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

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

51 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

Redskins are not the only front office that has molded into the Team President mold. 

 

Do you have input on why you think DW wouldn't be qualified? Or you just going to to passive aggressively respond? Contribute to the conversation a little and you would be surprised how much you can learn. 

 You contributed this: He's played football, cool w/ Jay and Bruce, & already working with some of the other scouting team (whatever that means).  I wouldn't be casting stones about contributions and a need to learn.

 

With that said, I'm not sure I can provide anything additional other than what has already been covered here, but if you insist:

 

He has very minimal experience as a scout and that brief history indicates nothing to say he would be successful building a roster.  Case closed.

 

I can totally see Doug Williams in a prominent role with the organization, doing Bruce kind of stuff: Alumni gathering, PR, etc. but to put him in charge of player personnel simply wreaks of a glorified title doing Bruce's dirty work.  The goal of every organization should be to hire the best possible people to do the best possible job.  Nothing about Doug's resume suggests that he's the best at the job we're talking about.

[NewCliche21]

1 hour ago, William Barbour said:

Redskins are not the only front office that has molded into the Team President mold. 

 

Do you have input on why you think DW wouldn't be qualified? Or you just going to to passive aggressively respond? Contribute to the conversation a little and you would be surprised how much you can learn. 

 

He doesn't need to qualify someone who doesn't have a job; Williams needs to be qualified.  You ever walk into a job interview and say, "Yeah, well why not hire me?"  It doesn't work that way.

 

You didn't really offer much to back up why you support Williams other than the quasi-buzz words that BFS quoted.  Don't get on him for quoting you.

[Burgold]

I don't know that I want to defend Doug Williams, but I think a case can be made for him. In terms of NFL experience, he has served a role in scouting for both the bucs and the skins. Probably better, would have been his stint as Grambling's head coach. 

 

One of a college coach's chief roles is recruiting. As a coach of a small program his eye needs to be sharp. The best recruits he has no shot at. They are going to the super powers or at least Division 1 schools. 

 

Williams had to truly be able to ID the diamond in the ruff. It's not hard to pick amongst 5 star recruits and win. It is much harder when you live low on the food chain. 

[celticsalmon]

DW would be GM in name only.  Bruce Allen is in charge. Sad but true.

 

[Morneblade]

19 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I don't know that I want to defend Doug Williams, but I think a case can be made for him. In terms of NFL experience, he has served a role in scouting for both the bucs and the skins. Probably better, would have been his stint as Grambling's head coach. 

 

One of a college coach's chief roles is recruiting. As a coach of a small program his eye needs to be sharp. The best recruits he has no shot at. They are going to the super powers or at least Division 1 schools. 

 

Williams had to truly be able to ID the diamond in the ruff. It's not hard to pick amongst 5 star recruits and win. It is much harder when you live low on the food chain. 

 

He wasn't with the Bucs for more than 18 months as head of the scouting dept. before being fired. Before that, no real scouting experience. And on the basis of his coaching, he was pretty bad his 2nd stint with Grambling.

 

The issue is that he has never done REAL scouting. He's never been a scout for someone at any level, where you're the guy that has to watch the tape, evaluate, and make grades. He's never been a guy that, as a job, went to watched players play and evaluate. He's basically done just about everything else BUT that.

 

He's been a Player. A Coach. An Executive.

 

But never a "Scout".

 

And the GM job is usually the best scout in the building. He ain't it.

[skinsmania123]

3 hours ago, William Barbour said:

DW going to be our next GM. I would bet the house. 

 

Also, Jessica McCloughan wouldn't be so loud on twitter this offseason if the Redskins were having a bad one. 

 

Impressed with #Redskins front office this year

 IMO SM knew exactly who the restricted and unrestricted free agents were going into 2017 soon after the 2016 season started.  Definitely Scot's draft board is in play as well as good potential FA's.  And that is probably why Jessica McCloughan is twittering away and Scot is sporting Skins gear.  

 

  So I have great difficult being "impressed" with the front office because I think it is Scot's choices they are pursuing for the most part.  Hey isn't he still touted as the magician personnel guy?  So why wouldn't pursue his choices?

