Bruce Allen, Scot McCloughlan, Jay Gruden, and all that stuff like that there

[SkinsPassion4Life]

Another day and more FAKE NEWS!....trying to make GMSM look like a genius and victim.....and so many fans fall for it...hook..line...and sinker!

[William Barbour]

Im sure both sides are at fault, but the media will follow the way the fans sway. Right now, its bashing the Redskins and praising Scot. 

 

If we draft 3 super stars, win the East and sign Kirk to a LTD. They will revisit this next year and talk about how Scot was an issue

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

25 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

 

 

If we draft 3 super stars, win the East and sign Kirk to a LTD. They will revisit this next year and talk about how Scot was an issue

The question is, if we draft poorly and finish in the basement, will you revisit and admit they were right?

 

I see the Eagles getting better, Giants about the same and Dallas worse.  But Dallas' worse could be better than us.  Drafting 3 superstars is quite a feat in matter of 3 years much less one draft.

[Probos]

1 hour ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

Another day and more FAKE NEWS!....trying to make GMSM look like a genius and victim.....and so many fans fall for it...hook..line...and sinker!

 

How exactly do you know if it is "fake news"?  What inside info do you have?  Oh that's right,...you have none.  

[Skinz_4_life]

49 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The question is, if we draft poorly and finish in the basement, will you revisit and admit they were right?

 

I see the Eagles getting better, Giants about the same and Dallas worse.  But Dallas' worse could be better than us.  Drafting 3 superstars is quite a feat in matter of 3 years much less one draft.

 

This draft will be based of former GMSMs board. Even the free agents we signed were similar to SM Direction last year. 

[ANONYMOUS SOURCE.]

If they just get Kirk locked in long term the volume on the rest of this BS gets turned down Id bet.  However if they do, and the team/Kirk doesn't deliver next season it will be unlike anything we've seen. ?

[RWJ]

1 minute ago, ANONYMOUS SOURCE. said:

If they just get Kirk locked in long term the volume on the rest of this BS gets turned down Id bet.  However if they do, and the team/Kirk doesn't deliver next season it will be unlike anything we've seen. ?

KC's done it 2 years in a row.  No reason why he can't do it for another 4 to 5 years. 

[SkinsPassion4Life]

9 minutes ago, Probos said:

 

How exactly do you know if it is "fake news"?  What inside info do you have?  Oh that's right,...you have none.  

 

Common sense

[skins island connection]

 

 I told myself I wasn't going to read, much less reply on this topic, enough has been said all around.

 

 With that being said, I cannot believe some of you people in here. I've made my feelings well known about Allen, not so much Snyder, mostly because he's a rich guy who doesn't know when to stay out of business. But my god it is flat out wrong to kick a man while he's down. Does Scot have an alcohol problem? Most likely, but none of us know to what extent.

 

He has a problem much bigger than football; he has a possible life and death serious problem, and some of you could care less whether the man dies or not, as long as you get to continue beating on a dead horse to base assumptions on. I suppose if he got so down and committed suicide you would say good riddens, huh!  Who cares, he's not a Redskin anymore, right?

 

Is this the way you treat friends or family members? Do you criticize relatives who have a drinking problem because they didn't send you a birthday card?  This is much bigger an issue than the Redskins, its a person's life !   The one single thing he needs more than anything is support to help him overcome his problem, screw whatever job he has, and that goes for every other person out there who has a problem. There is a way out, and he can get there, but not by the words of some here.

 

Sorry, I put a person's life way way higher than sports, and I love the Redskins, so that should give anyone an idea of what it means to me. 

I think the best thing for me is to just stay away from ES for awhile, maybe find some hobby to get into. no offense to the ones who have to monitor this site, but its gotten way out of hand, and frankly its disgusting.

