Califan007 The Constipated Posted April 30, 2017 Author Share Posted April 30, 2017 6 minutes ago, RedBeast said: So I was talking with @Califan007 at the gas station last night and he said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 @Califan007You're tearing me apart! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted May 1, 2017 Author Share Posted May 1, 2017 3 hours ago, Tsailand said: @Califan007You're tearing me apart! Bwahahahah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
readonly Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 On 4/27/2017 at 2:49 PM, Peregrine said: What, you say? Campbell said they already have changed the board a lot, so they arent using Scotts picks? Well that flies in the face of why they said they fired him. If it was just his drinking like Bruce claims, then why wouldnt you use his picks? If you didnt like his picks and fired him for that, and changed the whole board around, you get caught out for lying. Completely unrelated IMO. The board would necessarily be constantly changing, as intel changes and the situation develops....which doesn't stop until the draft. Scott was fired two months ago and hadn't been present for quite some time before that. How could they possibly stick to the letter with a board he drafted last season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 2 hours ago, readonly said: Completely unrelated IMO. The board would necessarily be constantly changing, as intel changes and the situation develops....which doesn't stop until the draft. Scott was fired two months ago and hadn't been present for quite some time before that. How could they possibly stick to the letter with a board he drafted last season? Not according to the experts, who ALL say the board doesnt change much, that its been set for months, and that if it is changing you have big issues. Little changes are one thing, but if you want to disagree with all of the people who actually do it for a living, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 5 minutes ago, Peregrine said: Not according to the experts, who ALL say the board doesnt change much, that its been set for months, and that if it is changing you have big issues. Little changes are one thing, but if you want to disagree with all of the people who actually do it for a living, so be it. Not typically a Bleacher Report person but this an accounting of how boards are put together in the NFL. It is from someone who was in fact not only a talent evaluator but someone who helped put the boards together and develop the draft plan. He starts out talking about boards in the 1980s but then moves to current drafts - references Lovie Smith at Chicago. So within the last 5 yrs or so. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1953077-how-nfl-teams-put-together-a-big-board-for-the-nfl-draft They do start doing research and begin ranking players as soon as they can but they need the combine, pro days, team visits and other research before they can create the final board, which are weeks before the draft not months. I did find it interesting that teams boards may only have 100 or 125 players on it, not 250 or more to cover all players that may be drafted. They only focus on the ones they want. Makes sense. It also explains why sometimes a player that looks good to fans gets ignored by the team. For some reason they are not even on their list. I will also say that I heard Bill Pollian discuss the process on NFL.com and he said boards are changing right up the day of the draft - mostly small changes but sometimes bigger changes can happen - especially if a player has a great combine, senior bowl, pro day, team visit, etc. Maybe that's what you meant. But it sounded like you are saying they create the boards months ahead and the combine, senior bowl, pro day, team visit, etc. have little to no impact. If you have some quotes stating that the boards are completed months in advance please post them. I would be interested in seeing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo'sRangers Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Those are good points by Jessica. I agree with both retorts. Hail Jessica McCloughan @JessicaMcCloug1 @mstowle @poetic_kid @MikeSilver Nobody had Allen falling to 17, they lucked out. That guard is a pro bowler and that WR was injured and can't be judged 4:29 PM - 2 May 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPG Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Since she likes running her mouth so much. Why doesn't she give us an opinion of the rest of the draft? And picking a pro bowl guard at pick 5 isn't something we should bow down to. Did every team out there damn near use Scotts draft board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShredder Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 For all intense purposes the blue print for turning a franchise into a Super Bowl team has already been created. The 2001 NE Patriots started their run in 2000 when they stole Bill Belichick from the Jets. If you remember Belickick had been