully everyone stays healthy and can contribute to their ability.. because there is definitely a bunch of talent on both sides of the line.

While it's not likely to see some enormous jump, even with the injuries the d-line last year was really very good in terms of pass rushing/sacks. Not so good in the run department, but hopefully that has been addressed by the new guys this year.

 

If Guice is the guy I think he is, then we'll be sitting pretty and those pass rushers can REALLY tee off on qb's actually playing with a lead and TOP on their side.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Being a religious follower of the Bruce debate and Vinny back in the day :) -- ironically both might have been my biggest targets of all time with this team -- here's my take thinking about what I've been reading on both sides of the aisle.

 

 

Vinny Versus Bruce

 

How they make the team look publicly:  They both made the Redskins look publicly inept.  For me it's a draw.  If you pushed me in one direction on this I'd say Bruce is even worse than Vinny with his classic sound bites that become comedic fodder for both the local and national media. 

 

Classy or Douche:  We have stories on both fronts.  It's about a draw to me if I had to go one direction Bruce to me is worse.  Cerrato's low point to me was how he handled Zorn's departure.  Bruce's low points to me were the Kirk contract both as to behind the scenes stories on it and the press release, Scot departure.

 

Perception About Both Around The League:  Both are punch lines.  They in turn have made the team a punch line.  That to me is the saddest evolvement in Bruce's tenure here.  He's really had to work his way to this  He was given the benefit of the doubt initially so IMO he's earned every bit of the ridicule.  

 

FA:  They both to me stink at playing FA.  A study from a relatively pro Bruce person showed they are batting 19% in FA under Bruce.  Vinny's mistakes were more catastrophic and crippling.  Bruce > Vinny.  But Bruce to me stinks in this department just for different reasons.  I give no plaudits for him here.  With the exception of last year which was far from perfect in its ownright, he's "meh" to me in FA.   Bruce gets a D.  Vinny gets an F.

 

Contracts:  Bruce doesn't like going beyond 2 years guaranteed -- that's great typically.  Arguably his insistence on it cost them Kirk Cousins though so will see how that unfolds.  Bruce > Vinny.  though Bruce himself likes to say that's all Eric Schaffer driving this boat. 

 

The Draft:  Vinny worse as to trading picks. Under Bruce they clearly value the draft more.  And nice job for hiring Kyle Smith.  Bruce easily over Vinny in this department. 

 

Overall, recalling my emotion about Vinny -- I'd celebrate just as hard if Bruce is reassigned as I did when Vinny was let go mainly for this reason  -- with Bruce Dan doubled up again on having a non-traditional GM running personnel.   And both Vinny and Bruce via their own doing made the team a punch line IMO.

 

IMO Dan's non traditional GM approach is the hallmark to his tenure here and not in a good way.  I don't blame Bruce for that -- as Cooley likes to say if you were given a job, would you demote yourself or elevate someone else over you -- of course you wouldn't -- so why should people blame Bruce for him not wanting to hire someone to give that person more power than he has?  He's right.  I don't blame Bruce for it.  That's Dan structure not Bruce's.

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

FA:  They both to me stink at playing FA.  A study from a relatively pro Bruce person showed they are batting 19% in FA under Bruce.  Vinny's mistakes were more catastrophic and crippling.  Bruce > Vinny.  But Bruce to me stinks in this department just for different reasons.  I give no plaudits for him here.  With the exception of last year which was far from perfect in its ownright, he's "meh" to me in FA.   Bruce gets a D.  Vinny gets an F.

 

Vinny strikes me as someone who would swing for the fences every time he was at bat and end up missing badly on huge whiffs.

 

Bruce, on the other hand, seems like he'd just stand in the batter's box, swing at nothing, and hope for the walk.

Edited by Reaper Skins
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Califan007 said:

"Eric Schaffer, who is the Senior Vice President of Football Operations/General Counsel, seems to be the favorite to be promoted to GM. He works closely with Williams, Allen, and Gruden along with the teams personnel staff to help shape the Redskins roster and has been one of the key individuals in negotiating contracts for Alex Smith, Paul Richardson, Orlando Scandrick, and Zach Brown. This move would be fantastic for the Redskins, especially since Shaffer has been with the team going on 16 years now."

 

No mention of Kyle Smith?...With many others chalking up this last draft to Kyle, I find it odd that this guy doesn't even mention him in the convo for possible new GMs for the Skins.

 

I've read mixed reports regarding this. On one side, Schaffer seems to be favorite for the GM position, but I also remember reading some articles stating that he wasn't really interested in the position also. So I'm not really sure what to believe regarding this front.