[Burgold]

50 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

 

And the GM job is usually the best scout in the building. He ain't it.

But what if he is the best scout in this particular building :doh:

 

I thought I made a pretty good Devil's advocate argument and here you go dismissing it all out of hand! Harrumph

[Morneblade]

Just now, Burgold said:

But what if he is the best scout in this particular building :doh:

 

I thought I made a pretty good Devil's advocate argument and here you go dismissing it all out of hand! Harrumph

 

Well, it's not like he's got the rep to back that up!

But if he is, we might be in a world of trouble.

[Tsailand]

4 hours ago, William Barbour said:

Do you have input on why you think DW wouldn't be qualified

 

That's not how it works.  You need to explain why you think he is qualified.

 

His resume is not strong enough to be a GM, that's why nobody else has tried to hire him away.  The reason he is the top candidate here is because it's an obvious PR move based on him being a Super Bowl MVP QB for us 30 years ago.

 

 

[Renegade7]

2 hours ago, celticsalmon said:

DW would be GM in name only.  Bruce Allen is in charge. Sad but true.

 

 

Which is why should just let Bruce do what he does, he's doing fine so far this offseason.

[William Barbour]

6 hours ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

He doesn't need to qualify someone who doesn't have a job; Williams needs to be qualified.  You ever walk into a job interview and say, "Yeah, well why not hire me?"  It doesn't work that way.

 

You didn't really offer much to back up why you support Williams other than the quasi-buzz words that BFS quoted.  Don't get on him for quoting you.

 

I offered exactly what I thought was a good opinion. Which was more than he did. So, please refrain from telling me what I can and cannot do.

 

Thanks!

 

3 hours ago, Tsailand said:

 

That's not how it works.  You need to explain why you think he is qualified.

 

His resume is not strong enough to be a GM, that's why nobody else has tried to hire him away.  The reason he is the top candidate here is because it's an obvious PR move based on him being a Super Bowl MVP QB for us 30 years ago.

 

 

 

I did that in my post. I never once mentioned anything about Super Bowl wins or being the MVP, but playing in the league does help. If you think a ex player in the NFL cant recognize other players who have the potential to play in the NFL. Then...Ill just disagree, but I do know he's been active with the rest of the scouting team, even when Scot was here. Its been said numerous times.

 

I think people dismissing the idea of him being the GM. Which, wouldn't be the traditional say all,  end all on roster moves. Since he was a Super Bowl MVP or has never been a GM before. Is just as bad as those saying hes the next Scot. 

 

All of which, has been said in this thread. 

 

But I do believe he can be one of the leaders of a full scouting team that was here BEFORE Scot and has helped build this roster the past 4 years with patience, drafting, and not spending millions on over aged FA's. 

[RedBeast]

@Mornebladenailed it. Crony, not qualified. Hire within if highly qualified, if not? Hire external. The interview process should be a blend of both. We have had a number of good people here before that we let slip away. Just because Alex Santos has been here 14 years doesn't mean he's a great scout and qualified as a GM, but i cant qualify his credentials.

[NewCliche21]

 

12 hours ago, William Barbour said:

 

I offered exactly what I thought was a good opinion. Which was more than he did. So, please refrain from telling me what I can and cannot do.

 

Thanks!

 

You offered the following, and he quoted it.  He felt that it wasn't really saying anything that proved your point.  He let your words speak for you.

 

20 hours ago, William Barbour said:

 

Thats a little harsh. Whybis DW not qualified to be a GM? Hes already brought in a handful of players on the Redskins right now. He knows football, He's played it, He's good with Jay and Bruce. 

 

Seems like a good fit to me. Hes already been working with some of the other scouting team. 

 

To say he cant handle the position is a strong opinion, but not one I agree with. Since the Redskins front office infrastructure is setup non traditional and more modern anyhow.

 

It's clear that you didn't have any malicious intent here.  You're just on a board wherein making random statements without backing them up isn't going to be received well.  It's still no reason to get on BFS because he disagreed with what you said.

 

If you would've clarified these things, then your opinion would be received differently:

 

1. 1)  What does playing football have to do with knowing how to run a front office?
2. 2)  What is being good with Jay and Bruce?  Getting along?  What does that have to do with being a good GM?
3. 3)  What does working some part of the scouting department have to do with being a good GM?
4. 4a)  What is a "non-traditional and more modern" front office infrastructure?
5. 4b)  Why would we want to keep what hasn't been working?

