Skinsinparadise Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 article posted above worth showing content. This would both agree and disagree with what Paulsen said on the air today. He suggested that personal issues have resurfaced with Scot but also suggested it wasn't the main issue, the main issue according to his sources was Scot versus Bruce. http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/sports/Sources-Bruce-Allen-Scot-McCloughan-Washington-Redskins-415698513.html Rumors are flying that the Washington Redskins are mulling replacements for General Manager Scot McCloughan. At this time, McCloughan is still a team employee, which is why he's stayed silent, but multiple sources said he knows he's on his way out. In fact, he's seen this coming for months. Redskins' GM Not at NFL Combine Due to 'Family Matters' Rumors of a replacement were swirling at the Senior Bowl. One source, who spends a lot of time at Redskins Park, insists this isn't about drinking, but he "wasn't surprised by the rumors based on his past." "(Team President) Bruce (Allen) needs a yes man," he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: "(Team President) Bruce (Allen) needs a yes man," he said. If this is about needing a "yes" man it is so much worse in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Man, Scot is really taking his grandmother 's death hard.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arftech Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 The above probably equates to Bruce is going to hire a lackey from Tampa...Boo! Hail Em Up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Did I miss something? Why does everyone talk about Bruce Allen like he's some horrible, useless piece of crap. Is it because he said something about a harvest fest once? That's it isn't it. Shrug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dissident2 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 13 minutes ago, TimmySmith said: Don't get the Bruce Allen hate, if the team is being held together with duct tape, it's because Allen put it there. The Skins have a godawful owner, no argument from anyone there. A GM with serious demons, no argument there. BA may be the only positive thing in the FO. BA took over in the wake of the RG3 disaster and no 1st round picks. His 1st 5 picks in the 2014 Draft T. Murphy M. Moses S. Long R. Breeland R. Grant Not bad for a "non-football guy". Look into his entire career resume. The 2014 draft may be the high watermark of his entire career. His overall record is horrible and I don't think he's ever left a team in a better situation than the one he found it in. SM's wife's twitter post of the rings awhile back is now making more sense. It was a swipe at the Redskins FO, probably Allen specifically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 minute ago, Burgold said: If this is about needing a "yes" man it is so much worse in my eyes. Yeah if this is true, IMO its as bad as it gets. I am hoping that Scot isn't plagued by the problems of his past. But if he is, I can understand needing to move on and hopefully he gets help. But if this is about Bruce wants to run the ship and thinks Scot is too strong minded for him to control -- then yeah IMO its back to the old dysfunctional times. I also tend to equate Bruce with Danny. I'll never forget reading the article citing Dan about the Marty year that he just wasn't having fun being removed from personnel decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 14 hours ago, PigskinRedskin said: Of course someone points this out: i suppose it is noteworthy that they didn't take a picture of davis signing the contract in SM's office while SM was not in the park. although that alternative could easily be considered creepy, and potentially noteworthy as well (grant paulsen and chris russell are cut from the same cloth) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Just got an ESPN alert that the 49ers are set to sign Hoyer to multi year deal......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Blaster Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 hours ago, Dissident2 said: LOL, really, telling an addict to admit to their problem and focus on it exclusively is "about as bad as it gets," huh? That's about as hyperbolic a comment as it gets and it's an idiotic, clueless statement. I'd say the "about as bad as it gets" advice to an addict would be to support the "I'm in control, I can stop when I want" mentality that Scot himself has exhibited in interviews on the issue. Your post was about the team doing it. Not about Scot doing it. For all you know Scot did admit a problem which started this all. Public shaming someone as you posted is the exact opposite of what to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmania123 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 3 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: Just got an ESPN alert that the 49ers are set to sign Hoyer to multi year deal......... I think that is a perfect landing spot for Hoyer. The QB whisperer will be able to design the perfect O for him. Always thought Hoyer needed better coaching/scheme to work out of. On another note of course that means the Cousin's rumors are just that. For all the Kirk fans good news. Love to see who he is going to throw to this year. Hate losing Garcon. Hopefully we pick up a vet. Hopefully it is the same for GMSM but I doubt that. But I find it hard to believe that both Danny and Bruce had no idea that our GM had a strong personality and preferred to make the personnel decisions. Didn't Danny fly to him on his personal plane to get him? This is a head scratcher for me. It is so unclear and the speculation is difficult not to make given the history of dysfunction with this organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExoDus84 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: Yeah if this is true, IMO its as bad as it gets. I am hoping that Scot isn't plagued by the problems of his past. But if he is, I can understand needing to move on and hopefully he gets help. But if this is about Bruce wants to run the ship and thinks Scot is too strong minded for him to control -- then yeah IMO its back to the old dysfunctional times. I also tend to equate Bruce with Danny. I'll never forget reading the article citing Dan about the Marty year that he just wasn't having fun being removed from personnel decisions. If our talented GM gets tossed aside because Allen wants a sycophant, I'm going to lose my ****. If Allen and Snyder put nepotism and politics over the success of this team, that's when I turn on those buffoons. That being said, we still don't know any specifics, so I'm in wait and see mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Blaster Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 13 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: Yeah if this is true, IMO its as bad as it gets. I am hoping that Scot isn't plagued by the problems of his past. But if he is, I can understand needing to move on and hopefully he gets help. But if this is about Bruce wants to run the ship and thinks Scot is too strong minded for him to control -- then yeah IMO its back to the old dysfunctional times. I also tend to equate Bruce with Danny. I'll never forget reading the article citing Dan about the Marty year that he just wasn't having fun being removed from personnel decisions. Realistically my patience with the Redskins is wearing thin. Scot had started a good thing. I'll wait to see what is going on but if this is because of power struggles I'm done with this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 23 minutes ago, TimmySmith said: Perhaps Scot should sign up for it. Seriously Scot give ideas and scouting reports, Bruce pulled the trigger. 