 

But you don't get those mixed reports when talking about Kyle Smith. And it was weird to not hear about him in this article, that stunned me as well...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Reaper Skins said:

Vinny strikes me as someone who would swing for the fences every time he was at bat and end up missing badly on huge whiffs.

 

Bruce, on the other hand, seems like he'd just stand in the batter's box, swing at nothing, and hope for the walk.

 

Yeah both points IMO are hyperbole but sometimes taking it to that extreme is the best way to bring home the point.

 

Vinny liked to say he will never apologize for being aggressive and he used that line to justify his moves.  It wasn't all bad.  The FA crop for example the year Gibbs came back was an insane haul and helped turned around the defense.  London Fletcher obviously was a good move.  Vinny's batting average in the first round was pretty good -- not too many missteps.  But on the aggregate he made too many mistakes.  He traded too many picks.  I hated how he would extends veteran contract -- borrow from Peter to pay Paul.  And he struck out on QB multiple times.  His public appearances could give the vibe that he was as clownish as his critics claim he is -- and that was turned into the Redskins being clownish.  Some say he was the ultimate politician behind the scenes at Redskins Park and that in part help keep his power.   I got the vibe with him that they'd be up and down -- more down than up with the swing with the fences approach since on occasion the big players they went for did come through. 

 

Bruce on the other hand is conservative -- to me a mediocre at best version of conservative.  I understand those that say don't partake in FA -- like an alcoholic saying never have a drink again.  I am not one of those people.  I see smart teams make good climbs via the shrewd use of FA.   Bruce isn't one of those people.  He goes bargain basement shopping and ends up finding few bargain but instead mostly garbage that you end up throwing out eventually.   As for the draft, ups and downs.  But i like the emphasis on the draft but not to the degree that it overtakes to me all the stuff I don't like -- and its not even close.  His public appearances could give the vibe that he was as clownish as his critics claim he is -- and that was turned into the Redskins being clownish.  Some say he is the ultimate politician behind the scenes at Redskins Park and that in part help keep his power.  I get the vibe that they will be mostly mediocre with him in charge -- he doesn't go for kill -- the upside to that is you won't major mistakes, the downside is you won't make major gains.

 

Hyperbole there from me on both Vinny and Bruce.  They both have shades of grey to their approach but that's a good summary for me if I am pigeonholing them.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2009 Washington Redskins Starters (Last year of Vinny):

 

QB: Jason Campbell

RB: Clinton Portis

WR: Santana Moss/Malcolm Kelly/Devin Thomas

TE: Fred Davis

LT: Stephon Heyer

LG: Derrick Dockery

C: Casey Rabach

RG: Will Montgomery

RT: Mike Williams

 

LDE: Phillip Daniels

DT: Cornelius Griffin

DT: Albert Haynesworth

RDE: Andre Carter

SLB: Brian Orakpo

MLB: London Fletcher

WLB: Rocky McIntosh

CB: DeAngelo Hall

Slot: Fred Smoot/Kevin Barnes

SS: Reed Doughty

FS: LaRon Landry

CB: Carlos Rogers

 

2018 Assumed Redskins Starters:

 

QB: Alex Smith

RB: Derrius Guice

WR: Josh Doctson/ Paul Richardson/ Jameson Crowder

TE: Jordan Reed

LT: Trent Williams

LG: Kyle Kalis/Shawn Lauvao 

C: Chase Roullier

RG: Brandon Scherff

RT: Morgan Moses

 

DE: Matt Ioanidis

NT: Da'Ron Payne

DE: Jonathan Allen

OLB: Ryan Kerrigan

SLB: Mason Foster

WLB: Zach Brown

OLB: Preston Smith

CB: Josh Norman

Slot: Fabian Moreau/Josh Holsey

SS: DJ Swearinger

FS: Montae Nicholson

CB: Quinton Dunbar

 

 

I found myself cracking up typing out the 2009 roster. 2018 looks pretty damn strong to me and don't even get me started on depth.

 

So you can talk character and analyze every aspect till you are blue in the face. But one guy assembled the 2009 roster, and the other is responsible for 2018. It's literally not even close. Vinny was TERRIBLE.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets me preface Bruce > Vinny.  But for me not by a heck of a lot.  I think they both are bad at their jobs just Vinny's worst is worst than Bruce's worst.  I like to say that this FO is mediocre -- not great, not awful but so so.  But by that I don't mean Bruce is mediocre -- I think he's the weak link that's propped up by other people in the FO.    Others to me average Bruce out.   To that point, the nicest thing I'll say about Bruce is i like two of his hires -- Kyle Smith and Jay.  Can't recall a FO related hire from Vinny that I liked. 