 

BFS could've been a little better in his response instead of just golf clapping, and your post to which he responded could've not earned said golf clap.  Your posts are going to be criticized because that's how it works on a message board.

 

Either way, respect other members of the board.  "He hit me first" isn't a valid excuse in kindergarten and it doesn't work here, either.

 

I think that you can offer a lot as a member, or else I would've just rolled my eyes and ignored this altogether.  I just don't want to see your valid points get ignored because they're not clear.

[Morneblade]

2 hours ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

 

You offered the following, and he quoted it.  He felt that it wasn't really saying anything that proved your point.  He let your words speak for you.

 

 

It's clear that you didn't have any malicious intent here.  You're just on a board wherein making random statements without backing them up isn't going to be received well.  It's still no reason to get on BFS because he disagreed with what you said.

 

If you would've clarified these things, then your opinion would be received differently:

 

1. 1)  What does playing football have to do with knowing how to run a front office?
2. 2)  What is being good with Jay and Bruce?  Getting along?  What does that have to do with being a good GM?
3. 3)  What does working some part of the scouting department have to do with being a good GM?
4. 4a)  What is a "non-traditional and more modern" front office infrastructure?
5. 4b)  Why would we want to keep what hasn't been working?

 

BFS could've been a little better in his response instead of just golf clapping, and your post to which he responded could've not earned said golf clap.  Your posts are going to be criticized because that's how it works on a message board.

 

Either way, respect other members of the board.  "He hit me first" isn't a valid excuse in kindergarten and it doesn't work here, either.

 

I think that you can offer a lot as a member, or else I would've just rolled my eyes and ignored this altogether.  I just don't want to see your valid points get ignored because they're not clear.

 

Way to coach him up NC21, I think he needs it.

 

I'll add a couple things as well, since I had some things to say about some of his opinions and he has never responded.

 

We all have our own opinions on things. However, if you don't have anything to back them up, they are not going to really matter to anyone, especially to people that disagree with you. Example:

 

"Doug Williams would be a great GM. The FO likes him and stuff"

 

"I disagree. He has no experience as a scout, and the GM's job is to be a scout first."

 

"Crickets".

 

@ William Barbour , this isn't going to get it done. Evidence is the best thing you can bring. If Williams had spent some time scouting (and not just being a executive of coaching for 18 months before getting fired from that job) then you have something. I'll be honest, there are times I see something that I'm like But, before I post, I go and check it to make sure. I actually did that with Williams and his scouting background. I was 'pretty sure", but I didn't want to get caught on something because I didn't bother finding out for sure.

 

I also was on another recent topic about contract makeup, disagreed with someone on it, searched for something to prove my point for hours into the early morning, thought I found it and posted. Turns out I didn't read it enough and was dead wrong. I acknowledged I was dead wrong, apologized and moved on. But at least I tried to back my point, and even then we're still gonna be wrong sometimes.

 

So, I'd say it's ok to have an opinion, but try to have an informed on, one that you can actually support.

 

Or it's going to be less than you hoped for on ES.

[Darrell Green Fan]

On 4/4/2017 at 8:55 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was tracking comments on twitter about Zach Brown -- pretty wild checking out Raider fans, some of whom were saying he choose that dysfunctional franchise, what gives!  Apparently, easier to deal for them losing him to the Dolphins.

 

Whether justified or not, its quite the come down to be made fun of by Raider fans of all teams as being the dysfunctional team.  I was watching First Take last week on a segment about Kirk, and one of the nonregulars were saying, Kirk get out of that dysfunctional place while you have a chance.

 

Forgetting whether its justified or not justified, I am not loving the media perception being back that this is clown show and this isn't a cool team to like, etc.  We had a nice run for awhile of those days are gone. 

 

Having young kids and a wife who is a Giants fan -- I do put some energy on getting my kids into the Redskins -- and yeah naturally they didn't grow up during the glory years.  They've watched the RG3 era and Shanny flame out and in an ugly way.  They saw me hyped about Scot, now he's gone.  They dig Kirk -- hopefully he's not gone next.  But yeah turning on the TV and seeing the Redskins linked with the word dysfunction a lot -- isn't a lot of fun for me.  

