Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

CONFIRMED: Scot McCloughan has accepted offer to become Redskins GM: Per Michael Robinson, Albert Breer and Ian Rapoport


Boss_Hogg

Recommended Posts

Actually you have that backwards. Gruden isnt his pick, so he isnt on the hook for Gruden. Which means if he stays around for a year or two and doesnt pan out, he can fire Gruden and bring in his own guy. Meanwhile, while figuring out if Gruden could work he was able to start building the roster. Gruden gives him time without any consequences. If he fired him and brought in someone else that didnt work thats his neck on the line.

 

I agree. Also lobbying to can a coach with 4 yrs left on his contract is not exactly the best way to get on the good side of your new bosses. Giving Gruden another year or two gives Scot some job security as well. I think he is getting a 4 year deal right? So if 2 years into that deal Gruden is not working out and gets canned you would figure Scot would be given a little more time with the new coach of his choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Belief in those clowns?

I'll back the bogey man.

Hail.

 

Except, if your view had any remote validity, someone would leak it.   Haslett, for SURE would leak it.   He'd make it known Snyder and/or Allen overruled Gruden.   Given people like you already believe it, he'd actually come off looking GOOD in spite of sucking so badly by making people think he lost his job over protest of his head coach.

 

He would actually increase his market value to say he was let go in spite of his coach wanting to keep him because of good a job he did.   None of this happened.   What DID happen, though, is a head coach defended his defensive coordinator.   Then, a head coach and defensive coordinator sat down and talked.   And you KNOW Haslett knows how hated he is.

 

You KNOW the two are friends.

 

You know someone in that room said, "Dude, if we struggle at ALL early next year, people will be calling for your/my (depending if Haslett or Gruden said it) head."   Gruden probably told him he's a good coach.   Haslett said, "I know, so are you."   And both realized staying together would mean BOTH would be out of work for a LONG time the first moment of trouble next season and that it was an impossible situation for a HATED coordinator to stay in.

 

Thus why both men met and decided it was the best thing all around, even though Gruden either really or politely believed Haslett didn't do badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe this for a second. If it was in the making since last year, why was it never brought up before? Think JSteelz is full of crap.

 

I believe it.  Bruce may be sneaky but he's not stupid.  His whole mannerism at the presser was just way off.  He had this sly grin on his face even when being pounded with one tough question after another.  I think he had this Ace up his sleeve for a while now.  This is a win-win for Bruce.  He can remain President till the day he dies.  He's good at all the PR stuff.  Everybody likes him personally and has a lot of respect for his dad.  He never claimed to be a guru at picking players in the first place.  The word has always been a good cap guy. 

 

To clarify, I don't believe JSteelz had inside knowledge but I believe Bruce had this in mind a while ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe this for a second. If it was in the making since last year, why was it never brought up before? Think JSteelz is full of crap.

I dont disagree except that it makes sense to an extent.  It begins to explain why a non-personnel guy takes over that role, then lets their best personnel guy walk. Who knows, just food for thought...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except, if your view had any remote validity, someone would leak it. Haslett, for SURE would leak it. He'd make it known Snyder and/or Allen overruled Gruden. Given people like you already believe it, he'd actually come off looking GOOD in spite of sucking so badly by making people think he lost his job over protest of his head coach.

He would actually increase his market value to say he was let go in spite of his coach wanting to keep him because of good a job he did. None of this happened. What DID happen, though, is a head coach defended his defensive coordinator. Then, a head coach and defensive coordinator sat down and talked. And you KNOW Haslett knows how hated he is.

You KNOW the two are friends.

You know someone in that room said, "Dude, if we struggle at ALL early next year, people will be calling for your/my (depending if Haslett or Gruden said it) head." Gruden probably told him he's a good coach. Haslett said, "I know, so are you." And both realized staying together would mean BOTH would be out of work for a LONG time the first moment of trouble next season and that it was an impossible situation for a HATED coordinator to stay in.

Thus why both men met and decided it was the best thing all around, even though Gruden either really or politely believed Haslett didn't do badly.

Yeah, still backing the bogey man over the company rhetoric.