given the Jets HC job and after the owner died, he went into a press conference and scribbled on a napkin that he quit. The Jets denied him the ability to talk to another team, but that behind door game was already over. Belichick sued the Jets with an anti-trust lawsuit and NE settled with the Jets in 2000 to get Belichick as their new HC. They gave up a bunch of draft picks, including their #1 pick in 2000 to place Belichick in the drivers seat. BB went into camp in 2000 and a majority of players came into camp out of shape. BB said there was no way they could win with 40 good players when all the other teams had 53. He already knew that they couldn't win. Bilicheck re-engineered the Personnel Department first. He replaced piece after piece to put into his system a team of FOOTBALL Players. "Hungry athletic guys" (as quoted by Bill Belicheck and used by Jon Gruden). So, Bledsoe goes down in week 1 and Brady starts week 2 and looses. They come into week 3 and that's when it started. Sooooo....WWTP (What Would The Patriots do?) is the big question. The Patriots are Bill Belichick #1. What does he do?? If you watch the turning point for that franchise, I can explain it by this YouTube video. They were coached extremely well and believed in the system which is everyone together as one. Who is to blame for the Skins current system of mediocre? Starts with Dan Snyder. Then shifts to Allen. I like Jon Gruden, but Chuckies younder brother is no Bill Belichick!! Patriots Introduction Superbowl 36 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 On 5/1/2017 at 0:47 PM, goskins10 said: Maybe that's what you meant. But it sounded like you are saying they create the boards months ahead and the combine, senior bowl, pro day, team visit, etc. have little to no impact. If you have some quotes stating that the boards are completed months in advance please post them. I would be interested in seeing them. Just to play off of that post and these thoughts aren't directed your way. Back last November -- Scot told me he had a strong idea of the top 50 players in the draft at that given time and he made it clear that he was scouting players personally at times. He said they were about to start on the next 50 players. I mentioned Malik Hooker and he said yeah I am about to see him play the next day. Maryland was playing Ohio State. I mentioned McCaffrey and he watched Stanford in person not long ago. Scott Campbell and Jay Gruden said Scot had an influence on their draft board. It would be weird if he didn't. I am sure the draft board was tinkered with after he left but if he had a handle on 50 players as far back as November and was about to heavily launch into the next group. I suspect they had detailed scouting reports from Scot by March and factored that in their decisions among other variables. I am ok with the idea of not giving Scot primary credit. I get the argument for that. But the idea that this is proof that they can pick well without Scot to me is silly. The last draft they had with no input from Scot was 2013. Lets see how they operate without Scot's recommendations. As to how much they factored them or not, who knows. But I can't give them credit for running a Scot free draft because it wasn't Scot free -- and Campbell and Jay admitted that and did so plainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 58 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: Just to play off of that post and these thoughts aren't directed your way. Back last November -- Scot told me he had a strong idea of the top 50 players in the draft at that given time and he made it clear that he was scouting players personally at times. He said they were about to start on the next 50 players. I mentioned Malik Hooker and he said yeah I am about to see him play the next day. Maryland was playing Ohio State. I mentioned McCaffrey and he watched Stanford in person not long ago. edit I know you were just extending and not directing to me specifically - but I do want to say I was not attempting to assign credit (or blame ) to anyone. I was more addressing the process. I am sure that all the GMs - top talent evaluators - have already started on next year, and had done so before the this years draft. I would be surprised if some of their strategy was not driven by what they believe will be there next year - strong or weak class for certain positions. But they also can't actually put a final board together until they get some of the final measurables. It may or may not change things very much. But these are young kids. Your evaluation last year may be completely invalid - either good or bad - in 6 months or even less. But in the end I honestly could care less who was more or less responsible. I just want the team to get better and win some football games. Hail!