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

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

6 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

No sense in arguing it really. I was just contributing a tidbit of info because I don't agree with Doug Williams being presented as another puppet with no talent or something. People are free to run with whatever narrative they want. Also don't agree with the mental gymnastics of discrediting the hiring of Jay Gruden's as simply a "buddy hire". 

 

I have no idea how much input Doug has had on any of the players selected by the team recently other than Anthony Lanier being his hand selected UDFA project which is looking good right now. Everything I read was that Doug was well respected as a talent evaluator and didn't want anything handed to him based on his name. Just curious if hires of other teams get discredited so easily when I'd be willing to bet you could frame them as "buddy" hires one way or another when the entire league is basically a buddy system to begin with.

 

But people will be allowed to never give the team the benefit of the doubt based on recent history until they prove otherwise and win. I understand that about as good as anyone.

 

You are correct in that a lot of hires in the NFL are buddy hires.  That is also perfectly okay when you have really talented, respected and coveted buddies.  Jay fits that criteria to a T and is the one place where the Tampa connection was very beneficial.

 

Where we differ is that I haven't read anything that says Doug is well respected as a talent evaluator.  I have read the part about not wanting anything handed to him.

[Skinsinparadise]

6 hours ago, FrFan said:

Thank you for the info. Link for those like me who missed it.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/audio/grant-and-danny/

 

 

As for Scot relating to Doug and granted its conjecture.  We got his wife Jessica making fun on twitter when the Redskins were advertising a fan event where Doug and Santos were doing a draft run down for fans a week or so before the draft -- she said something that implied who among those guys knows anything about the draft?  The implication I took it as Doug isn't that well versed with college players.   Then, there was the guy who ran into Scot at the gas station, (some blog verified that the exchange happened but who knows?) -- according to that fan in the mix of things Scot said was Doug is a nice guy but doesn't know personnel.

 

When I met with Scot, the person he touted as helpful with him with personnel and has a good eye was Jay.  Doug was in the building at the time.  He never mentioned him to me.  Doug himself in one of his interviews said the key guy to the last draft was Scott Campbell.  Campbell and Jay said Scot had a major imprint on it.  Scot himself said he had a major imprint on it and no one has disputed that, yet.    So I am gathering Doug didn't have much to do with the last draft.  Chris Russell said Doug's main contribution was lifting morale in the building when it all went down.

 

Yeah as far as Doug.  We don't know much.  He was a scout very briefly with Jacksonville long ago.  Then his other jobs in the NFL have been via Bruce.  One of the beat reporters said that Dominick fired him in Tampa once Bruce left but they called it a mutual parting.  As for players, the only two articles I've seen that refer to him were:   Lanier's coach called Doug (he was Doug's friend if I recall) and told him you got to sign this guy, Doug checked him out and agreed with the coach and ditto Scot ultimately agreed, too.  And the other one was about Doug pounding the table that Freeman is the right guy to be drafted to be the QB in Tampa and he is better than Sanchez who was under consideration, too. 

 

Chris Russell has been on fire when it comes to the FO this year.  He broke the Scot story.  He said that Doug would be hired before others said the same, etc.   Russell's latest is behind closed doors Schaffer is now been elevated over Doug in power.  He didn't explain why, though.  Russell in previous segments said the criticisms about Doug being not great at personnel and not the hardest worker was fair but its unfair now because he's really picked it up this year, he's a new man who is energized, etc. Grant Paulsen said he talked to a few people he knows at the FO who told him Doug isn't much of a personnel guy, its not his gig but he's a really nice guy and they like him.

 

For me at least that's a lot to digest to come out with a great feeling about Doug the personnel guy.  But a lot to like about Doug the person.  And I'd feel better if the dude was forceful as a speaker but he seems to talk in platitudes.  I don't really learn anything listening to him.  I was listening to him in an interview not long ago where he talked about how his experience brings a lot to the table.   

 

And then he launched into a story to bring it home (so I'm thinking ok this is bound to be good) and then he says he ran into Jordan Reed this off season and Doug asked him how's it going, Reed says its going good and he has to thank Doug because Doug told him years back "you got to take care of your body."  Then Doug chuckles in a way where he's implying you see you see.    I only have one issue with Doug's personality and that is he has the habit of crowing about not liking to crow and then crows.  He's not over the top about it but if you are going to crow about not crowing, then don't IMO crow a sentence later   but other than that he comes off as a really good dude.  But if he is a personnel wiz you don't even get a sniff of it in his interviews IMO.  When you watch a Polian or Reddick or other former GM personnel types on TV they can have my head spinning with info.   Granted maybe that's just not Doug's style but when I couple that with the other stuff I hear, it doesn't give me the vibe that the dude is an elite personnel guy.

 

To this debate, we got people who claim to be talking to some in the know actually saying that Doug isn't much of a personnel guy period let alone considered among the top at their game.  And I know he has a defender or two like Casserly who says he has good instincts but Casserly hasn't worked in the FO with him and even he isn't saying well heck yeah Doug is considered among the top personnel guys in the league.  When teams like the Colts were looking, they were going through some of those big names and landed on one. Heck Casserly himself did the same when he was hired by the Jets a couple of years ago to help them in their GM search. They interviewed multiple people.  Doug clearly wasn't one of the guys Casserly told them to interview.

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

@Skinsinparadise Glad it's not only me that feels that way.  You summed up my thoughts perfectly in relation to Doug.  Absolutely comes of as a good dude.  I know many like them in business, in fact - I've been one at work.  Where I've been delegated to run a new team because people like me, not because I really know anything about what the team is doing.  I guess the thought there is that I can probably figure it out, but we're talking about business processes - not building NFL rosters.

