Gizmo 3squire Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 Just now, purbeast said: LOL I don't know if you were listening this morning or not, but someone actually called in and basically called Kevin and Cooley out on this. About time they (we) start calling in on their bs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 I'm handling my fandom like Kirk is handling his contract. I dont know if I want a LTD with the redskins either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purbeast Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 53 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: I adored my grandmother. I spent more time in her house than mine growing up. She died two years ago at 88. I missed two days of work, mainly due to air travel. There is no earthly way he is missing the freaking combine over that. That's great. What does the combine have to do with anything I posted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 Just now, DogofWar1 said: Are there opportunities to interview people after the combine? Usually at individual school pro-days, right? If so, missing combine might not be the worst thing. Buncha numbers and medical reports that can be viewed later. So long as interviews can happen another time, the combine is disposable. Not that it makes his absence less unusual from the norm, but it may explain logically why his absence might be okay. The only thing we know right now is that Chris Russell is talking to different "sources" than everyone else. Because only he is breaking a doom and gloom story. He might be right, it's too early either way, but we at least have conflicting stories. Look, under any circumstance a GM missing the combine would be "odd" at best and "reason for concern" at worst. This would be a story for any team. And I would guess that 31 other teams would have handled in the press pretty quickly and cleanly. The Redskins have a history of always having a raging inferno behind the puff of smoke. There have been disturbing stories on Scot for three weeks during what can only be called a dumpster fire of a negotiation with Cousins. (Everyone realizes that Cousins is going to take home more money over three years than any player in NFL history, right?) On top of that, Scot has a well known history that has cost him two jobs in the past. This is not Kevin Colbert or John Elway or anyone who seems 100 percent stable and secure in his job missing a combine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justice98 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Califan007 said: JP FinlayVerified account @JPFinlayCSN "It's all bullsh**, he's not fired" what I just heard from a source I know and trust on Scot McCloughan. Story to come. The other part of this is, folks just don't like Russell, but these other people aren't really coming with any more concrete info than Russell is. It's a battle of anonymous sources, outside of people with a vested interest in denying the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Gizmo 3squire said: About time they (we) start calling in on their bs It's Dan Snyder's station. Basically one Dan Snyder publicly accused another Dan Snyder employee of being a rummy. And no one from the Redskins said a word. It's nuts. In all honesty, if there is any "legal" concern here that could be it. I'm not sure it's First Amendment issue when it can be turned into workplace harassment. 6 minutes ago, Boss_Hogg said: I'll take the word of Scot, his agent, Scot's wife, Bruce, JP Finlay, Rich Tandler, and Mike Jones over Chris Russell any day So Scot was banging that reporter last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: So Scot was banging that reporter last year? Again, all hyperbole and speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dissident2 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 13 minutes ago, Gizmo 3squire said: 14 minutes ago, purbeast said: LOL I don't know if you were listening this morning or not, but someone actually called in and basically called Kevin and Cooley out on this. About time they (we) start calling in on their bs The irony of this is that the caller mentioned was accusing Kevin and Cooley of being "mouthpieces" for Snyder, so that doesn't really fit the "media mindlessly bashing the Redskins" narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 He is drinking again, but it appears to me that they don't want to fire him. His grandmother passed almost a month ago. That excuse will not fly. What makes the most sense here is that he is drinking again, but the skins want him to figure it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Boss_Hogg said: Again, all hyperbole and speculation. Not if you take the word of his wife. Or can we be selective in taking the word of his wife? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 http://www.csnmidatlantic.com/washington-redskins/its-all-bullsh-hes-not-fired-word-scot-mccloughan-source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justice98 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Dissident2 said: The irony of this is that the caller mentioned was accusing Kevin and Cooley of being "mouthpieces" for Snyder, so that doesn't really fit the "media mindlessly bashing the Redskins" narrative. That's always been a baseless narrative ever since Snyder bought the station. If shilling for the front office was a Snyder mandate, BMitch woulda been gone a long time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 Funny how the usual suspects show up when things go TMZ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markshark84 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 1 hour ago, ThomasRoane said: I'm curious. If the Redskins disclosed that SM's drinking (he never said he stopped) was a problem again would they open themselves to litigation later? That would explain why everyone is sticking to the same story. Plus, SM does have an idea of what the Redskins want to do in the draft. It wouldn't be wise to piss him off and have him tip off the competition. Talk about litigation..... If Scot did that, he'd never work in the NFL again --- and not because of a lawsuit from the Redskins. It would be because no team would want to hire a guy that worked for an organization who disclosed privileged information about the ongoings of the franchise he is under contract with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 18 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: Look, under any circumstance a GM missing the combine would be "odd" at best and "reason for concern" at worst. This would be a story for any team. And I would guess that 31 other teams would have handled in the press pretty quickly and cleanly. The Redskins have a history of always having a raging inferno behind the puff of smoke. There have been disturbing stories on Scot for three weeks during what can only be called a dumpster fire of a negotiation with Cousins. (Everyone realizes that Cousins is going to take home more money over three years than any player in NFL history, right?) On top of that, Scot has a well known history that has cost him two jobs in the past. This is not Kevin Colbert or John Elway or anyone who seems 100 percent stable and secure in his job missing a combine. I don't disagree, but I don't think the present events are entirely inconsistent with Scot's version of events. A messy estate could require a lot of attention, and that's to say nothing of the emotions involved, which could be significant. I mean, the man broke his fist punching a wall over a player injury. Him being an emotional wreck for 3 weeks after the death of a grandparent is not out of the realm of possibility. So