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 9 minutes ago, goskins10 said: I know you were just extending and not directing to me specifically - but I do want to say I was not attempting to assign credit (or blame ) to anyone. I was more addressing the process. I am sure that all the GMs - top talent evaluators - have already started on next year, and had done so before the this years draft. I would be surprised if some of their strategy was not driven by what they believe will be there next year - strong or weak class for certain positions. But they also can't actually put a final board together until they get some of the final measurables. It may or may not change things very much. But these are young kids. Your evaluation last year may be completely invalid - either good or bad - in 6 months or even less. But in the end I honestly could care less who was more or less responsible. I just want the team to get better and win some football games. Hail!! Yeah I am sure the combine had an influence and that came post Scot. So I agree with that point. Though Scot liked to say he doesn't live and die with combine numbers, he wants football players. I doubt for example someone like Ryan Anderson jumped up their board after the bad combine he had. I'd bet money Scot already had a high grade on him. But I agree I don't really care. My main point is I don't buy that Scot didn't help them much in this draft. Scott and Jay acknowledged Scot had an imprint on it. And the only reason why I am making that point is I've never been excited about any of the guys in house to take over the GM duties -- especially Doug Williams. And I can't give them credit for running this draft Scot free because they didn't run the draft Scot free. If my wife gives me a shopping list to go to the grocery store, just because I added a few items to it and tinkered with it some -- it still makes it her shopping list primarily or at the very least I can't say hey I did it without her. You can trust me to create the shopping lists from scratch from here on. Not that its tough to make grocery shopping lists -- just using that analogy to make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrFan Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 11 hours ago, Riggo'sRangers said: Those are good points by Jessica. I agree with both retorts. Hail Jessica McCloughan @JessicaMcCloug1 @mstowle @poetic_kid @MikeSilver Nobody had Allen falling to 17, they lucked out. That guard is a pro bowler and that WR was injured and can't be judged 4:29 PM - 2 May 2017 I noticed she photoshoped the logo on Scot's hat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 11 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said: If my wife gives me a shopping list to go to the grocery store, just because I added a few items to it and tinkered with it some -- it still makes it her shopping list primarily or at the very least I can't say hey I did it without her. You can trust me to create the shopping lists from scratch from here on. Not that its tough to make grocery shopping lists -- just using that analogy to make a point. Not sure that's a good analogy. Your wife is most likely to do the grocery list going for needs while you're most likely to go with the Best Product Available. Even if it's not needed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPG Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Is anyone seeing the new tweets in the twitter thread. Don't know how to copy them here on my phone. She actually is answeing quesfions about the other pics. Then she had me cracking up. Someone said it would be cool if the new gm was announced weating a hood and then he took it off to reveal it was Scotty Mac. That would be hilarious and she photshopped a pic of him in a hood.??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Last year our top 3 picks were all hampered by injury. Perhaps the initial lack of production coinciding with the emergence of the pre-GMSM 2014 draft class (Moses, Murphy, Long, and Breeland) and the disappearance of Preston Smith tarnished the aura of indispensability of Scotty Mac. Fuller, Doctson, and Cravens should now be at or near 100% with a year under their belts. If all 3 start and live up to the hype, and especially if the light finally turns on for Agent Smith, then McC's brief tenure will be looked upon quite favorably. If Doctson lags far behind Pryor and Crowder, and Fuller falls on the depth chart behind Breeland and either Dunbar or Dr. Moreau, then I would say canning him was no great loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 He's not exactly batting 1000 on Redskins stuff lately but for what its worth: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted May 5, 2017 Share Posted May 5, 2017 anyone could have made the probowl pick. outside of crowder, i am not impressed with his drafts. Allens 2014 drafts already trumps what SM did in 2 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted May 5, 2017 Share Posted May 5, 2017 1 hour ago, skinfan2k said: anyone could have made the probowl pick. outside of crowder, i am not impressed with his drafts. Allens 2014 drafts already trumps what SM did in 2 years Allens 2014 draft was based off of Scotts scouting. By the sound of everything coming out of Redskins Park, it would appear the only thing