[Skinsinparadise]

17 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

@Skinsinparadise Glad it's not only me that feels that way.  You summed up my thoughts perfectly in relation to Doug.  Absolutely comes of as a good dude.  I know many like them in business, in fact - I've been one at work.  Where I've been delegated to run a new team because people like me, not because I really know anything about what the team is doing.

 

It's a tough debate to have because it positions you where you are arguing against a Redskins legend and all that Doug and that year represented.  And the cynic in me thinks this was part of the soup as to why the hire happened.   The Scot/Kirk stuff didn't go down well with the fans/media.  How can we bounce back?   And heck who doesn't love Doug?  That would do it...

 

 I like Doug and heck 1987 was a great season which I still remember it vividly and I love all that it represented.   But to me one thing has nothing to do with the other.  The most blunt way for me to put it is I love reading about hires and their backgrounds.   And I've read and listened to as much as I can about Doug.    

 

The defenders of this hire tend to center it around people just wanting to be negative for the sake of being negative.  To each their own but I think that's ludicrous.    But yeah everything I've seen points to Doug being a great guy but just about nothing points to him being a great personnel guy.  To use a metaphor, the debate behind the scenes centers more on whether he is even chef material let alone among the best cooks in the country. 

 

I am not saying he won't surprise us.  You never know.  But I don't even think one whit that they hired Doug because they think he's the best personnel guy they could find.   And I actually like the spirit behind elevating Doug's status in the organization but I don't get the idea that he should be the de facto guy in charge of personnel.  But the more I hear, the more I wonder if he even really has that power.  

[DC Lumber Co.]

17 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

http://washington.cbslocal.com/audio/grant-and-danny/

 

 

As for Scot relating to Doug and granted its conjecture.  We got his wife Jessica making fun on twitter when the Redskins were advertising a fan event where Doug and Santos were doing a draft run down for fans a week or so before the draft -- she said something that implied who among those guys knows anything about the draft?  The implication I took it as Doug isn't that well versed with college players.   Then, there was the guy who ran into Scot at the gas station, (some blog verified that the exchange happened but who knows?) -- according to that fan in the mix of things Scot said was Doug is a nice guy but doesn't know personnel.

 

When I met with Scot, the person he touted as helpful with him with personnel and has a good eye was Jay.  Doug was in the building at the time.  He never mentioned him to me.  Doug himself in one of his interviews said the key guy to the last draft was Scott Campbell.  Campbell and Jay said Scot had a major imprint on it.  Scot himself said he had a major imprint on it and no one has disputed that, yet.    So I am gathering Doug didn't have much to do with the last draft.  Chris Russell said Doug's main contribution was lifting morale in the building when it all went down.

 

Yeah as far as Doug.  We don't know much.  He was a scout very briefly with Jacksonville long ago.  Then his other jobs in the NFL have been via Bruce.  One of the beat reporters said that Dominick fired him in Tampa once Bruce left but they called it a mutual parting.  As for players, the only two articles I've seen that refer to him were:   Lanier's coach called Doug (he was Doug's friend if I recall) and told him you got to sign this guy, Doug checked him out and agreed with the coach and ditto Scot ultimately agreed, too.  And the other one was about Doug pounding the table that Freeman is the right guy to be drafted to be the QB in Tampa and he is better than Sanchez who was under consideration, too. 

 

Chris Russell has been on fire when it comes to the FO this year.  He broke the Scot story.  He said that Doug would be hired before others said the same, etc.   Russell's latest is behind closed doors Schaffer is now been elevated over Doug in power.  He didn't explain why, though.  Russell in previous segments said the criticisms about Doug being not great at personnel and not the hardest worker was fair but its unfair now because he's really picked it up this year, he's a new man who is energized, etc. Grant Paulsen said he talked to a few people he knows at the FO who told him Doug isn't much of a personnel guy, its not his gig but he's a really nice guy and they like him.

 

For me at least that's a lot to digest to come out with a great feeling about Doug the personnel guy.  But a lot to like about Doug the person.  And I'd feel better if the dude was forceful as a speaker but he seems to talk in platitudes.  I don't really learn anything listening to him.  I was listening to him in an interview not long ago where he talked about how his experience brings a lot to the table.   

 

And then he launched into a story to bring it home (so I'm thinking ok this is bound to be good) and then he says he ran into Jordan Reed this off season and Doug asked him how's it going, Reed says its going good and he has to thank Doug because Doug told him years back "you got to take care of your body."  Then Doug chuckles in a way where he's implying you see you see.    I only have one issue with Doug's personality and that is he has the habit of crowing about not liking to crow and then crows.  He's not over the top about it but if you are going to crow about not crowing, then don't IMO crow a sentence later   but other than that he comes off as a really good dude.  But if he is a personnel wiz you don't even get a sniff of it in his interviews IMO.  When you watch a Polian or Reddick or other former GM personnel types on TV they can have my head spinning with info.   Granted maybe that's just not Doug's style but when I couple that with the other stuff I hear, it doesn't give me the vibe that the dude is an elite personnel guy.

 

To this debate, we got people who claim to be talking to some in the know actually saying that Doug isn't much of a personnel guy period let alone considered among the top at their game.  And I know he has a defender or two like Casserly who says he has good instincts but Casserly hasn't worked in the FO with him and even he isn't saying well heck yeah Doug is considered among the top personnel guys in the league.  When teams like the Colts were looking, they were going through some of those big names and landed on one. Heck Casserly himself did the same when he was hired by the Jets a couple of years ago to help them in their GM search. They interviewed multiple people.  Doug clearly wasn't one of the guys Casserly told them to interview.