 

George

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Finally someone applies logic lol...From Tandler:

 

 

3. I get that everyone is mad because Scot McCloughan wanted to sign Kirk Cousins to a contract extension in 2015 after Cousins was named the starter and Bruce Allen didn’t want to do it. But how realistic is it to think that they could have come to an agreement on a long-term contract at that time? Would they base the value on his 2014 starts, when he was turnover prone and eventually benched and demoted to third string? Or after, say, Week 6 when he was sitting there with six TD’s and eight interceptions and a passer rating of 77.4? There were talks during the bye week after the “you like that!” comeback over the Bucs but nothing materialized. And according to the Breer article by the time December came around the Cousins camp wanted to wait until 2016 to talk.

 

So they essentially had a window between the bye week and December to get a deal done. The Redskins went 2-2 in that stretch with blowout losses against the Patriots and Panthers. While you couldn’t necessarily blame either loss on Cousins, they weren’t the kinds of performances that made you want to throw a bunch of money at him, either.

 

If someone can tell me when there was an opportunity there to come up with a contract that offer that would have been either so high as to look like a vast overpay for the team or a big-time lowball from Cousins’ perspective, I’m all ears. The timing just wasn’t right. This doesn’t mean that disagreement over how it should be handled was a good thing and it shows that McCloughan's instincts were right. According to Breer it was the nexus of things falling apart in Ashburn. But thinking that Cousins would be signed for a few more years now if McCloughan had prevailed in 2015 doesn’t really add up.

 

http://www.csnmidatlantic.com/washington-redskins/need-know-how-realistic-was-redskins-cousins-contract-agreement-2015

[ThomasTomasz]

16 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Absolutely.  This organization has made their bed with decades of examples of treating employees poorly and escalating the drama. Their history of clumsy PR and damage control is perhaps unmatched in American sports.   If other's want to ignore that evidence this is their right, but they should not be judging those who see the organization differently. 

 

Forget unmatched in sports, it's unmatched in the business world as well.  If the Redskins were a publicly traded company, there wouldn't be any shareholders left.  I have no idea how Snyder created his first IT company and sold it for millions- nothing he has ever done with the Redskins has shown me he can be a successful businessman. 

[Dissident2]

40 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

This doesn’t mean that disagreement over how it should be handled was a good thing and it shows that McCloughan's instincts were right. According to Breer it was the nexus of things falling apart in Ashburn.

 

 

http://www.csnmidatlantic.com/washington-redskins/need-know-how-realistic-was-redskins-cousins-contract-agreement-2015

 

Mostly good points from Tandler. Cooley and Kevin were talking about this this morning, and Cooley basically agreed with Tandler's stance, but suggested that if a $10-$12 million deal was still on the table at week 6 of the 2015 season, Kirk may have well taken it. But they all agreed that it still would've required a huge leap of faith for the FO to even offer a deal at all at that point based on what Kirk had shown up until then. 

 

For me, the much bigger takeway is the last part I quoted. "It shows McCloughan's instincts were right." The fact that he could see the worth of signing Cousins back then after a pretty shaky start to his career shows just how valuable McCloughan was and could've continued to be if things had taken a different turn. If nothing else, it's yet more evidence for the argument that another, better football mind is needed out there beyond Allen and a return to the status quo pre-2015.

 

Quote

But thinking that Cousins would be signed for a few more years now if McCloughan had prevailed in 2015 doesn’t really add up.

 

I don't get that one. If he had prevailed in 2015, they WOULD have signed Cousins long-term, so that comment doesn't really make sense. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

8 minutes ago, Dissident2 said:

I don't get that one. If he had prevailed in 2015, they WOULD have signed Cousins long-term, so that comment doesn't really make sense. 

 

lol...Technically you're right. But I think he meant that if McC had prevailed at being allowed to TRY and sign Cousins to an extension...not that if he had prevailed at actually signing him. He could have written that part better.

[Reaper Skins]

45 minutes ago, ThomasTomasz said:

nothing he has ever done with the Redskins has shown me he can be a successful businessman. 