4 starters 4 years later with no 1st rounder. Oh sure, Bruce had decide to do them. I believe they were all players Scott recommended. Heck, why would you hire someone as your GM to pick players, if you didnt trust him to pick players. Not using his picks after paying for his service would be saying you didnt trust him. Much less to be your GM. Thats the scary thing now. Either it IS a drinking issue, or they dont want to use his picks, and have decide they just want to make their own. The latter is a disaster waiting to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Consigliere Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 41 minutes ago, TimmySmith said: Don't get the Bruce Allen hate, if the team is being held together with duct tape, it's because Allen put it there. The Skins have a godawful owner, no argument from anyone there. A GM with serious demons, no argument there. BA may be the only positive thing in the FO. BA took over in the wake of the RG3 disaster and no 1st round picks. His 1st 5 picks in the 2014 Draft T. Murphy M. Moses S. Long R. Breeland R. Grant Not bad for a "non-football guy". Is their a reason you neglect to mention the vast collection of incompetent decisions made, including the draft, with his previous employers? Bruce's career didn't begin with the '14 class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 30 minutes ago, Burgold said: If this is about needing a "yes" man it is so much worse in my eyes. If it is or if it isnt, the team will let you THINK its about drinking just so they dont have to address it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisxcore Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 23 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: Just got an ESPN alert that the 49ers are set to sign Hoyer to multi year deal......... Placeholder for the year. Keep picks and make a run at Kirk next offseason. Smart on their part. I'm getting really aggravated at the whole thing now though and I would franchise tag Cousins again next year just for spite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 13 minutes ago, ExoDus84 said: If our talented GM gets tossed aside because Allen wants a sycophant, I'm going to lose my ****. If Allen and Snyder put nepotism and politics over the success of this team, that's when I turn on those buffoons. That being said, we still don't know any specifics, so I'm in wait and see mode. Agreed. If this is all about Bruce and Scot not getting along and not Scot relapsing, then we are right back where we were the day Allen uttered that awful line "We are winning off the field". Everyone remember the disgust at Allen and the Redskins at that point? Remember how it was all washed away when the Mcloughan hire was announced not too long after? Well it will all come crashing back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dissident2 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 14 minutes ago, Master Blaster said: Your post was about the team doing it. Not about Scot doing it. For all you know Scot did admit a problem which started this all. Public shaming someone as you posted is the exact opposite of what to do. Of course it is, which is why that's not at all what I posted. Read it again and tell me where I said they should "publicly shame him." How you get that out of my post is mind-boggling. I said HE needs to admit there's a problem, "public be damned." In other words, if he has the problem and needs to work on it, he needs to do it without the public "finding out" being his main concern, if it's his concern at all. Most people tend to look at that kind of thing favorably anyway, when someone admits to a problem and sets out to fix it with no excuses. Like I said in the post you completely garbled, SCOT needs to fix the issues and admit to the problem. Of course the team can't do it for him, but "helping him" and "directing him down the right path," which is what I said, is not even in the same universe as "public shaming." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, chrisxcore said: I'm getting really aggravated at the whole thing now though and I would franchise tag Cousins again next year just for spite. We could just Transition him. Less compensation but also less money and we still have the right to match. Shanny Jr. may not like it, but the Redskins could keep Kirk through 2018 if they really wanted to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 32 minutes ago, tshile said: i suppose it is noteworthy that they didn't take a picture of davis signing the contract in SM's office while SM was not in the park. although that alternative could easily be considered creepy, and potentially noteworthy as well (grant paulsen and chris russell are cut from the same cloth) tshile, I respect you and I understand your disdain for Russell....I really do. But we're at the point, it's time to come to grips with the fact that Russell was at the least, partially correct, in his 'breaking news' about Scott. I completely understand that the glee he displays when providing factual or fictitious, negative news about the Redskins is frustrating. But Scotts buying groceries, while Bruce is buying players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Just now, BatteredFanSyndrome said: But we're at the point, it's time to come to grips with the fact that Russell was at the least, partially correct, in his 'breaking news' about Scott. That news he walked back? Which part that he didn't walk back was he partially correct about? What has changed other than Scott still hasn't been at the facilities? Because the only thing I see changing are media people cycling rumors because no one from the team will actually tell them anything other than what they were told from the start. Did I miss something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 8 minutes ago, chrisxcore said: Placeholder for the year. Keep picks and make a run at Kirk next offseason. Smart on their part. I'm getting really aggravated at the whole thing now though and I would franchise tag Cousins again next year just for spite. I like it. In another couple of years, Kirk will be making a $160 million a year and the rest of team is undrafted free agents. His left tackle is a 190lb white guy. See how he likes that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisxcore Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 5 minutes ago, scruffylookin said: We could just Transition him. Less compensation but also less money and we still have the right to match. Shanny Jr. may not like it, but the Redskins could keep Kirk through 2018 if they really wanted to. I'm down. The thought of this nightmare scenario ending with Kyle freakin' Shanahan getting Cousins is just too much to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 31 minutes ago, ExoDus84 said: If our talented GM gets tossed aside because Allen wants a sycophant, I'm going to lose my ****. If Allen and Snyder put nepotism and politics over the success of this team, that's when I turn on those buffoons. That being said, we still don't know any specifics, so I'm in wait and see mode. I'll go right ahead and say it. If that is indeed true, then he will have hell to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.