 

 

I could have sworn Lanier was hand picked by Doug. But regardless, yeah Doug is very unproven, bordering on under qualified if his main duties are selecting draft picks.

 

My ideal situation out of the FO structure is that our scouts get more input, with Campbell's elevation possibly being the most important promotion within the new structure. Jay continues to have a strong impact on talent acquisition, and everyone in the building stole everything valuable possible from Scot after working with him for 3 years and apply it to their own practices. 

 

Let's be honest, scouting isn't an exact science and Scot doesn't come off as the brightest guy, I don't think his ways we're something that couldn't be learned.

 

If all the above operate how I described and Doug merely provides small input on scouting for guys he wants to bang the table on like Lanier because he has good "instincts" or serves as the tie breaker when the room is split on a player for the same reasons, it could work.

 

If we're as doomed as some think under this new regime, let's just hope we get lucky on a pick or two a year and Scots classes laid a strong enough foundation to put us into contention, or were screwed. Haha

 

I don't think the outlook is that grim though. I have faith in Eric and Campbell and think Scot taught a lot to our entire scouting Dept.

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

 But regardless, yeah Doug is very unproven, bordering on under qualified if his main duties are selecting draft picks.

 

Let's be honest, scouting isn't an exact science and Scot doesn't come off as the brightest guy, I don't think his ways we're something that couldn't be learned.

 

 

Scot actually came off to me as bright and observant.  I got to spend a little time with him and that was obvious to me.  I don't feel like repeating my experience with him but I've elaborated on it previously.  He had a thing to say about anything I threw at him and it took mere seconds for him to talk way over my head.   As for Doug, I am not suggesting he's not bright but he doesn't come off to me in interviews as even remotely as a personnel expert.  

 

When I listened to Scot, what ran through my mind among other things is he knows so much more football than the average hardcore football geek fan it would make them dizzy.   Granted, I haven't spoke to Doug so I'm just going based on his interviews.  In interviews, Doug IMO comes off like he knows less football then the casual fan on this board let alone dazzle us with his expertise.  

 

Now, I'm sure Doug knows a heck of a lot more in reality than any of us, I'm just saying Doug IMO is underwhelming in interviews as to displaying football expertise. Part of the reason why I liked Louis Reddick for this spot is he comes off incredible sharp and quick in interviews -- when he speaks about players.   If I didn't know Doug's position with the organization, I'd think he's some casual fan that they grabbed off the street when he answers questions about players.  He brings almost no detail, interesting philosophy, football jargon or makes comments that make you think. 

 

Now like I said that could just be Doug's style.  But when you couple that with the behind the scenes criticism -- it fits that criticism.   Doesn't make it right but it makes me pause on him.  

 

7 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

My ideal situation out of the FO structure is that our scouts get more input, with Campbell's elevation possibly being the most important promotion within the new structure. Jay continues to have a strong impact on talent acquisition, and everyone in the building stole everything valuable possible from Scot after working with him for 3 years and apply it to their own practices. 

 

 

That's my best case scenario, too.  Jay and Kyle Smith both mentioned they learned from Scot.   I think Campbell is competent at what he does (I never thought great judging by the drafts he's had but he comes off to me as OK and maybe even good).   I'd feel better if Bruce made a bigger deal of Campbell's promotion like he did with Doug.

 

7 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

If we're as doomed as some think under this new regime, let's just hope we get lucky on a pick or two a year and Scots classes laid a strong enough foundation to put us into contention, or were screwed. Haha

 

 

Personally, I don't think they are doomed as long as they keep Kirk.  If Kirk's gone yeah I think the whole thing blows up and we talk about Cerrato territory.   Cerrato is defined today as a disaster.  But at the time, we had a running debate on the board about him with some.  People were talking about some of his better FA signings including London Fletcher.   In Gibbs' first year they had a really good FA run.  They had some good picks in the draft.  It was a see saw -- good and bad but in that mix they never landed on a QB.  So up and down and no franchise QB = mediocre to bad.   I wasn't wild about their approach especially as to trading picks.  One of my personal highlights was when I called in to Redskins Lunch back then (Larry and Bram's show) and grilled Gibbs (he took calls) on a call about why are they trading 3rd round picks like giving away candy.  It was tough for me to do because Gibbs was/is my hero.

 

If Kirk is gone and we have this FO running the show -- (keep in mind Campbell was there for a chunk of Cerrato's run) I see it going down the same way.  6-10 team for the most part with an occasional 4-12 and an occasional 9-7. 

 

7 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

I don't think the outlook is that grim though. I have faith in Eric and Campbell and think Scot taught a lot to our entire scouting Dept.

 

My issue with it is really one thing.  It seems same old same old as for the approach that it doesn't matter whether they have a michelin star type chef cooking in the kitchen.  That more than anything IMO is why this team has failed more than succeeded during Dan's reign.  People here used the Patriots as an example of a team that does things out of the box and different.  So different maybe is good?  I don't see how any version of different is good when you don't value having a top rate personnel guy run personnel or at the very least is the top recommender for personnel decisions.  The Patriots are practically a farm team for the rest of the league as to personnel studs.  If I start hearing how teams covet Doug, Smith, Campbell whomever to run their operations.  Then, I'd take note.  