Hail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say those are swings and misses considering all of the guys have had or did have long NFL careers as competent backup QBs except Frye.

Exactly, spot on EMB.  Too many analyst in the business have stated how talented Scotty M. is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand your skepticism, and all of it is warranted. However, how many have had the personnel chops that McCloughan has?

 

I guess I am not really skeptical as much as just not excited anymore. I am sure he is a great talent guy and hopefully, he will work out but its like clockwork with this organization. Have a horrible season and in early January the next guy in line is hired to fix everything.

 

I love the team but this year (combined with all the other nonsense) just made me apathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being concerned because the guy has washed out of the last two jobs because he is an alcoholic is completely legit. Is it concerning that articles out there say this guy does a great job but some people wouldn't hire him because of his personal demons? It should be to everyone. Doesn't mean people are looking for ways for it to fail or that anyone else is predicting doom and gloom.

 

I hope Daniel Snyder does things to create an environment where this guy can succeed and control his problem. Personally, I think this team has a 3-4 year window with this guy to succeed based on his previous jobs.

 

So let's trade down to a weaker offensive lineman? If the best lineman is projected as an immediate starter, don't outsmart yourself.

 

You can say what you want, but it's just more of the some whining and complaining about any and every move this organization makes. Much of it is certainly deserved, but that does not mean everything is a bad move.

 

Also, he didn't "wash out' of the other jobs. True he left because of an admitted drinking problem, but he also still managed to build 2 SB caliber teams with that "drinking problem." It didn't seem to affect his performance so at that point it becomes a personal issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This quote from former Seahawk Michael Robinson on ESPN is what I have been looking for ever since Dan took over the team and tanked it.

 

“One thing about Scottie, what he understands, not only talent, OK, that’s easy,” Robinson continued Tuesday. “You talk about Patrick Willis. You talk about Frank Gore. You talk about Justin Smith and all those guys. But he understands how to build a quality locker room. He’s not just looking for your attributes on the field. He’s looking for how can I infuse you into this locker room to make this…a place where it’s conducive to winning. We would have so many conversations on the football field in San Francisco I can remember. He would always stand kind of behind everything and watch all of practice. When I would finish a play all the way through and I would talk to him and [say], ‘What are you looking for? Why do you sit back here and look all the time?’ He’d say, ‘Mike, I know all you guys can play. I’m looking to see the chemistry. I’m looking to see how you guys deal with each other.’ He’s really a bright guy. He looks at talent a whole different way, unlike I’ve seen in this business.”

 

Just think what it would be like to have someone look at the full picture - how players work together instead of against each other or just for themselves...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He will because everyone else has been except Norv and a TINY bit of interference with Zorn toward the end.

Dan fired Marty do that he could get back to meddling. Played GM during Spurrier. Was extremely involved in free agency and the draft with Gibbs. A TINY bit for Zorn? Ok. Shanny certainly didn't feel like Dan kept his fingers out of everything and let the coach do his job.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was doing an impression of what he regards as the disingenuous racism of owners when handling the Rooney Rule, and using some charged racist language to underline what he think is the true story behind the racist behavior/tokenism of the owners. 

 

Reread what he wrote and you can see what he means there.

 

I disagree with him, but understand his p.o.v. It is tokenism, but before the rooney rule, it was virtually impossible to get any of the white owners to interview African-Americans for HC jobs, Coordinator jobs, or GM jobs etc. You only have to turn back the clock to the days of Joe Montana, Phil Simms and Marino to locate a league wide bias against African-American QB's. 

 

You had to force these idiots and racists, as well as the simply social ignorant's (rich old white guys that had never hung out with any African-American's and were more comfortable with what they knew-fellow old white guys) to even entertain the thought of "not hiring" an African American candidate after an interview, let alone having an interview at all. It was a long road and the Rooney Rule was put in place to open the door to candidates. It creates some uncomfortable and ugly situations at times, but it's definitely a major improvement over the Al Campanis attitude that reflected quite well the thinking in a majority of F.O.'s just a generation ago. 

No, I agree with his point and have had another poster point out that he was just trying to make a point, in a very poor way I may add. The use of quotation marks on his part probably would have saved some typing for some folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I'm sure Mara and Lurie are already thinking of ideas for Goodell...