long as Scot can basically replicate the combine's important part, the interviews, elsewhere, I don't feel we can rule out that Scot and everyone else worked out an arrangement where he misses the combine on purpose. Now yes, the team being mum and not particularly forthcoming is concerning, both throughout February and now, but Redskins PR has always been terrible. I could see them saying after news of his grandma passing the FO saying "let's say nothing to anyone about anything Scot until he's done with it" which might explain why they kept mum despite Cooley, they worried they would out Scot's grieving before he was ready, though obviously hindsight they should have opposed it if nothinv was wrong. I mean, who knows. Could be worst case, could he innocuous. I just don't see enough evidence either way just yet. Lots of conflicting media speculation from anonymous sources. Gotta wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 IF scot is struggling again - what should the team do- it is not their place to announce someone's struggling with alcolholism - they can be there to support as much as they can but what good would a team announcement do ? What would it have done when Cooley shot his mouth off... all that happens when you answe one question is you get asked a whole bunch more ... if Scot is drinking again - then who gives a **** - in the bigger picture - he is not a brain surgeon or a pilot people didn't die - he is a talent evaluator for a football team - he is also a human being ... and I think people forget these things . IF he is drinking and If the team can support him and help stop his life going down the toilet again then surely that is a good thing - but remember it might be as stated - until Scot is ready to say anything i think it is none of our business - and instead of giving these "media" vultures the time of day we -as fans - for once could try supporting one of our own and keep out of the drama ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Dissident2 said: The irony of this is that the caller mentioned was accusing Kevin and Cooley of being "mouthpieces" for Snyder, so that doesn't really fit the "media mindlessly bashing the Redskins" narrative. Snyder is the media. Maybe Snyder has figured out that the real money is in bashing Snyder. My God, that's diabolical. Anyway, haven't we lived through twenty years of Sonny and Snyder? Cooley is the just the same dynamic - only edgier and hipper. If Cooley is "speculating," I'm farily certain that he's doing it with tacit approval from someone at Redskins Park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justice98 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, redskins59 said: He is drinking again, but it appears to me that they don't want to fire him. His grandmother passed almost a month ago. That excuse will not fly. What makes the most sense here is that he is drinking again, but the skins want him to figure it out. I can't even speculate whether he's drinking again or not. It could be a completely new, non-alcohol thing going on. But the grandmother story is flimsy. Something non-grandmother is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizmo 3squire Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: Snyder is the media. Maybe Snyder has figured out that the real money is in bashing Snyder. My God, that's diabolical. Anyway, haven't we lived through twenty years of Sonny and Snyder? Cooley is the just the same dynamic - only edgier and hipper. If Cooley is "speculating," I'm farily certain that he's doing it with tacit approval from someone at Redskins Park. I chucked in these dark times.lol But that would be so Redskins if that was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 I'd like to know what Scot's wife meant when she said "A price will be paid." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said: I don't disagree, but I don't think the present events are entirely inconsistent with Scot's version of events. A messy estate could require a lot of attention, and that's to say nothing of the emotions involved, which could be significant. I mean, the man broke his fist punching a wall over a player injury. Him being an emotional wreck for 3 weeks after the death of a grandparent is not out of the realm of possibility. So long as Scot can basically replicate the combine's important part, the interviews, elsewhere, I don't feel we can rule out that Scot and everyone else worked out an arrangement where he misses the combine on purpose. The guy has worked at the highest levels of the NFL for years now. Hire a damn attorney and do an Estate Sale. I mean, family is family, but a three week leave of absence during one of the most important parts of the off-season over THIS? I could almost buy that narrative but for Cooley's slander of the dude. That's the piece here that feels problematic. 5 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said: Funny how the usual suspects show up when things go TMZ. This is the fun part of being a Redskins fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, KingGibbs said: I'd like to know what Scot's wife meant when she said "A price will be paid." She know some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 By the way, I think it's odd to say "drinking again." Didn't that ESPN article a few years ago establish that he never stopped drinking? He was drinking during the freaking interview as I recall. The question with Scot is always "problem drinking," right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: The guy has worked at the highest levels of the NFL for years now. Hire a damn attorney and do an Estate Sale. I mean, family is family, but a three week leave of absence during one of the most important parts of the off-season over THIS? I could almost buy that narrative but for Cooley's slander of the dude. That's the piece here that feels problematic. I mean, it might be a combination of things. Maybe grandma hit him hard emotionally, and then he relapsed, and he's home dealing with it, or whatever. Maybe he fractured a vertebrae banging his head against a wall after hearing about it, ala Doctson injury fist punch on steroids. Cooley's slander is problematic, but I don't know how much weight to give it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justice98 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said: I don't disagree, but I don't think the present events are entirely inconsistent with Scot's version of events. A messy estate could require a lot of attention, and that's to say nothing of the emotions involved, which could be significant. I mean, the man broke his fist punching a wall over a player injury. Him being an emotional wreck for 3 weeks after the death of a grandparent is not out of the realm of possibility. Couple of things, if just needing more time to grieve were it (which seems questionable to me, but whatever), they could have simply said that. Particularly as the story was spinning out of control. But Scot said a completely different thing. Now, he wasn't obligated to say anything at all, it's a personal matter, but once he did, the truth was the way to go. But even if I bought the handling of estate affairs as a reason for all this, you still schedule these things. Lawyers and all that would work around the fact there's 5 days in March where he's unavailable with previous obligations. Whatever legal wrangling could be going on Thursday, the 2nd could go on Tuesday, the 7th. Or last week on the 23rd. 7 minutes ago, KingGibbs said: I'd like to know what Scot's wife meant when she said "A price will be paid." She seems kind of a live wire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.