Net worth when he bought the team in 1999:  750 million

Current net worth despite how awful he is at the job: 2.85 billion

 

I'm no fan of Snyder, but the business side of it is the one area he hasn't been a loser

[ThomasTomasz]

16 minutes ago, Reaper Skins said:

Net worth when he bought the team in 1999:  750 million

Current net worth despite how awful he is at the job: 2.85 billion

 

I'm no fan of Snyder, but the business side of it is the one area he hasn't been a loser

I'm talking about leading a professional organization.  Compared to the Patriots, Packers, Steelers or Ravens, there just isn't a comparison between Snyder and those owners (or in the case of the Packers, Murphy and the controlling board.)   Like I said, the way people are hired and fired, business results (on the field) and how the organization handles PR relations, investors would have bailed out long ago.

 

Just the same, Jeffrey Loria is known as one of the worst owners in MLB, and probably could carry that title for all professional sports teams right now in the Big 4.  He bought the Marlins for $159 million (received a no-interest loan from MLB in the process) and it was rumored that he was going to sell to the Kushner family a few months ago for $1.7 billion.  All of that stemmed from an initial minority investment in the Montreal Expos in 1999 of $12 million US, and $50 million later when a series of cash calls went unanswered, he ended up with 93% of the Expos, which he sold to MLB in part to help him buy the Marlins a few years later. 

 

We are really talking inflation here, and also how the NFL has quickly become a gigantic cash cow since Snyder took over as owner.

[Peregrine]

20 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

We have also "heard" that he was not answering calls. The only part I was actually responding to was that he went home on his own, that he was not sent home. I should not have bolded the other part. Doing too many things at once. 

 

Having said that, It's not a big leap from him going home to him stopping accepting calls. It was reported that the reason he left was because he was not supported by the team when Cooley suggested he was drinking again. But fair enough, that could all be bull****. I mean that sincerely.

 

But again, I was mostly addressing the point that he was not sent home. That is a verifiable fact. The way your comment read it sounded like you did not believe that.

 

 

And therein is the problem, "Its not a big leap", just starts leap after leap, and I think ignores that the ONLY actual reports we have from people say he was fielding calls.  Now Im not saying whether he was or wasnt for sure, but Im just not understanding some people putting this out there as fact based on one post by a forum member.  If its been "heard", where has it been heard?  I was curious, but it seems like no one really has an answer for it.  Its one of those cases where no one can say where its been heard....then has it really been heard?  Especially considering the army of beat writers who would LOVE to run with that story.

 

I certainly agree it seems most likely he wasnt sent home but left on his own terms at one point.

 

 

[goskins10]

7 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

And therein is the problem, "Its not a big leap", just starts leap after leap, and I think ignores that the ONLY actual reports we have from people say he was fielding calls.  Now Im not saying whether he was or wasnt for sure, but Im just not understanding some people putting this out there as fact based on one post by a forum member.  If its been "heard", where has it been heard?  I was curious, but it seems like no one really has an answer for it.  Its one of those cases where no one can say where its been heard....then has it really been heard?  Especially considering the army of beat writers who would LOVE to run with that story.

 

I certainly agree it seems most likely he wasnt sent home but left on his own terms at one point.

 

 

 

So you clearly stopped reading after the first sentence. The statement below is directly from my response. May want to read my response again.

 

"But fair enough, that could all be bull****. I mean that sincerely.

 

But again, I was mostly addressing the point that he was not sent home. That is a verifiable fact. The way your comment read it sounded like you did not believe that."

 

 

 

[Coach Janky Spanky]

1 hour ago, Dissident2 said:

 

For me, the much bigger takeway is the last part I quoted. "It shows McCloughan's instincts were right." The fact that he could see the worth of signing Cousins back then after a pretty shaky start to his career shows just how valuable McCloughan was and could've continued to be if things had taken a different turn. If nothing else, it's yet more evidence for the argument that another, better football mind is needed out there beyond Allen and a return to the status quo pre-2015.

