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

[tshile]

3 minutes ago, chrisxcore said:

The thought of this nightmare scenario ending with Kyle freakin' Shanahan getting Cousins is just too much to take.

 

The guy majority of redskins fans chased out of town with pitch forks?

 

For Griffin?

 

 

It would be Redskinsesque and would probably be the final stage of what has been a long, painful soul-sucking.

 

I'm getting to the point where i'm questioning whether I have the energy to keep up with, and care about, the team anymore.

 

[Master Blaster]

15 minutes ago, Dissident2 said:

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." 

 

 

That could be exactly what has happened.  We don't know and like I said, don't need to know.

[London Kev]

22 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

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.

 

If it is the latter, I wonder if it could be a BPA thing. Bruce could have specific players/positions that he wants drafted in the early rounds, but Scott's philosophy of BPA may not equate to them?

 

 Lots of ifs and buts there, but at the moment what else do we have?

 

I like Scott and sincerely hope that he hasn't relapsed (or whatever the correct term is), but the power struggle scenario is probably even more troubling.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Just now, tshile said:

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?

 

You're not going to make me defend Russell.  All I'm saying is it seems like your standing pat for the sake of standing pat, that there isn't really anything going on and its all made up by the evil mediots.  Russell jumped out there and stated that the team was being ran by Bruce, Doug and the gang.  This appears to be correct.  Whether Scott was sent home or chose to stay at home really doesn't matter.  He's not at the park to sign free agents.  There is nothing not strange about that.

[tshile]

5 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

You're not going to make me defend Russell.  All I'm saying is it seems like your standing pat for the sake of standing pat, that there isn't really anything going on and its all made up by the evil mediots.  Russell jumped out there and stated that the team was being ran by Bruce, Doug and the gang.  This appears to be correct.  Whether Scott was sent home or chose to stay at home really doesn't matter.  He's not at the park to sign free agents.  There is nothing not strange about that.

 

I'm not asking you to defend Chris Russell.

I'm asking you to provide some evidence that actually contradicts with what the Redskins, SM, and agents of other players (not on the team) have been saying (that they have been talking to SM.)

 

This whole thing, unless I've missed something, hangs on:

SM is not at the park

Chris Russell went on a rant on his radio show

People believe anything more than 2 weeks to deal with a death in the family is absurd

 

What am I missing?

 

Instead of trying to address every single theory, let's just go with the most basic issue - If they want SM gone, why haven't they fired him yet? They can.

 

Or are they going to make him sit at home under contract until it expires?

 

[dyst]

I admire people for trying to stay calm and look at the bright side. There really is no bright side. This is so normal for them. 

[tshile]

6 minutes ago, dyst said:

I admire people for trying to stay calm and look at the bright side. There really is no bright side. This is so normal for them. 

for the record - my default view on this organization is dysfunction.

 

i'm 32 years old. for 25 years this team has been a complete and utter disaster. the last time it was respectable I was about 8 years old.

 

but what i've seen here is a bunch of people riling themselves up by just speculating nonstop with no new information.

 

if the team wanted to screw with the media and you by just not saying anything, because they didn't think they needed to or you deserved anything more than "family matters", then they've succeeded wildly because most of the fans and the media seem to be foaming at the mouth and moreso by the minute.

 

sorry, need more information than that. sometimes the story doesn't make sense. what doesn't make sense is why scott isn't there, but what also doesn't make sense is why he hasn't been fired if supposedly everyone with any meaningful say wants him gone.

 

unless there's something in his contract about being fired before x date triggering some big payout and they're just avoiding dealing with that, but I haven't heard a single person mention that yet.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

9 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

Instead of trying to address every single theory, let's just go with the most basic issue - If they want SM gone, why haven't they fired him yet? They can.

 

Or are they going to make him sit at home under contract until it expires?

 

The primary reason would be that he knows everything about what we plan to do in free agency and the draft.  Rarely does any GM get fired at this point in the calendar year.  I'm sure there are other legal/contract related reasons as well.

 

I have a better question, given all the crap circulating about the GM, why hasn't Bruce or Wylie came out and made a definitive statement about his spot in the organization other than "we're busy with free agency?"?