 

Hopefully, Bruce hires the next Scot type personnel guy and gets a LTD done with Kirk otherwise I'd say especially looking at the Redskins era that my kids grew up with -- I'd label it weird with some wild up and downs.  You keep Kirk it brings a needed level of stability and consistent success IMO.  You bring in a new GM with pedigree then it would be easier to sell the idea that what happened was just a quirky thing that was endemic to Scot.

 

The Raiders haven't been dysfunctional since Crazy Al died.  That was years ago, meanwhile our side show of buffoonery continues and that's can't possible be a good thing for a number of reasons.  And yes acquiring top talent in the front office, the coaching staff, and in free agency being the main one.

 

I hate rooting for this joke of a franchise.  It's like having an obnoxious brother that everyone hates, you have to kind of roll your eyes and admit sheepishly to others that yes he is your brother. 

[Skinsinparadise]

21 hours ago, skinsmania123 said:

 IMO SM knew exactly who the restricted and unrestricted free agents were going into 2017 soon after the 2016 season started.  Definitely Scot's draft board is in play as well as good potential FA's.  

  So I have great difficult being "impressed" with the front office because I think it is Scot's choices they are pursuing for the most part.  Hey isn't he still touted as the magician personnel guy?  So why wouldn't pursue his choices?

 

That's what Cooley more or less said yesterday without the part about Jessica.  Albert Breer suggested the same.  

 

I don't mind Bruce hogging the credit -- Scot's now gone but its tough for me to say either look at what Bruce could do without Scot.  Even Bruce when asked about it in an interview -- didn't deny they are working with Scot's lists -- he softened it by saying others like Alex Santos put work into it, too.  Jay admitted it too when asked on the subject.

 

The last time Bruce could talk about an off season without any help at all from Scot that would be the 2013 off season. 

[RedBeast]

So? Maybe the lines here about GMSM leaving are really lines between generations? What I have seen is that most of the older fans are just plain sick and tired of this ****ing bull**** from the FO while others here throw mud at those comments. Not sure, but just a guess? Comments like fans refusing to go to games or buy Redskins gear until this joint gets turned around are dissed as XXX or YYY or ZZZ. Maybe some are used to getting punked since that is all they know? That they see waning loyalty to the FO (not the team) as one.

 

I am die hard. I used to read the WP every day and cut out B&W photos into a scrapbook as a kid in the 70's. I used to get up at 1/2/3 in the morning to watch games in Europe. Had season tickets forever. Have collected Redskins cards since I was 8 (30,000+). Remember watching all of our Super Bowls. Carried my 2 and 3 year old children (one per game) to our seats when the could not walk the distance - raised my children Redskins fans. Met probably more players than I could name. Was pretty tight with the Hogettes at one point. etc. etc., etc.

 

So for those of you that think that we lack loyalty? Don't throw rocks until you have walked in the same shoes...and I am only 52. What about those that have had season tickets in their families for 50 years? 60 years? 80 years? Evidently I am not the only one...It's not just GMSM or the Cousins contract debacle, that was just the icing on the cake for some

 

thanks Hap for the link!

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2017/04/04/theyve-had-redskins-tickets-for-more-than-50-years-theyve-finally-had-enough/?utm_term=.51c2c9aa8294droark

[elkabong82]

1 hour ago, RedBeast said:

So? Maybe the lines here about GMSM leaving are really lines between generations? What I have seen is that most of the older fans are just plain sick and tired of this ****ing bull**** from the FO while others here throw mud at those comments. Not sure, but just a guess? Comments like fans refusing to go to games or buy Redskins gear until this joint gets turned around are dissed as XXX or YYY or ZZZ. Maybe some are used to getting punked since that is all they know? That they see waning loyalty to the FO (not the team) as one.

 

I am die hard. I used to read the WP every day and cut out B&W photos into a scrapbook as a kid in the 70's. I used to get up at 1/2/3 in the morning to watch games in Europe.