 

Some people slam the concept of top personnel guys by talking about Scot's mistakes.  And how people that tout him by extension think he could do no wrong.   But really no one is saying that.  And it seems like its that attitude that pervades Dan or Bruce's thinking where its like hey Scot made the wrong call on this guy or that guy so what's the big deal about him?  The big deal is not expecting perfection but patiently building a team over time.   John Schneider has had bad drafts but they stick with him.  Stick with an approach and stay methodical.  

[TK]

@DC Lumber Co.  FYI mi amigo

 

11. Please do not use the “Quote” feature to quote pics, gifs, vids, or any large sections of text.
It unnecessarily extends and clutters threads and is annoying. Edit them out. If you would like to respond to the contents of a particular post,you can simply highlight text, click the popup that floats over it, and it just quotes that text.  When on mobile, if you quote a post with an image in it, simply tap the image in the quote box to highlight it & hit backspace on your keyboard to delete it.

 

 

It was bad enough to scroll through on a laptop which means it's brutal on mobile.

[DC Lumber Co.]

6 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Some people slam the concept of top personnel guys by talking about Scot's mistakes.  And how people that tout him by extension think he could do no wrong.   But really no one is saying that.  And it seems like its that attitude that pervades Dan or Bruce's thinking where its like hey Scot made the wrong call on this guy or that guy so what's the big deal about him?  The big deal is not expecting perfection but patiently building a team over time.   John Schneider has had bad drafts but they stick with him.  Stick with an approach and stay methodical.  

 

I just think my whole take on all of it is often erring on the side of "two sides to the story and the truth lies somewhere in the middle"

 

I get mistaken for an overly optimistic fan a lot of times when in reality I do question things as much as the most cynical of Skins fans. I take the time to educate myself as much as possible on every possible explanation for a given situation with the team, and force myself to remain inquisitive when I feel myself becoming frustrated towards the team after reading article upon article by the local media that constantly try to tie everything back to the "dysfunction may be afoot here" narrative.

 

For example, with Scots firing: Amongst all of the backlash at the time I took note of how unified the team was through it all. They issued one statement really and I think maybe one quote from Bruce while walking into a draft meeting. They let the media go crazy but seemingly tuned it out completely. Scot's recent comments about his willingness to return to the team if the situation we're right, and his tweets about missing being a part of Redskins nation also supports my idea that it really wasn't as ugly of a situation the media made it out to be. I think Scot and the Skins would have had a lot more vitriol towards each other if it were the big conspiracy against Scot it was touted as, to be honest.

 

Another great example of selective hearing/reading I've noticed is how much flack Bruce gets for calling Kirk "Kurt", when I vividly remember Scot doing the exact same thing. But you don't see Scot slammed for being a moron who blatantly disrespected Kirk by not getting his name right. 

 

I just think there is so much more to a lot of stories in relation to the Redskins that continually get ignored because the only ones that move the needle the majority of the time are the critical ones. Again, the only thing that changes this is winning.

[dyst]

It's quite simple, anyone who thinks Doug is a great personnel guy, is a schmuck. Anyone trying to convince others that he's a good personnel guy is also a schmuck. The end.

[TSO]

On 8/17/2017 at 9:36 PM, dyst said:

It's quite simple, anyone who thinks Doug is a great personnel guy, is a schmuck. Anyone trying to convince others that he's a good personnel guy is also a schmuck. The end.

 

That's harsh, brother.

 

I've been as critical as it gets here regarding the entire FO structure and all that, but we've got to remember where we are. This is a Redskins' board for Redskins' fans. To think you're going to come here and just poop on everything (even deservedly so) is as silly as going to some other hobbyist message board and pooping on the hobby. That may have come out too harshly on my end now, lol, but you know what I mean.  

 

There are going to be people who hold onto hope no matter what and look for reasons to believe. There's really nothing wrong with that at all and, in fact, it's the default setting of fanhood. The only issue that might come out of it is when they condescend or act like they're the only ones being reasonable as opposed to others who are legitimately critical of issues that truly deserve critique. 

 

I think anyone who believes this FO, as currently structured, is set up for success is being incredibly naive and if all they have is to point to the Pats (in a way that's not even befitting) or one or two other teams... well, that just proves my point.

 

But damnit, I envy them. I would never despise them for it or even be annoyed by it. Sometimes I wish I could go back to not knowing a lot of the research I did regarding Front Office setups and how the vast majority have succeeded in the NFL. 

 

I've said it before - and received many "likes" and responses in agreement by some of the same posters who are now downplaying this entire ordeal - but I loved our FO setup with Scot at GM, Jay at HC, and an Owner with a Team President handling the ancillary stuff and allowing the football guys to handle the football. It was a setup most teams that win championships or get to the playoffs with any consistency have. It makes sense organizationally in terms of titles/roles being fulfilled by their respective experts. 

 

I even said that, upon Scot's hiring, were the worst to have happened with Scot and he needed to be let go, that so long as the above structure remained we'd be good. That the owner/Team President have seemingly found the proper hiring process and would enable the best talent evaluators to do their jobs with final say on that part of it, while the coaches have final say on their part.

 

We briefly got exposed to a morsel of the positive effects that process brings with how Crowder was drafted, where the coaches wanted one thing but the personnel guy with final say did the right thing. That is what happens more often than not when the structure is right. 

 

So when they decided to forego that structure, what kind of hypocritical rationalizing would I have had to go through to simply accept that? How much information in my mind would I have to ignore? 

 

Not gonna happen. No way. And no one has presented a valid argument to change my thinking. 