 

 

 

YES!

 

It's difficult to speculate on what the contract numbers would've been if they'd been able to sign him between the bye week and December, and what they would have based his value on.  But to me that's missing the point entirely.   The critical thing is the bigger takeaway.  You hire a GM (and allegedly at the time give him full control) for situations just like this!   So that the GM can say something like:  "listen, Cousins wasn't great last year and hasn't had a great start, but I've been here for 9 months now and I've seen enough.  This is the guy.  You might think I'm crazy, but pay him now before it's too late.  The window of opportunity will be closed soon."  

 

That's why you hire a GM!   But they didn't listen to him.   They didn't listen to him.  Allen stood there in January 2015 and looked us all in the eye and said "I'm giving Scot control."   But he didn't.   He didn't listen to Scot at maybe the most critical moment of the past 2 years, and I believe it will be a franchise altering mistake.  We sign Cousins then in mid-season 2015, the national media flips out saying we're a laughing stock, and then well, how about that, six weeks later we're in the driver's seat to the NFC East title with the best Redskins QB in 20 years not locked up at a discount rate, allowing us to sign a ton of other guys.   A ton of other guys we now cannot afford because of that huge mistake.  

 

Let me be clear.  I would never have thought to sign Cousins between the bye and December.  I don't know if anyone on here would.  But the Tandler article, to talk about the fact that we would've had a hard time coming up with numbers at the time that made sense to both parties, that misses the point.  So the Redskins are 2-2 during the bye to December stretch, the window of opportunity to sign him, from Tandler's article.  So what!  A GM does not evaluate a QB solely on how the team does in 4 games.  Bruce Allen might.  But he's not a GM.  Scot started evaluating Cousins the moment he got here in January 2015 and after a handful of games, he'd seen enough to know.  He was ready to take a leap of faith.  To him, it probably wasn't even a leap, it was a safe bet.  Huge, catastrophic mistake not to listen to him.    

 

 

 

 

[Dissident2]

25 minutes ago, Coach Janky Spanky said:

 

YES!

 

It's difficult to speculate on what the contract numbers would've been if they'd been able to sign him between the bye week and December, and what they would have based his value on.  But to me that's missing the point entirely.   The critical thing is the bigger takeaway.  You hire a GM (and allegedly at the time give him full control) for situations just like this!   So that the GM can say something like:  "listen, Cousins wasn't great last year and hasn't had a great start, but I've been here for 9 months now and I've seen enough.  This is the guy.  You might think I'm crazy, but pay him now before it's too late.  The window of opportunity will be closed soon."  

 

 

Exactly. And even if they couldn't get him signed during 2015, the window was wide open after the season ended. If they'd truly believed in Scot and allowed him to have the control they said he had, they would've found a way to get that deal done prior to the 2016 season. Those are the far greater issues here. I believe the Breer piece said that Scot wasn't even allowed to deal with Kirk's agent after 2015, that it was put in the hands of Eric Schaefer, and the deal never got done. They hired Scot because, in Allen's words, he had the ability to find the kinds of players who'd make great Redskins. “We picked Scot because of his great track record, but really the way he describes a football player, the intangibles that he’s looking for in a football player and the winning traits that he has helped other teams acquire.” That's another quote from Allen. Scot dubbed Cousins as one of those players with those winning traits, and they didn't listen. I agree, big mistake. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

I am convinced the most divisive phrase in American culture today is FAKE NEWS.  I swear if I read it one more time I'm going to puke.  It's a crutch for those who reject bad news. Problem is not every bit of bad news can be excused away as fake news, much of it is true or at least has it's roots in truth even if they get a bit of the specifics or a date wrong on occasion. 

 

 

Here has been our pattern for 20 years.

 

We suck

Then we suck some more

Then we make a miracle run at the end of the season and squeak into the playoffs where we scare nobody and leave early

Then we suck

Then we rebuild and sell our fans on the new beginning

Then we suck.