 

Or maybe it's because it's just a game and you all getting so worked up over every little speculative nugget gets tiresome and annoying.

 

Before the Post finishies saying "jump," you all are already in the air.

 

Now in this thread you all continue passing gossip back and forth as if you all actually know how the team operates, and almost every one of your assumptions ignores that their set up mirrors what a lot of other teams are doing. But oh no, team can't be normal, some just can't accept that. Snyder and Allen have disdain for the Post and the feeling is mutual. Post for years was essentially labeling the team and fans as racists over the name and getting other journalists to jump in. Before and after no matter how good the team has done (not as much as we'd like, obviously) there are always some, especially at the Post, taking shots at the team, and nearly every damn time there's a chunk of fans swallowing it up because it's what they WANT to believe. Many others are just plain tired of hearing it. One can onyl take hearing so much exaggeration before they just shut it out. We get it, FO isn't perfect, but many premises operate on belief these people can barely manage to breathe and walk at the same time.

 

Maybe it's all just a self-fulfilling prophecy with you all. Yell about dysfunction long enough, it becomes all you can, or are willing to, see. Hard to believe some when they say they "want" a great team, but then proceed to buy in to any negative take possible on any news tidbit and run with it as being proof of dysfunction. (Obviosuly you do want team to be great though). You all are like the boy who cried wolf, so people really are starting not to believe you, same as with the media. Only so much absurdity one can see before they begin doubting the messenger. 

 

Scot gets fired being way too drunk all the time (plenty of photos to support this so enough with the conspiracy theories) and going completely dark at the start ofn free agency. That's right. Our GM would NOT take any calls from any other teams at the start of free agency. No other team's fans would forgive that. Yet there's a segment here that actually believes Scot was either innocent of everything or the team drove him to it, and all because Bruce was jealous. LOL! You all don't even seem to care/recognize how utterly ridiculous it is. But oh, some local media guys dropped the Bruce is jealous info, so obviously it must be true. Just like when they dropped the "Cousins demands a trade" nugget that Cousins himself refuted. Or how about the littany of falsehoods and outright lies the Post persistently reported when attacking the Redskins name? Or how about locals saying Gruden signed his extension at some restaurant during the combine and the team did it as a misdirect from the Scot drama? Or earlier that Gruden was just a Tampa lackey of Bruce's? Instead he's turned out to be a good head coach and qualified for the spot. Turns out the extension was signed before then and, once again, media was drumming up nonsense to push their narrative. But some think the media doesn't spin, speculate, or even outright BS stuff. That's proof that they do, and it's all recent.

 

But if I was like others and believed every single bit of poison being spoon-fed, no matter how wrong it turned out to be, I guess I'd be pretty miserable and ticked off too! But I'm not because I prefer to look at actual actions that have happened, I follow insiders who have proven to be reliable instead of media members who don't get scoops and often are wrong on their speculation, and when looking at the whole picture I decide to patient and see it unfold rather than conclude something negative because it's all I'll accept. 

 

Heck, we used to crucify reporters on this website for going utterly ridiculous on negative takes, and that's when the team was nowhere near as good as they are now. Len Pastabelly and Peter Queen were commonly referenced on here. Nowadays no matter how negative or ridiculous the take, it gets posted in here and people run with it. Yeah, that's so awesome sifting through on here!

 

The FO isn't perfect, obviously, but their not incompetent boobs either. But you all continually let yourselves go to those extremes and when you do it puts others off. At the end of the day it's, again, just a game. It's meant to enjoy and you all contribute quite a bit to sucking the fun out of it, this thread bearing proof of that. 

 

Until fans stop giving local trolls clicks, the good ol' boys club of trashing the team will persist and convert those that come in because they need to be part of the group to survive. We started doing it during the name change nonsense, but now many are back to believing some of the same reporters who were completely slipshod during all that, have been wrong on a lot even just recently, all because those people are being negative and they want to also because they're mad Scot is gone. No matter how good the team si, there's always going to be negative fools so long as fans are willing to click on their tripe. It's a game! Stop buying into the grabage and just try to enjoy the product! IT's been good lately and looks to continue to do so. 

 

This thread seems like an exercise in self-inflicted misery. 