 

Still, with all that said, I don't hate anyone for it. Nor would I insult them. I sincerely envy them. I enjoy having that hope and finding legitimate reasons to hold onto it. There really is nothing at all wrong with that. 

 

Right now, my hope is tied to Jay and Kirk. I believe in those two. I think they can uplift the organization and overcome whatever obstacles to success the FO as is currently setup provides them. But that's what will always frustrate me. That I can't ignore the high likelihood that, instead of providing the best support for them by accentuating their strengths and minimizing their weaknesses, they'll do the opposite and instead be an obstacle for them. 

 

I'm really going to try and make this my last post on the topic here for a while. I don't derive any pleasure in proving that this FO setup is problematic, fails more often than not, and the entire hiring process of our Owner/Team President seems philosophically inept... and sorry this essay came at your expense @dyst, it's not all directed at you but it's stuff I've been meaning to say.  

[Skinsinparadise]

14 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

I just think there is so much more to a lot of stories in relation to the Redskins that continually get ignored because the only ones that move the needle the majority of the time are the critical ones. Again, the only thing that changes this is winning.

 

It's a good debate on your end as to your recent posts on the subject IMO.  Your position is nuanced and unique compared to what I am primarily used to on the subject.  With your point that Scot was good but you have faith that there will be lingering positive after effects from his time here and the stamp he left coupled with optimism about Jay pervade your points -- I have some hope along those lines, too.  Good stuff.

 

My pessimism is really just driven by one thing which is going back to the restaurant analogy I like to use relating to the FO.  Great groceries = great food in the restaurant.  It's been the oddest thing for me during Dan's tenure that he doesn't buy into that.   It seems like the FO instead was about relationships, ego, Dan's own involvement, downplaying its importance, etc.  Dan like many of us enjoyed the glory of the 80s years and it seemed like his takeaway was that it was 100% Joe Gibbs while Bobby Beathard was incidental or a nominal part of that success.    Scot was a short departure from that mindset.  Making a big deal of Doug Williams being the guy to replace Scot just strikes me as the same old same old mindset as to the FO.  That's sad to me.

 

14 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

I just think my whole take on all of it is often erring on the side of "two sides to the story and the truth lies somewhere in the middle"

 

Another great example of selective hearing/reading I've noticed is how much flack Bruce gets for calling Kirk "Kurt", when I vividly remember Scot doing the exact same thing. But you don't see Scot slammed for being a moron who blatantly disrespected Kirk by not getting his name right. 

 

For me none of it is relevant to the bottom line -- the Scot-Bruce stuff.  I liked Scot a lot as a person when I met him.  I've heard other beat reporters say a lot of nice things about him, too.  Still, if Bruce or whomever is claiming he needed to go.  OK, I'll go on that ride.  I have no idea what was going down behind the scenes.  And I said this when it happened, my thoughts on Bruce would be dictated by what his next move would be as to the FO structure.   And I said if Bruce hired another Scot type to run personnel -- I'd be impressed.  If he didn't, I wouldn't like it and I said that move would be telling. 

 

14 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 I think Scot and the Skins would have had a lot more vitriol towards each other if it were the big conspiracy against Scot it was touted as, to be honest.

 

Even though I don't think its relevant to the main point at hand -- which is the structure of the FO and how things look moving forward-- but I'll respond because I think you are missing a key point in this mix.  On both his first radio interview after it went down and on his first tweet, Scot complemented the heck out of a lot of people involved with the Redskins but conspicuously omitted one person in that mix -- the team president, Bruce.  Some beat reporters doubled down on it saying yeah it was an issue with Scot and Bruce.  So yeah I don't recall some blanket Redskins versus Scot drill ever being in play or people painting the issue that way.  When Jay was cornered initially when it went down he said look I really like Scot I'm not going to saying anything bad about him -- or something to that effect.    

 

14 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

I just think there is so much more to a lot of stories in relation to the Redskins that continually get ignored because the only ones that move the needle the majority of the time are the critical ones. 

 

In defense of the people covering the Redskins -- the Redskins version of different usually translates to losing.  We aren't the Patriots where their version of different means good things.  And I'd add that point belongs on steroids relating to the FO.   This FO has done many odd things over the years.  They did it again in 2017.  So for people covering the team to embrace it or just shrug their shoulders about it is asking for them to forget a lot.  Going back to the media, Sheehan I think summarizes it well he goofs on Bruce when Bruce says look we do things the Redskins way and Sheehan laughs and says does Bruce understand that the Redskins way is much more congruent with losing than winning -- and using the term "Redskins Way" doesn't bring confidence to people who follow this team closely. 

 

For me personally, if they can get out of their own way (which I got my doubts about) and get Kirk signed finally this off season, I'll be optimistic about the future.  Currently, I am optimistic about 2017 and that year alone. 

[dyst]

To add to what @thesubmittedone said above, in case the wrong impression is taken from my earlier post, I didn't mean to offended anyone. Just wanted to add some humor/tease to the situation. 

[elkabong82]

I really don't like Bruce Allen. The failure to lock KC up long-term and him continuing the blame shifting with misrepresentations was the last straw for me. I don't think that's the kind of person who should be team president.

 

But, in response to some of the dourness over the prospects of the new FO, I will say that Allen wasn't terrible in the past when he oversaw drafting and team operations, both with us and with Tampa. His cheapness has hurt teams in past and is another reason to be wary of him. But, in this thread I believe by me, it has been shown that what he was building with Jon Gruden in Tampa was a very competitve roster, but the owner ran out of patience and it screwed the team.