[tshile]

Just now, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The primary reason would be that he knows everything about what we plan to do in free agency and the draft.  Rarely does any GM get fired at this point in the calendar year.  I'm sure there are other legal/contract related reasons as well.

 

I have a better question, given all the crap circulating about the GM, why hasn't Bruce or Wylie came out and made a definitive statement about his spot in the organization other than "we're busy with free agency?"?

 

They have. They said nothing has changed, he's dealing with family matters.

 

But you and others won't accept that, so instead you speculate.

 

So, if they wanted him gone so bad and now is a bad time why didn't they fire him before now?

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

6 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

They have. They said nothing has changed, he's dealing with family matters.

 

But you and others won't accept that, so instead you speculate.

 

So, if they wanted him gone so bad and now is a bad time why didn't they fire him before now?

 

If by "you and others won't accept that", you mean everyone on the earth but you - Ok.  The team's handling of this has caused everyone but you to speculate and given how you've lived through 2 decades of dysfunction, it's just weird to me that you are willing to believe the team's canned response right now, given that every rumor from everywhere points to this ending badly.

[tshile]

Just now, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

If by "you and others won't accept that", you mean everyone on the earth but you - Ok.  The team's handling of this has caused everyone but you to speculate and given how you've lived through 2 decades of dysfunction, it's just weird to me that you are willing to believe the team's canned response right now.

 

So you're just dodging the fact that you asked why they haven't given a definitive answer, when they have, and the real issue is that you just refuse to believe it.

 

And that makes it their fault because of the way they handled it, which was to give a definitive answer (the day it broke) which is what you said they should have done (which, as has been pointed out multiple times now, they did), but that it wasn't the right way to handle it.

 

You guys have twisted yourselves up so much over this 'story' you can't even keep a coherent thought going.

 

I'm waiting for something to happen other than rampant speculation. I don't think that's a very high bar, but apparently it is.

 

It would seem really weird if they wind up firing scott because there's a riff, and Chris Russell of all people had the scoop on it. Not impossible, but really weird.

 

I'll bet against chris russell every single time, knowing sometimes i'll be wrong; but most times i'll be right.

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

"(Team President) Bruce (Allen) needs a yes man," he said.

 

If he needs a yes man, why didn't he hire one?

 

This is starting to sound like when you start to hear "details" about a marriage that's on it's way to divorce, but you only hear from the wife's friends lol...

[London Kev]

5 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

If he needs a yes man, why didn't he hire one?

 

This is starting to sound like when you start to hear "details" about a marriage that's on it's way to divorce, but you only hear from the wife's friends lol...

 

Well if Scott's been leaving the toilet seat up, then they definitely need to sack the selfish pig. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

5 minutes ago, London Kev said:

 

Well if Scott's been leaving the toilet seat up, then they definitely need to sack the selfish pig. 

 

I see you know my ex-wife lol...

[SoCalSkins]

7 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

If he needs a yes man, why didn't he hire one?

 

This is starting to sound like when you start to hear "details" about a marriage that's on it's way to divorce, but you only hear from the wife's friends lol...

 

He probably assumed that's what he was getting in Scot given his past 2 departures. Probably figured he was happy to have a job and would provide scouting like he did through his scouting service and calm down the fan base and not bite the hand that feeds him.

[London Kev]

Just now, Califan007 said:

 

I see you know my ex-wife lol...

 

You admitted that you quoted my sister a while back, so I quoted your ex-wife. 

[dyst]

35 minutes ago, tshile said:

for the record - my default view on this organization is dysfunction.

 

i'm 32 years old. for 25 years this team has been a complete and utter disaster. the last time it was respectable I was about 8 years old.

 

but what i've seen here is a bunch of people riling themselves up by just speculating nonstop with no new information.

 

if the team wanted to screw with the media and you by just not saying anything, because they didn't think they needed to or you deserved anything more than "family matters", then they've succeeded wildly because most of the fans and the media seem to be foaming at the mouth and moreso by the minute.

 

sorry, need more information than that. sometimes the story doesn't make sense. what doesn't make sense is why scott isn't there, but what also doesn't make sense is why he hasn't been fired if supposedly everyone with any meaningful say wants him gone.