 

As for the comparison of those two years -- supposedly Bruce's peak roster versus Vinny's nadir -- the year that got him fired.  I'd take the current roster but to me its not that crazy stark.  The glaring one missing to me is Chris Samuels is out for getting hurt in 2009.  He retired after that.  Replaced by Trent.  There really wasn't a Stephen Heyer era at LT. He played because of injury.  Chris Cooley got banged up in 2009, had a big year in 2010.  If Cooley's out, we should take Jordan Reed out too for being banged up in 2017.   I love Reed but I barely even take it seriously anymore about him being a starter.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow, someway I hope that Kyle Smith is named the future GM of this team.  To let him go to another team as GM would be a huge mistake.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Lets me preface Bruce > Vinny.  But for me not by a heck of a lot.  I think they both are bad at their jobs just Vinny's worst is worst than Bruce's worst.  I like to say that this FO is mediocre -- not great, not awful but so so.  But by that I don't mean Bruce is mediocre -- I think he's the weak link that's propped up by other people in the FO.    Others to me average Bruce out.   To that point, the nicest thing I'll say about Bruce is i like two of his hires -- Kyle Smith and Jay.  Can't recall a FO related hire from Vinny that I liked. 

So the guy responsible for bringing in the longest tenured coach during Snyder’s ownership and who seems to be a pretty damn good talent evaluator, as well as a young up and coming talent evaluator who has overseen two very good drafts in a row, is somehow worse than the train wreck that was Vinny Ceratto? By your own account our FO is average. But Bruce Allen is terrible. So wouldn’t that make the guys (Kyle and Jay) who prop up Bruce Allen’s terribleness and make us into a mediocre FO pretty freakin good? Just trying to follow the logic here, because I struggle to see how someone who brought us Kyle and Jay, who by your admission are pretty good in their roles, is only slightly better than Ceratto. Bug eyes was an embarrassment. You want to talk about punchline around the league? People may dislike Bruce Allen the person, but I would bet my life savings they respect more about his ability to run a football operation than they did Vinny Ceratto. Also by your own admission, you give Bruce a large nod in the drafting department over Vinny. The draft is the lifeline or the pipeline of an NFL organization. And it’s never been more important than it is now due to rising % of the cap allocated to having a good QB.

 

So you list off 4-5 criteria, I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said. But I do disagree with your weighting for each criteria, which you implied to be even. Say there is a 10 point scale, 1 being lowest importance 10 the highest. Your 1-3 above all kind of tie together with personality/perception around the league. I’d give it a generous 4. Free Ageny I’d give a 5. Contracts id give an 8. Draft a 10. The things we do better now are way more important to having success in this league. Hence the best 3 year stretch under Snyder. Bruce is meh in my opinion. Meh>>>>>>Vinny. I think the years has made some forget how truly terrible he was. 

 

9 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As for the comparison of those two years -- supposedly Bruce's peak roster versus Vinny's nadir -- the year that got him fired.  I'd take the current roster but to me its not that crazy stark.  The glaring one missing to me is Chris Samuels is out for getting hurt in 2009.  He retired after that.  Replaced by Trent.  There really wasn't a Stephen Heyer era at LT. He played because of injury.  Chris Cooley got banged up in 2009, had a big year in 2010.  If Cooley's out, we should take Jordan Reed out too for being banged up in 2017.   I love Reed but I barely even take it seriously anymore about him being a starter.  

 

The roster is not even close. Put Cooley in take Reed out I don’t care. Vernon>Fred still if that’s your hangup. That OL is atrocious. Portis was washed up. Moss aging. Campbell the definition of mediocre. DL old, aging, and flat out money stealing sacks of potatoes. Landry got beaten like a drum at FS. I was more athletic than Doughty. I could go on and on and on and this isn’t even delving into the depth this team has. It’s literally not even close man. Either you are forgetting how bad things really were, or you just flat out hate Bruce Allen so much that it’s causing you to say ridiculous things. Vinny and Zorn make the current regime look like the Patriots. Still hardcore for zorn though. And everyone stay medium on the Bruce Allen lover talk. The gist of this post is to convey how bad Vinny was. Not how great Brucey Boy is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

I found myself cracking up typing out the 2009 roster. 2018 looks pretty damn strong to me and don't even get me started on depth.

 

So you can talk character and analyze every aspect till you are blue in the face. But one guy assembled the 2009 roster, and the other is responsible for 2018. It's literally not even close. Vinny was TERRIBLE.