 

Now we have Jay Gruden, who does have an eye for talent. I like hearing that Scahffer is getting top power. I assumed Doug was more of a figurehead-type to get positive vibes in a FO that many around the league are dubious of, not just among us fans but also among new potential hires now and in the future. Jay offense, so long as we keep Cousins long-term, will keep this team competitive, which makes the FO's jobs much easier. For all these reasons, I do believe the current FO can add the pieces needed to keep the team competitive. 

 

But if we don't re-sign Kirk and can't find a suitable replacement, the ship will sink fast and the only silver-lining will be if it leads to Allen's firing and Snyder hiring a true talent-evaluator as GM again and letting him set things up as he sees fit.

[DC Lumber Co.]

23 hours ago, elkabong82 said:

But, in response to some of the dourness over the prospects of the new FO, I will say that Allen wasn't terrible in the past when he oversaw drafting and team operations, both with us and with Tampa...it has been shown that what he was building with Jon Gruden in Tampa was a very competitve roster, but the owner ran out of patience and it screwed the team.

 

Now we have Jay Gruden, who does have an eye for talent. I like hearing that Scahffer is getting top power. I do believe the current FO can add the pieces needed to keep the team competitive. 

 

But if we don't re-sign Kirk and can't find a suitable replacement, the ship will sink fast.

 

I couldn't agree more.

 

I've said it before, but the hiring of Scot McCloughan really overshadowed (as it should have) the competent job that Bruce did the year before Scot's arrival. Some will say that the entire success of that draft class is owed to the Redskins using Scot's scouting service, but given what we now know about Jay's involvement in that area, I think it was moreso a contributing factor, not the sole reason. I also wonder if Scot will continue to do business with the team in a similar capacity for future drafts with his recent positive remarks about the team.

 

The reason I remain optimistic that this FO can work is mainly Jay Gruden. We go as Jay goes.

 

The thing that threatens our long term success is (like you pointed out) if for some reason Kirk leaves after this year, our owner doesn't possess the patience to give Jay a leash longer than 1 chance to draft his replacement. 

 

Jays unprecedented contract extension, coupled with Scot revealing that Jay was someone who HE leaned on and described as a great talent evaluator gives me confidence that we can continue building something here without Scot. We've also touched on the idea the just because he is gone doesn't mean our Scouts didn't absorb a lot of Scots knowledge to apply to their own scouting practices moving forward.

 

I really hope Jay has finally got his defensive hires right this year. That has been my only real complaint with him as our HC. But as an offensive minded, young, and developing head coach, I think it's reasonable for him to have taken a little while to get that right. I will never understand why he wasted one of his "9 lives" with inheriting the previous regimes DC, and I think he fell victim to Barry being a great interview because it always felt to me after the way Jay spoke about him from day 1 that he got sold on something that didn't ever become reality.

 

So long as Jay remains the constant under Bruce, we can win now and in the future with this FO structure. If Kirk leaves, Bruce better hope Jay gets his first hand-selected QB draft pick right or it could cost everyone their jobs. I wonder if he has the foresight to understand that when he negotiates with Kirk after the seasons over...

 

This is one of the most exciting seasons I've been alive for as a fan, not only because of the teams potential, improved overall talent & depth, but also the implications that a successful or unsuccessful season could mean for this team, Kirk Cousins future, the front office, etc. This off-season and season has the potential to be looked back on as a real pivotal, turning point for the franchise... Or worst case, a breaking point.

 

 

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

I've said it before, but the hiring of Scot McCloughan really overshadowed (as it should have) the competent job that Bruce did the year before Scot's arrival.

 

The reason I remain optimistic that this FO can work is mainly Jay Gruden. We go as Jay goes.

 

 

This thread and the cyclical arguments are exhaustive so I don't participate as much as you do in here but I wanted to piggy back off this because one thing that I used to find a lot more of here from fans was hope. Like, I remember when we hired Jay there was pessimism about his being a friend hire, but there was also a somewhat sizeable set of fans who actually believed in him, or just didn't count him out before the first game. Same with guys like Ramsey, Brunell, Campbell, McNabb, Griffin, etc.

 

Each of those times were so different than today, or maybe i was just less exhausted then. I don't know. But just like we would have laughed at the foolish fan who in 2012 said "I'm not putting my faith in RG3 or the other RG3, but I'm going to believe in the 4th rounder who people didn't even want us to draft." But look where we are now. His resume didn't call for him being a starter. His very drafting meant a potential QB controversy and a possible power struggle between coaching and management. But here we are 4 years later and now he's the guy that at least 75% of the fan base has rallied behind DEMANDING that he be re-signed and calling this a bad offseason because he wasn't re-signed to a long term deal, or even offered what they consider a "quality" contract. 

 

But that's how the NFL, sports, and life goes. It gets so frustrating reading this thread, seeing Doug go through the same thing that Jay went through, seeing the discussions about how bad our defense will be because we didn't draft/sign a NT, seeing how bad our offense will be because we didn't re-sign Garcon and Jackson, etc. Its the stuff that makes me wonder if the fact that Bruce is our team president has taken all optimism from the fans.