 

The reason I, and likely others, so easily dismiss the hand-wringing over the FO (and I'm an older fan) is because of oversaturation and a desire to actually enjoy something that is meant to be enjoyable. No matter how good the team does the locals keep sniping because mean old Dan took away their seats, some fans readily buy in because the team hasn't been good for the most part under Snyder so therefor he must be guilty of every single accusation levied, and meanwhile the rest of us instead look at the actual team moves and we now see a team that has very good potential to be annual playoff contenders, and we care more about that and the draft then some fan squabbling over a fired GM who they wrongly absolve of all sins. 

 

Sorry if there is some "tone" coming across, but when you strawman others' opinions who disagree with you as "Maybe some are used to getting punked since that is all they know?", it doesn't exactly encourage a super polite tone. But there's your answer, at least from my perspective, as to why some simply roll their eyes at the hysteria of other fans on here.

[RedBeast]

@elkabong82 bro you made some good points but I'm not going to quote you and go through and dissect every little word or paragraph and get into an argument with you here. I also disdain the WP but I think that it is a really strong point that they made, hence the reason that I posted it. 

 

Nobody really knows what the ****'s going on upstairs except that this franchise has been in ruins for 20 years and some of us are ****ing tired of it. Even JG couldnt get us back. Some people may feel that they will try and deal with the **** coming down from the King of England while some of us give him the finger and are willing to fight ($).

 

I'm not attacking you or your post. I do appreciate some of the good points you made. I am still a huge fan of the team but I am disgusted that we are still in the same **** pit we were 18 years ago. Yes things are looking up from a team side, and the coach, but I guess we won't really know for a few years. If we go win a Super Bowl under Danny and I am wrong? I will be the first to come here like a man and admit it.

 

I still don't believe the front office has their **** together.

[elkabong82]

40 minutes ago, RedBeast said:

@elkabong82 bro you made some good points but I'm not going to quote you and go through and dissect every little word or paragraph and get into an argument with you here. I also disdain the WP but I think that it is a really strong point that they made, hence the reason that I posted it. 

 

Nobody really knows what the ****'s going on upstairs except that this franchise has been in ruins for 20 years and some of us are ****ing tired of it. Even JG couldnt get us back. Some people may feel that they will try and deal with the **** coming down from the King of England while some of us give him the finger and are willing to fight ($).

 

I'm not attacking you or your post. I do appreciate some of the good points you made. I am still a huge fan of the team but I am disgusted that we are still in the same **** pit we were 18 years ago. Yes things are looking up from a team side, and the coach, but I guess we won't really know for a few years. If we go win a Super Bowl under Danny and I am wrong? I will be the first to come here like a man and admit it.

 

I still don't believe the front office has their **** together.

 

I definitely went on a rant, so no worries.

 

All I care about is the result on the field. I want a good team. I think the current regime can keep it going, though Kirk needs to be given LTD. 

 

I just don't prescribe to sewing circle football and this have decided to abstain from these conversations. I just saw your post and decided to share my mind. I don't think enough people realize that the tripe can be ignored. This offseason thus far has shown FO is fine. They'll need a good GM hire and, again, sign Kirk to LTD. Otherwise those lack of actions would make me become more dubious.

[Skinsfan1311]

3 hours ago, RedBeast said:

So? Maybe the lines here about GMSM leaving are really lines between generations? What I have seen is that most of the older fans are just plain sick and tired of this ****ing bull**** from the FO while others here throw mud at those comments. Not sure, but just a guess? Comments like fans refusing to go to games or buy Redskins gear until this joint gets turned around are dissed as XXX or YYY or ZZZ. Maybe some are used to getting punked since that is all they know? That they see waning loyalty to the FO (not the team) as one.

 

I am die hard. I used to read the WP every day and cut out B&W photos into a scrapbook as a kid in the 70's. I used to get up at 1/2/3 in the morning to watch games in Europe. Had season tickets forever. Have collected Redskins cards since I was 8 (30,000+). Remember watching all of our Super Bowls. Carried my 2 and 3 year old children (one per game) to our seats when the could not walk the distance - raised my children Redskins fans. Met probably more players than I could name. Was pretty tight with the Hogettes at one point. etc. etc., etc.