[LightningBuggs]

40 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

I am convinced the most divisive phrase in American culture today is FAKE NEWS.  I swear if I read it one more time I'm going to puke.  It's a crutch for those who reject bad news. Problem is not every bit of bad news can be excused away as fake news, much of it is true or at least has it's roots in truth even if they get a bit of the specifics or a date wrong on occasion. 

 

 

Here has been our pattern for 20 years.

 

We suck

Then we suck some more

Then we make a miracle run at the end of the season and squeak into the playoffs where we scare nobody and leave early

Then we suck

Then we rebuild and sell our fans on the new beginning

Then we suck.

(Standing and applauding)  Couldn't have said it any better myself.  Well done.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

Here's a thought.  If the Redskins really gave a **** about getting another GM - don't you think we would have heard something by now?  There have been 0 official interviews.  To me, this whole thing stinks.  It sounds more and more like Bruce Allen had some issues with Scot's plan.  And speaking of which, how many times over the past two years did we hear this phrase "Scot, the man with the plan".  The players certainly believed in Scot.  The first year the Redskins lost in the playoffs against the Packers everyone was giving credit to SCOT!  Not Bruce. Not Dan.  In fact, we were praising Dan for staying the hell off the map and allowing real football people to do what they did best.  Now? We are back to the dumpster fire.  This front office is awful in every way.  What other organization has these types of problems with players, coaches, and now GMs?  The answer is none.  Just the Redskins.  What a joke.

[Morneblade]

6 minutes ago, Thirtyfive2seven said:

Here's a thought.  If the Redskins really gave a **** about getting another GM - don't you think we would have heard something by now?  There have been 0 official interviews.  To me, this whole thing stinks.  It sounds more and more like Bruce Allen had some issues with Scot's plan.  And speaking of which, how many times over the past two years did we hear this phrase "Scot, the man with the plan".  The players certainly believed in Scot.  The first year the Redskins lost in the playoffs against the Packers everyone was giving credit to SCOT!  Not Bruce. Not Dan.  In fact, we were praising Dan for staying the hell off the map and allowing real football people to do what they did best.  Now? We are back to the dumpster fire.  This front office is awful in every way.  What other organization has these types of problems with players, coaches, and now GMs?  The answer is none.  Just the Redskins.  What a joke.

 

As much as I would like to argue against this, I really can't. And it makes me a sad puppy. Especially when even Skeletor looks like he finally has some sembalance of stability over in 'Pokeland.

 

I just hope Zeke implodes and Zak turns into Quincy Carter 2.0

[Coach Janky Spanky]

15 minutes ago, Thirtyfive2seven said:

Here's a thought.  If the Redskins really gave a **** about getting another GM - don't you think we would have heard something by now?  There have been 0 official interviews.  To me, this whole thing stinks.  It sounds more and more like Bruce Allen had some issues with Scot's plan.  And speaking of which, how many times over the past two years did we hear this phrase "Scot, the man with the plan".  The players certainly believed in Scot.  The first year the Redskins lost in the playoffs against the Packers everyone was giving credit to SCOT!  Not Bruce. Not Dan.  In fact, we were praising Dan for staying the hell off the map and allowing real football people to do what they did best.  Now? We are back to the dumpster fire.  This front office is awful in every way.  What other organization has these types of problems with players, coaches, and now GMs?  The answer is none.  Just the Redskins.  What a joke.

 

Can't argue with anything here.  As far as the next GM, I think I remember that when we hired McCloughan, there wasn't much time between initial rumors connecting us to him and then the team announcing the official hire.  Maybe just half a week or so.   The difference now may be about timing.  The team probably doesn't want to bring in someone from the outside so close to the draft.  

 

[StuckinIA]

What GM candidate is going to be available a couple weeks before the draft? And what team would grant permission for an interview during this time?