 

Its weird because I may be the only person on ES to actually like Bruce's FO handling, mainly because since 2000 all I've wanted was a FO that invested more in the draft and less in FA, and that's what we've had under Bruce. There's other stuff that I like and don't like about Bruce and our FO, but the truth is that this goes way beyond Bruce and the "front office". Just like the field has these guys that rise on the roster out of seemingly nowhere (Jamison Crowder, Kirk Cousins, Chris Baker, Breeland, Chris Thompson, Robert Kelley, etc), there are guys who do the same in other realms, particularly coaching and scouting because we as fans know so little about how they do their jobs. But one thing I recognize is that the longer you're around somebody the more you know if you can work with that person or what you're going to and not going to rely on them for. That's one of the reasons why I'm not a big fan of overhauls where we bring in a whole new staff that nobody knows and then they've got to get used to working together again. 

 

Whatever the reason, Bruce, Doug and Schafer (and Campbell?) are in charge now and we have some new guys under them. So much like we saw Cousins rise up and take the starting job from RG3, I do not doubt that if there is any talent in our scouting department that we will see it either rise to the top (via promotion) or get plucked away. That's the nature of the business, as well as human nature. And if Doug is as incompetent at his role as this forum makes it seem, then there will be all kinds of rumors / leaks / and pure anger that he's in that position from people underneath him that we will either see a mass exodus or a firing. 

 

But other than your posts, its so hard to read this thread (or ES in its entirety) because its taken such a negative tone, like way worse than I've ever seen, and after winning seasons. like wow. But whereas your faith comes from Jay, mine comes from human nature and the fact that people want to do their jobs well and be rewarded. I think we are seeing that and will continue to see it. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Doug Williams has proven nothing that would justify any position of power regarding personnel. If he has any say in the draft we are back to the, well, the Charlie Casserly days of poor drafts year after year.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Again, Dougs situation is in no way similar to Jay.  Jay was well known for his offense and coveted in the league.  Doug not so much.  

[Thinking Skins]

11 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Again, Dougs situation is in no way similar to Jay.  Jay was well known for his offense and coveted in the league.  Doug not so much.  

 

Says you. You can dismiss Doug's resume all you want but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It reminds me of when I was applying for jobs and people said I shouldnt put the fact that I taught classes in college cause it wouldn't count. It was something that helped distinguish me from other candidates and something that I did. Nobody is or has ever said that Doug has a resume like Scot or that Doug is a known personnel guy, but he is a (a) a former player who took his team to the highest rank in the highest league (more than Jay can even say cause Jay won it all as a player in a lesser league), (b) a former coach who took his team to win the SWAC twice (you can say this is similar to Jay who was a coach in the Arena football league and took his team to the championship, but then there's an argument of who plays better football, the SWAC or Arena football but both are winners). And years in front offices and as a scout. Jay only had a few years as an OC before being named HC, which was a major reason why people said he wasn't qualified to be a coach and was only getting it because of name recognition and Bruce friendships. 

 

And I love the questioning of Doug's intelligence as if he wasn't a former QB in the NFL who freakin won a ring. Suddenly he's not smart enough to watch film? And because he doesn't give great interviews that makes him a bad FO hire? These are such subjective and nonsense critiques that its frustrating that I keep seeing them come up.

 

But nobody seems to care about the fact that Williams is a former QB, used to leading a team, and managing personalities or the fact that he's a former coach, used to leading a team and managing personalities. From everything I've read that's what he's doing here, trying to help manage personalities and help relieve the tension. What I've said all along is that there was likely a lot going on that we know nothing about. The media pounced on the drinking story once Cooley mentioned it on his show, and suddenly it went from the Elephant in the room that will not be mentioned to the reason that the Skins were claiming to have fired Scot. There was never an official reason given by the Skins (other than grandma's death) or by Scot. I have a feeling that whatever went down Doug had a large part in settling it and helping resolve the issues.  

 

But hey, this fan base will believe what it wants. If we win this board will pick a scout or member or former member of the FO that's not Bruce or Doug and say it was them. If we lose they'll say see I told you. Its sad to see how negative the fan base is right now. 

[DC Lumber Co.]

6 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

This thread and the cyclical arguments are exhaustive so I don't participate as much as you do in here but I wanted to piggy back off this because one thing that I used to find a lot more of here from fans was hope. Like, I remember when we hired Jay there was pessimism about his being a friend hire, but there was also a somewhat sizeable set of fans who actually believed in him, or just didn't count him out before the first game.

 

I hear you man. Sometimes I feel like I'm constantly viewed as an idiot by most on here for some of my viewpoints when I don't even consider myself a blind Homer compared to more casual fans I know who are blindly optimistic like members of my family. It's nice to see someone who feels the same.

 

Quote

It gets so frustrating reading this thread, seeing Doug go through the same thing that Jay went through, seeing the discussions about how bad our defense will be because we didn't draft/sign a NT, seeing how bad our offense will be because we didn't re-sign Garcon and Jackson, etc. Its the stuff that makes me wonder if the fact that Bruce is our team president has taken all optimism from the fans.

 

I share the same frustration. Its pretty sad that just because Scot didn't work out, it stole so much zeal from the fanbase about this team and how far we HAVE come since Bruce came onboard. Jay absolutely is underappreciated as well, and his 2 year extension was overshadowed by all the negativity surrounding the Scot situation. He's the best coach we've had since Gibbs and for once we signed a young up-and-coming coach who was well respected in the league,  instead of an over the hill re-tread that had his success with a different franchise.