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2015/01/07/diversity-group-files-complaint-over-redskins-gm-search/

 

EDIT: Sorry, just found it was updated an hour later.

 

I think it's kind of funny though that... Wooten: “I don’t think it violated the letter of the [Rooney] rule. It violated the spirit of the rule."

 

Hmmm, where have we heard that before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This quote from former Seahawk Michael Robinson on ESPN is what I have been looking for ever since Dan took over the team and tanked it.

 

Just think what it would be like to have someone look at the full picture - how players work together instead of against each other or just for themselves...

 

D53pAmG.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan fired Marty do that he could get back to meddling. Played GM during Spurrier. Was extremely involved in free agency and the draft with Gibbs. A TINY bit for Zorn? Ok. Shanny certainly didn't feel like Dan kept his fingers out of everything and let the coach do his job.

 

So, with Marty, Snyder didn't like being out of the loop completely, and didn't like some of the moves he made.  Marty wouldn't relinquish control, so he was gone.  Spurrier was the three headed monster and that didn't work at all.  Gibbs had complete control and Snyder was glad to give him anything he asked for.  While he did give control over to Vinny for Zorn, he did still try to have the meetings with the head coach he did under Gibbs, but that was just a bad idea.  Since then, he's been pretty much hands off, but he still gets his input on FO decisions, as does most owners in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can say what you want, but it's just more of the some whining and complaining about any and every move this organization makes. Much of it is certainly deserved, but that does not mean everything is a bad move.

 

Also, he didn't "wash out' of the other jobs. True he left because of an admitted drinking problem, but he also still managed to build 2 SB caliber teams with that "drinking problem." It didn't seem to affect his performance so at that point it becomes a personal issue. 

 

Agreed totally. This team was going to suck for the next few years without a change in approach. This guy will make us better without question over the next couple of years. Will he crash & burn ? who the hell knows. I'll take the chance given his tenures in SF and Seattle have lasted 4/5 years even with issues.

 

2 years, 4 years. 5 years...more..we don't know yet, but I'm sure we'll be better & moving forward however this thing plays out.

 

The alternative was probably no change....no thanks to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link Skins.  Loved this from JLC at the end of the piece. 

 

"Maybe, just maybe, McCloughan is catching Snyder at is lowest point, more vulnerable than ever, truly on wounded knee, willing to win on someone else's terms rather than continue losing on his. The mere possibility, for long-suffering Skins fans, is almost too tantalizing to conceive of."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JLC who is as cynical as it gets about this team

 

"...And few will believe Snyder is completely divested of meddling in football operations until they see it with their own eyes."

 

 

That's just it...it's impossible for anyone outside of a very select few to "see it with their own eyes". The overly-simplistic equation the fan base uses (along with some media members) is that if the Redskins are winning, it means Snyder isn't meddling. If the Redskins are losing, it means Snyder is meddling. Nobody makes their conclusions based on actually seeing concrete proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I agree with his point and have had another poster point out that he was just trying to make a point, in a very poor way I may add. The use of quotation marks on his part probably would have saved some typing for some folks.

He was actually being offensively racist in the opposite way that he took heat for. The implication he used was that the NFL is run by these old white guys who are openly racist behind closed doors and view blacks as mere apes... Sometimes I have to check the calendar to see what year it is: "yep it really is 2015 and not 1948."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now the Fritz Pollard Alliance is filing a complaint against us for not telling the league we were interviewing the token minority candidate? 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2015/01/07/diversity-group-files-complaint-over-redskins-gm-search/

 

 

I like how they allege the Redskins did not violate the Rooney Rule, but did violated the "spirit of the rule". You know, just how the Redskins violated the Spirit of the Salary Cap. Not only do you have to comply with all these rules and regulations, you need to comply with the spirit of them as well!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scot certainly has his work cut out for him. There's a pile of paperwork,couple of thousand emails,who knows how many hours of game "film", and a whole lot of evaluations waiting for him right about now,(among other things).  Damn near sends my ADHD in to overdrive thinking about it. Matter of fact,I need to get up because pigs are my favorite color. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...