Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Here's how I tend to take all this: Whenever something I love seems to be going wrong, I want clarity. And I'm willing to wait for it. Just make sure it's accurate, because above all else I want to know the truth. Rampant speculation kills off any chance at clarity. I appreciate those media members who say right up front "I'll find out what I can and until then I won't speculate on anything". I don't appreciate those media members who, 9 seconds after it's known something is going on, give me an avalanche of rumors and speculations they've heard about over the last month or so. I want to cut through all of that to see if there's anything I can hold onto. It makes everything harder for me as a result...and I despise the media speculators who claim that their speculating is not their fault. Also, don't give me things as "fact" that can't be proven, like jealousy. You can't investigate how jealous Bruce Allen is lol...he and Scot aren't lovers. Not that there's anything wrong with that lol...but "I've been told that Bruce Allen is jealous of the praise Scot M gets" sounds like high school gossip, not something grown-ass men toss out with a puffed-up chest. So I'm willing to wait, like others have said before me on this thread. I don't need to reach a conclusion now, and there's no holiday rush on voicing my displeasure or anger over anything. I don't have a need to be among the first people on ES to get pissed off lol...it's not like I can't get pissed off later. "Dammit, I wanted to get pissed off over this whole McCloughan/Allen thing but I waited too long!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 One thing that is possible is that SM wants to build one kind of team, the kind that he knows how to build, (ie: SF/Seattle mold, tough, hard-nose, run-first and play defense team) and doesn't really want to build a pass-first team and invest in QB/WR. That could be entirely at odds with Gruden/Allen. And if they just can't agree on the direction the team should take, Gruden/Allen win because Allen is SM's boss. And that wouldn't be the worst thing, maybe they get somebody else to choose players that more fits their style. This is always the danger of hiring a GM with a HC still in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrobert Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Scot > Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dissident2 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 1 minute ago, ixcuincle said: Again the whole narrative that he was a bad GM when he drafted Robert Kelley, Crowder, Scheff and Cravens is ridiculous. He made some mistakes but many of them weren't his fault. Under what circumstances could his drafting be considered mediocre? Do you people honestly forget Bruce Allen's drafts? Or Cerrato? We have a competent guy at GM and suddenly the story is he's a terrible talent evaluator? Get over yourselves people. All I know is, we haven't had a losing season in two years under Scot. We've finally gotten to the cusp of respectability and stability, and the jackalopes that run things just don't seem to understand how to handle success. In Scot we bust, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 6 minutes ago, ixcuincle said: Again the whole narrative that he was a bad GM when he drafted Robert Kelley, Crowder, Scheff and Cravens is ridiculous. He made some mistakes but many of them weren't his fault. Under what circumstances could his drafting be considered mediocre? Do you people honestly forget Bruce Allen's drafts? Or Cerrato? We have a competent guy at GM and suddenly the story is he's a terrible talent evaluator? Get over yourselves people. How do you know that Cravens is good? They couldn't even decide what position to play him Or that Kelley is sustainable? Crowder and Scherff look good but there's a decent chance that his last first round pick is a bust and that he had a hand in running a good QB out of town. Listen, I didn't want the guy gone but he's definitely been very hit or miss since he's been here. But now that he's gone after a such a short amount of time, he's gonna become "the greatest GM in history" and that revisionist history is going to be very annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Anyone who thinks we'd actually get another GM if Scot is fired is crazy. It would become the Doug Williams/Bruce Allen/Jay Gruden show. And that other guy that's been here forever, Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 I'm a huge SM fan and I'm very upset that this appears to be the end of the road for him in DC. If the rumors are true let's be honest, it was a risky hire. None of us wanted to admit that at the time, we were just so thrilled to have such a talented evaluator of football talent that we over looked the obvious. With that said his history here was only OK. It's too early to judge his drafts, Doc could turn into AJ Green. But Scherff at 5 was about as safe as it gets, Crowder was a really good pick and the rest is up in the air. As for his FA sure he signed second teir "low risk" players but there was a risk. That risk was they would fail, leaving the same hole to be filled and collectively they represented a lot of dead cap space. And that is exactly what happened with Pea and company. We have one of the highest dead cap figures in the league. For ever Vernon Davis or Ty N. there are 3-4 players like David Bruton and Chris Culliver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Also, we know VERY little. It will probably turn out that the guy just needs some time to get his **** together and it has nothing to do with Bruce Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Ill be very glad when this gets settled in a month or so........oh god, its going to take that long isnt it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Love The Skins Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 4 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said: Also, we know VERY little. It will probably turn out that the guy just needs some time to get his **** together and it has nothing to do with Bruce Allen ITA it might turn out to be a non story.