 

And I was one of the few who we're optimistic that a NT would be found out of the group we had, simply because of the hire of Tomsula. Citing that the majority of Nose situations in the league weren't all that different from our roster, with a lot of low round draft picks and free agent nobodies who we're developed by good coaches. But again, me citing those rosters and backgrounds of the NTs on them was either ignored or chalked up to blind homer-ism. They either had to be high draft picks, or free agents with proven track records backed up with high PFF grades to be considered an attempt at fixing the NT problem (I had a little more faith in our player development and pro-scouts than that)

 

Quote

Its weird because I may be the only person on ES to actually like Bruce's FO handling, mainly because since 2000 all I've wanted was a FO that invested more in the draft and less in FA, and that's what we've had under Bruce.

 

Yeah you're not the only one. It was like Christmas the day we hired Bruce for me. Regardless if Scot is here or not, the most important thing for me (that I've wanted the majority of my life as a Skins fan) was a dedication to building through the draft. I couldn't agree more that it's often lost in the drama that Bruce and Jay have stuck to that team building philosophy. I don't think that just because Scot is gone that we are doomed for that very reason.

 

Quote

But other than your posts, its so hard to read this thread (or ES in its entirety) because its taken such a negative tone, like way worse than I've ever seen, and after winning seasons. like wow. But whereas your faith comes from Jay, mine comes from human nature and the fact that people want to do their jobs well and be rewarded. I think we are seeing that and will continue to see it.

 

I think this is the year that everything comes together for this team. I really do man. And if Jay is able to do it under the constant doubt and scrutiny of the local media and fanbase it will be all the more impressive. Then maybe, just maybe, the fanbase and this board will give this team, it's coaches, and players the benefit of the doubt again and instill a little more faith around here.

 

 

 

PS: curious if this makes you worry more about the state of the board being "in a good place", @thesubmittedone

[dyst]

Year 4 of Jay, needs to show improvement.

[DC Lumber Co.]

28 minutes ago, dyst said:

Year 4 of Jay, needs to show improvement.

 

Has he not shown improvement every year? Save for a half game worse record last season I think Jay has shown considerable growth as a HC every season here.

 

Considering the absolute dumpster fire of a roster he inherited and the RG3 fiasco he had to navigate upon arrival, where we are as a team is pretty impressive if you ask me.

 

Jay isn't without his flaws, as I mentioned with his defensive coordinator hiring mistakes. 

 

I agree that this year is huge for Jay. He has the roster now on both sides of the ball where using talent as a scapegoat won't really work. He's had 3 chances to select a supporting cast of coaches on defense, so any blame for the defensive coaching will be as much on Gruden as it is the assistants. 

 

He also is taking on the responsibility of play calling away from an OC and onto his plate to boot. We really are living and dying with Jay Gruden. I will say it again, we will either look back on this season as the turning, or breaking point for this franchise. Thankfully, Jay Gruden is an easy guy to get behind.

[Rufus T Firefly]

In most of our work places, if you have some competence and work ethic, then you often have a chance to move up with seniority when there is an opening. In truth, managers, assistant managers, team leaders, whatever job, can generally be done adequately by plenty of people. Just knowing the basic ins and outs and being willing and able to put in the work is enough.

 

People often think of things thru the lens of their own experiences. This, I imagine, might be why people always seem to be talking about pro sports jobs in these terms. Being a good GM, like being a coach, or player, is about being better at it than almost everyone else in the world. So, 'having the resume' to be worthy of the job means showing the talent or aptitude for being exceptional at it. But, every time the word "resume" is used int his context, it seems people want to list job histories as if that means anything. It doesn't. Not a thing. There is nothing to show that Doug Williams can be good at it. And, if managed to be an NFL front office exec for another 50 years, that still wouldn't mean he has the resume for the job.

[TSO]

3 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

PS: curious if this makes you worry more about the state of the board being "in a good place", @thesubmittedone

 

Not at all.

 

And don't ask me again in this setting.

 

We've got a feedback forum and I've already told you not to hijack any threads with this, you can PM me if you'd like to discuss it further. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

11 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

Says you. You can dismiss Doug's resume all you want but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It reminds me of when I was applying for jobs and people said I shouldnt put the fact that I taught classes in college cause it wouldn't count. It was something that helped distinguish me from other candidates and something that I did. Nobody is or has ever said that Doug has a resume like Scot or that Doug is a known personnel guy, but he is a (a) a former player who took his team to the highest rank in the highest league (more than Jay can even say cause Jay won it all as a player in a lesser league), (b) a former coach who took his team to win the SWAC twice (you can say this is similar to Jay who was a coach in the Arena football league and took his team to the championship.....

 

See here's the thing.  Being an NFL QB who won a ring, and a head coach at low level colleges, simply does not qualify you to be better at picking NFL players than his counterpart with the Pittsburgh Steelers.  And that is what this is all about. Questioning his intelligence is unfair, I agree, but questioning his ability to identify 4th round safeties is totally fair because to date nothing on his resume suggests he can do that better than his competitors.

 

It is perfectly understandable for fans to question him in that role.  Just because you love the man for hitting Ricky Sanders in stride does not mean those concerns are not valid.

[DC Lumber Co.]

3 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

See here's the thing.  Being an NFL QB who won a ring, and a head coach at low level colleges, simply does not qualify you to be better at picking NFL players than his counterpart with the Pittsburgh Steelers.  And that is what this is all about. Questioning his intelligence is unfair, I agree, but questioning his ability to identify 4th round safeties is totally fair.

 

Doug was actually director of pro personnel for Tampa Bay in 2009, fwiw.

 

But I hope you aren't trying to insinuate that the selection of Montae Nicholson was a player Doug stood on the table for or something. It's well known that the Redskins followed Scot McCloughan's draft board to a T other than Josh Holsey who was added late in the process.