 

So for those of you that think that we lack loyalty? Don't throw rocks until you have walked in the same shoes...and I am only 52. What about those that have had season tickets in their families for 50 years? 60 years? 80 years? Evidently I am not the only one...It's not just GMSM or the Cousins contract debacle, that was just the icing on the cake for some

 

thanks Hap for the link!

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2017/04/04/theyve-had-redskins-tickets-for-more-than-50-years-theyve-finally-had-enough/?utm_term=.51c2c9aa8294droark

 

With a few exceptions, (My Dad was stationed in Naples, Italy in the late 70's, they didn't televise games there,  and we had a friend with one of those newfangled VCR's, our stories our eerily similiar).   I'm 53.

 

At least you and I are fortunate enough to have lived through, and witnessed, the good times.   I cannot imagine how bad it is for younger fans, who have lived a lifetime with this mess.   I used to get worked up over the negativity, but not any more.  They expect more, a lot more, and I don't blame them for being upset.  If they don't want to go to games, or buy Skins gear, that's fine.  I get it and don't think any less of anyone who chooses to do so.   Hell, if I grew with this ****-show, I'd probably feel the same way.

 

I have nothing but respect, and admiration, with this current generation of fans who have been **** on so badly, yet keep the faith and support our team. 

 

 

 

[Spearfeather]

4 hours ago, RedBeast said:

 

 

I'm not attacking you or your post. I do appreciate some of the good points you made. I am still a huge fan of the team but I am disgusted that we are still in the same **** pit we were 18 years ago.

 

 

 

We're really not though.

 

Are we the same now as we were with Tony Banks ? How about the days of Shane Matthews, or Danny Weurfel ?  How do you like Gruden compared to Spurrier ? Or Zorn ?

Cousins and Reed compared to anyone.

 

I'll gladly and easily take our situation now compared to 2000 - 2011.

 

 

 

 

[XtremeFan55]

People need to read this over and over to see how hopeless it is to think that things will change for the good.   This team under Snyder will always fail given the long consistent pattern of how this organization has been run.  Any person thinking of becoming the next GM of this team will be either a fool or someone who is totally unqualified but would grab a chance to have the opportunity to play GM (May****, DW?) or someone who has been out of the game for whatever reason and desperate to get back in and is willing to take the chance that somehow things will be different this time around.  My final straw was remembering an article when Mike Shanahan was first hired.....I think he was interviewed outside The Palm restaurant in DC....where he stated that he knew the toxic history of the Redskins but that Snyder promised to change and not get too close to the players which gave them the sense of entitlement that would cause them to undercut his authority as HC like Snyder in the past did with players like Arrington and Portis.  The problems began almost immediately when Snyder did it again with RG3 which forced Shanahan to fight back because he was decieved.   We all know the story but we need to keep remembering it so that we don't fall back into the trap of believing that things will be different.  I almost feel sorry for Redskins fans because alot of us were around during the glory years under JKC and are stuck with one and only regional NFL team owned by the worst owner in sports bar none.

 

Read the article.  It may have already been posted in here but this is the first I have read it.

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2017/03/13/dan-snyder-redskins-through-the-years/

[RedBeast]

@elkabong82  @Skinsfan1311 @Spearfeather

 

Thanks for the perspectives, all good points. I truly hope so...

[Darrell Green Fan]

13 hours ago, elkabong82 said:

 

Or maybe it's because it's just a game and you all getting so worked up over every little speculative nugget gets tiresome and annoying.

 

Before the Post finishies saying "jump," you all are already in the air.

 

 

 

Simply amazing.   You can't see the dysfunction in this organization.  Fine, bury your head in the sand and continue to support Daniel Snyder seeing as he is a victim of the mean old Washington Post out to get him for no reason at all.  Guess they just figured they'd make up stuff to sell clicks.  If you believe that this is your choice.  But I don't think it's fair to lecture others who have devoted 40 years to this franchise and feel cheated and let down. 

 

Do you actually think it's an accident that in every sport some franchises win all the time and do nothing but lose?  They change players, coaches, GMs yet the results tend to be the same. What doesn't change?  The owner.  And no correlation what so ever right? 

 

Good grief.