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onedrop Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 2 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said: Anyone who thinks we'd actually get another GM if Scot is fired is crazy. It would become the Doug Williams/Bruce Allen/Jay Gruden show. And that other guy that's been here forever, Campbell. when the hoopla had died down and the new owner was announced all those years ago a friend excitedly said to me...."the new owner is a fan, just like us. its gonna be awesome" i dont remember honestly what i felt at that moment but i certainly wish now that this was not the case. i truly believe Snyders fandom, not some evil villain persona, is his downfall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Would be very disappointing if Scot goes. I get if it's because of personal reasons, i.e. substance abuse, but if it's for any other reason it doesn't bode well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Is there any reason to believe that Snyder is involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 7 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said: Is there any reason to believe that Snyder is involved? Depends on what you mean by "involved". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 1 minute ago, Birdlives said: Would be very disappointing if Scot goes. I get if it's because of personal reasons, i.e. substance abuse, but if it's for any other reason it doesn't bode well. Totally agree. If this is a result of his drinking then despite the clumsy PR by the team I would have no problem with the decision. However if this is a power play between a jealous Bruce and SM and Scott is let go we should all be really upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
actorguy1 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Sigh...Will we ever know the real story anyway? It's going to be one group blaming Snyder and Allen and another group claiming Scott's drinking problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said: I will say this about the back and forth in this thread: Anyone who thinks the Redskins deserve any benefit of the doubt, hasn't been paying attention for 20+ years. Anyone who thinks the Post is objective in any way, shape, or form with the Redskins, hasn't been paying attention for 17+ years. Well said. I've come to the realization that it's next to impossible to hold a nuanced view here (or arguably anywhere on the internet) without being painted into a corner or having your thoughts overly simplified. It just sucks. It's with everything and every topic. In this case, you can say a million times how acknowledging some of those within the media's lack of proper reporting (and even give a myriad of examples be it a lack of sources cited, mixing opinion with fact but presenting it all as fact, exaggerations based off speculation and conjecture, etc...) DOES NOT negate acknowledging that, perhaps, something is awry and that the organization may be doing something wrong or has done something wrong. Both can be true. You don't have to be on either "side". No one can end up "right" here because no one has the entire friggin story. Recent example: You can acknowledge Russell's initial story being based on something legit while also acknowledging that he's likely to have exaggerated or embellished, and that he's wrong for doing so. Why should I like that he's seemingly excited at hearing terrible news about the organization? Look at this tweet when the news broke about that moronic trade scenario: That's his first response to Rapaport's crazy scenario where we lose both Kirk and draft picks for Romo while the Cowboys and Niners gain them. Is that cool? I can read Mike Jones's and Brewer's stories while sifting through them for actual sources being cited (anonymously or not), while questioning what is in there that doesn't have that. Isn't that how one is supposed to read these things? Or is any opinion/speculation/embellishment supposed to simply be accepted at face value because, hey, "past dysfunction". For instance, I can wonder how Brewer says something like this: Quote It’s possible because the trio of Gruden, McCloughan and Allen — despite the current drama — already have the franchise on the verge of sustainable success. McCloughan has been a part of forming the offseason plan, and whether he is allowed to execute it, Washington figures to follow it. The remainder of the front office that spent months contributing to the plan remains in place. As free agency begins this week, the team’s needs are clear: maintain or replenish the receiving corps and get as many quality defensive players as the budget will allow. Then trust McCloughan’s draft insights. And then contrast it with Russell's initial take: Quote Russell stated president Bruce Allen, coach Jay Gruden, scouts Alex Santos and Scott Campbell, and personnel executive Doug Williams have taken over. Williams has reportedly taken on an "increased role," likely at McCloughan's expense. McCloughan "has