Allen did in hiring Scott was prevent other teams from receiving his scouting service. For all we know, the 2015/2016 drafts that you think are so terrible were on Bruce. Again, for the millionth time, the disappointment many of us have about the front office has less to do with Scott and how great or not he was, and much more to do with the fact that we never had a legitimate structure at all and we're back to this boys club mentality where a bunch of guys that no other teams desire have pow-wows to make picks and get free agents. I'm not sure how this escapes so many folks, no matter how you feel about Scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted May 5, 2017 Share Posted May 5, 2017 59 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: Allens 2014 draft was based off of Scotts scouting. By the sound of everything coming out of Redskins Park, it would appear the only thing Allen did in hiring Scott was prevent other teams from receiving his scouting service. For all we know, the 2015/2016 drafts that you think are so terrible were on Bruce. Again, for the millionth time, the disappointment many of us have about the front office has less to do with Scott and how great or not he was, and much more to do with the fact that we never had a legitimate structure at all and we're back to this boys club mentality where a bunch of guys that no other teams desire have pow-wows to make picks and get free agents. I'm not sure how this escapes so many folks, no matter how you feel about Scott. It's funny. I have still yet to see anyone give a realistic alternative prospect they would have selected over Preston Smith, Doctson, or Cravens. Yet they want to complain as if there were so many better options available. People also forget that the 2014 class was considered a much stronger class than 2015 and 2016. Ditto for 2017. The cliche is that a really strong draft class comes out every 3 years. Hard to argue based on the 11, 14, and 17 classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 I finally heard the interview with Allen on "inside the locker room" this morning when it was re-played on Cooley/Kevin. I had a few thoughts. 1. I despise with every fiber of my being the way Doc Walker conducts interviews. Or really does anything at all. I give him credit for the "wants pelts, kills" line, that was funny. But the Allen interview was horrendous and it was Doc's fault for asking leading questions, rambling, and having to live up to the tough-guy persona at all times. I'm not sure who is a WORSE interviewer: he or Larry Michael (no S, just Larry Michael.) Both are awful. But I'm not sure which is worse. That said... 2. Allen did a reasonably good job talking about the GMSM debacle. He was desperately trying to get across the point that they didn't need GMSM, and that they didn't follow GMSM's board. Ok, fine. Whatever. By all accounts the 'Skins had a good draft. Was that luck, Scot's board, or the "Redskin" board? Who really knows. 3. It was clear by all of the comments that a. He's in charge. b. he wants to be in charge, c. he doesn't want to really tell anybody that he's in charge. 4. I don't know WHY he's so confident that they'll get a LTD deal done with Cousins. Maybe he knows that in the end, the 'Skins are going to match Kirk's price. But there's no reason to lie about it (and he lies like a rug all the time), because the proof is going to be RIGHT THERE. So, if he's confident, then so be it. I'll take it at face value. 5. I don't believe that they didn't receive any "calls" about Cousins. Maybe not specifically on draft day, because they probably came earlier. 6. I shudder every time anybody brings up Dr. James Andrews as a positive for the 'Skins. I mean, it probably is, but that's like bringing back the guy who handed Brutus the knife just before he killed Julius Caesar. I REALLY want to hear from Dan. But not with Larry, Doc or Cooley. Larry is a shill, Doc is a miserable interviewer, and Cooley is a friend. The only guy on 980 I would like to hear him interviewed by would be Bram. Bram knows how to be tactful, respectful and direct. I know that will never happen, because the DC media has beaten Dan up so much now that he NEVER TALKS TO ANYBODY. That's unfortunate. It really would be interesting to hear him talk. Last time we heard from him was during training camp with Cooley/Kevin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPG Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 So now our lovely lady friend from twiiter Ms. Mac is praising the Matt Jones pick and saying he will go elsewhere and ball out. Any thoughts? Are these words coming Scotty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsPassion4Life Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 8 minutes ago, JPG said: So now our lovely lady friend from twiiter Ms. Mac is praising the Matt Jones pick and saying he will go elsewhere and ball out. Any thoughts? Are these words coming Scotty? I just hope that GMSM is advising some team to trade for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.