 

Now compare 2005.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

So the guy responsible for bringing in the longest tenured coach during Snyder’s ownership and who seems to be a pretty damn good talent evaluator, as well as a young up and coming talent evaluator who has overseen two very good drafts in a row, is somehow worse than the train wreck that was Vinny Ceratto?

 

Somehow I go Bruce is worst over Vinny.  Though I said the opposite.  I actually highlight the two things you mention as the two things I'd like about him over Vinny.  But somehow that turns to me saying Vinny > Bruce and I need to be lectured about the same two things I highlighted?

 

Without getting too far in the weeds, I've read enough of your posts to focus on just some fundamental points that veer our debates off

 

A.   As much as I love the draft.  There is MORE to me -- a lot more to building a team than hey we kept our draft picks.  We drafted guys.  We liked the guys post draft that we drafted.  To me welcome to the NFL 101.  95% of the rest of the NFL does the same.  It's a good start.  But, there is much more that you got to do to create that edge IMO.

 

B.  Bruce's involvement when I read about it in recent years was mainly these things -- team PR, his rare public appearances, the Kirk contract, FA.  I think he was below average at all of it.

 

C.  I used to believe as a battered fan that FA doesn't work post Cerrato.  But I've seen teams successfully use it including in our own division.  This is where I hear Bruce is most involved.  And at least one reporter said Jay and Bruce have clashed over some FA decisions especially this year.  I think this team is bad at playing FA.

 

D.  No one stinks at everything.  Vinny didn't stink at everything.  Vinny's 2005 FA corp IMO was killer.  Ironically he was the last dude that turned around the defense via one off season. Fletcher might be the best FA signing of Dan's era.   Vinny made some good decisions.  He was here when Gibbs came on board.  Gibbs if you buy into his quotes loved Vinny. 

 

Some forget but when people like me argued against Vinny, he had some strong defenders just like Bruce has now.  And the defense was similar -- well look at these good things he did.  Yeah I am not arguing anyone is a walking train wreck and makes bad decision after bad decisions.  You make countless decisions over 9 years.  Some end up good, some end up bad.  It's about averaging them all. 

 

I don't think anyone in the NFL for that matter is just a walking joke and screws up everything.  Zorn had his attributes too.  So that's not my yardstick whether I like somethings done by so and so.  I like somethings done by just about every so and so.   So with that yardstick, I'd like everyone,. 

 

E. Drafts on paper are always exciting.   Post draft hype -- all teams pretty much have it.  I enjoy it as much as anyone.  You should have seen me after the 2011 draft. Hankerson looked like a stud in spot duty.  Helu and Royster had flashes.  Jenkins was the beast of training camp.  Kerrigan = stud.  Aldrick Robinson -- Charles Davis said was the steal of the draft.  Drafts have to play out.  I got no idea about this draft and the previous year -- on paper I like it - but I am not a scout, drafts need a couple of years to play out. 

 

 

7 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 But Bruce Allen is terrible...is only slightly better than Ceratto.

 

Here you hit my point the way I said it.  Slightly better than Cerrato.  Yep.  And I know that this is the fundamental disagreement we have and ditto some of the others here who argue on behalf of Bruce.  My #1 beef with Bruce is the clownish/incompetent vibe that he generates IMO -- which to me is totally apples to apples with Cerrato.  He might even be worse at it than Cerrato.   Maybe I am more sensitive on it with young kids who are surrounded by fans of other teams including from within my own family -- but I don't like turning on CNBC of all things and Kramer goofing on a company and using the Redskins as the comparison as if all will understand that means inept management without further explanation.

 

I don't like being the team that's a punchline.  And no I don't think that the default reaction and we can't help it.  It wasn't the case when Bruce initially came on board and Shanny was here.  It wasn't the case when Scot was here.  Bruce IMO recreated that image via his actions to bring it right back to the Vinny years. 

 

It matters to me if the team president lends to the reputation of the team being clownish, classless and incompetent.  I think it was funny when some local beat guys talked about Doug's emergence as more of a spokesman and they said people they talked to at Redskins Park told them they just trust Doug is less likely to make a gaffe and comes off more likable. 

 

So the dude to me isn't involved with the draft.  What I've seen in FA I mostly don't like.  What I've seen publicly from him, I often hate.  He represents (actually even more than Cerrato who at least had a scouting background) to me the hallmark of why this organization has been a loser under Dan -- that is why give a rats behind if the guy running personnel has major pedigree in scouting.   Though again I don't blame Bruce for that part -- why should he turn down the job -- that's on Dan.  If Bruce was running business operations I'd be totally fine with him.   Just like I'd have been fine with Vinny if he was just a scout versus head of personnel. 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.