nothing to do with anything and has not for a very long time," according to Russell. McCloughan is allegedly missing the Combine due to the passing of his 100-year-old grandmother. Online records show McCloughan's grandmother passed away on February 6. The funeral occurred on February 13, and the woman was laid to rest the next day. There are many examples of this. There absolutely has been wrong done by the media and that doesn't absolve the team. It's not either/or. I'm sure I'll be labeled here a "homer" who has his "head buried in the sand" now. None of what I said in this post will be taken contextually and interpreted properly. The entire time I was writing this I'm thinking to myself "what's the point". It seems like every post I start out to write these days that's what I'm thinking. The vast majority of which I can't bring myself to hit "submit". Sucks. :/ Looks like Scot is gone. I still hope that's not the case and it's all been sensationalized. I'd like to know exactly what happened. It's extremely important that it wasn't based on some disagreement regarding personnel. If that's the case, this organization can't even be called one, since there's no organizational structure. Titles are still meaningless. But hopefully that's not what the issue was. And they'd better place someone legitimate into that role who has final say over personnel. That title/role should not change. No random assortment of executives with whom no one knows where the buck stops and the only ones not accountable are those closest to Dan. This is what I've maintained since hiring Scot initially. His inability to maintain his last two jobs was always a concern and I said that, as long as the hiring process is solid and we keep the current (sound) structure in tact, we'll be okay even if we have to move on from him. It's frustrating this even needs to be discussed when we're so damn close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh32 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 31 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said: You can't be serious... And his goal was never to sign a bunch of difference makers (i.e. expensive vets) in free agency. He drafted a guard and a wr that has has shown anything..Just about everybody else he has drafted has been a bust so far or underperformed..look at the pathetic defense he built and compare it to the offense that was built mostly by Shanahan and Allen..So again what has he done to make this team better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyst Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 The guys has a hand in continued success in Green Bay, San Fransisco and Seattle but can't build a winner in DC. Sounds about right for this franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Just now, bh32 said: He drafted a guard and a wr that has has shown anything..Just about everybody else he has drafted has been a bust so far or underperformed..look at the pathetic defense he built and compare it to the offense that was built mostly by Shanahan and Allen..So again what has he done to make this team better? Did you just completely ignore all the posts after my initial reply? If so, go look there for your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
actorguy1 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 All we can hope is that we follow the same paths to the playoffs that Seattle and San Francisco (pre Harbaugh firing) after letting Scot go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 2 minutes ago, actorguy1 said: All we can hope is that we follow the same paths to the playoffs that Seattle and San Francisco (pre Harbaugh firing) after letting Scot go I'd have more hope regarding that if Scot was given 5 years to build up our roster before a far inferior talent evaluator took over (Trent Baalke in SF) or if he was only here for a couple years, but a talent evaluator who was just as good was still there running the show (John Schneider in SEA). Bruce resembles the former more-so than the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh32 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 2 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said: I'd have more hope regarding that if Scot was given 5 years to build up our roster before a far inferior talent evaluator took over (Trent Baalke in SF) or if he was only here for a couple years, but a talent evaluator who was just as good was still there running the show (John Schneider in SEA). Bruce resembles the former more-so than the latter. Bruce Allen had a better 2014 draft than Scot has in the two years he has been here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedBeast Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Yeah bail on GMSM, it such an easy job and we have a great history and success with GMs here ...get this guy, he knows how to do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Green Fan Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 9 minutes ago, bh32 said: Bruce Allen had a better 2014 draft than Scot has in the two years he has been here As I said I'm a huge SM fan but an argument could be made that you are correct. I keep seeing posters say that SM is responsible for the Redskins turnaround the past 2 years when the fact is the vast majority of the most productive players were already on the roster before he arrived. Cousins DJax Pierre Reed Trent, in fact 4/5 of the starting OL Chris Thomas Chris Baker Off the top of my head these along with Crowder, Scherff and Norman are the top players on this team in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.