 

unless there's something in his contract about being fired before x date triggering some big payout and they're just avoiding dealing with that, but I haven't heard a single person mention that yet.

With any other team this would be true but with this team, I always side in the side of "yep they probably ****ed up" and then I wait for them to prove me wrong. Been right more often then not doing it this way with Snyder in charge.

[goskins10]

28 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

If by "you and others won't accept that", you mean everyone on the earth but you - Ok.  The team's handling of this has caused everyone but you to speculate and given how you've lived through 2 decades of dysfunction, it's just weird to me that you are willing to believe the team's canned response right now, given that every rumor from everywhere points to this ending badly.

 

That's not what they said. They said the team did make a statement and many are ignoring it and going on wild speculation rants.

 

It's clear there is something going on. Of course no one can ignore that. But the point @tshile was making is let's see what is actually happening before assuming we know.

[ZRagone]

28 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

If he needs a yes man, why didn't he hire one?

 

This is starting to sound like when you start to hear "details" about a marriage that's on it's way to divorce, but you only hear from the wife's friends lol...

 

It's "starting" to sound like that? Explain how it wasn't sounding like that the last two weeks, when it seemed clear the leaks were coming from a seemingly Bruce/Gruden angle rather than a McCloughan angle. Clearly, team employee Cooley suggesting publicly that Scot was off the wagon full bore again was leaked by Scot to make people just hear his side. 

 

If anything, as you now have some of these stories coming out pointing back the other way, it seems more like a divorce when you are finally hearing from BOTH sides, and realize the truth is likely somewhere in the middle. 

 

Also, I'm sure you know this, people can change their mind, or discover a situation may not be quite like they expected it to be. How a fan of the Redskins, who for example watched the situation with Shotty for instance, somehow doesn't understand that you can hire someone thinking one thing, and then later think a different way, is beyond me. 

[88Comrade2000]

Expect regime change in 2018.  It's clear Scott is on his way out; it just hasn't been made public yet.  Was it a relapse?  Dissatisfaction with his choices of players? I don't think we will get an answer.

 

Sure, we gave Gruden an 2 year extension.  I view that more as trying to project some long term stability and maybe a parachute for Jay; when the ax does fall.

 

2017 is going to see this team and crash and burn.  Even if Kirk plays for the Skins this year; I don't think his head will really be here.  I am have this 6-10 or worse vibe for 2017. Despite Jay's extension; I sense Snyder cleans house after this year and goes after yet another big name coach. His usual M.O.

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

 

The guy majority of redskins fans chased out of town with pitch forks?

 

For Griffin?

 

 

It would be Redskinsesque and would probably be the final stage of what has been a long, painful soul-sucking.

 

I'm getting to the point where i'm questioning whether I have the energy to keep up with, and care about, the team anymore.

 

I liked Kyle. I just hated Haslett. I was pretty upset with his bridge burning dad too, but I was okay with Kyle.

[ncr2h]

My hunch:

 

McLoughan is being shown the door because he botched the Cousins situation last year.  He has never been good at evaluating QBs (see Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers; years of QB failures in SF; lack of LTD for Cousins last year).  IMO, what likely happened here was that Gruden was sold on Cousins and was standing on the table for Bruce to sign him to a LTD.  Scot was adamant that we needed more time to see if Cousins was the real thing.  Bruce wasn't sure, but leaned toward Scot because of Scot's pedigree.  Ultimately, that turned out to be the wrong move and is now a colossal screw up that is going to cost the Skins ~25M in cap space over the next 5 years (if we're lucky; if we aren't lucky, we won't even have the opportunity to blow the $25M and instead will get less compensation than much worse QBs have gotten [Sam Bradford, Jay Cutler, etc.]).

 

Combine that with the fact that (1) the Redskins' draft class in 2016 was worse than most teams' and (2) Scot was an advocate for avoiding FA splash moves in a year in which the Giants shored up their defense with 3 marquee signings, and I think you can at least imagine the rationale for moving on from him.  It's also possible that Bruce and Jay were high on certain players in FA and the draft that Scot ended up passing over in favor of Doctson, Cravens, and Fuller (all of whom were rather underwhelming, with the possible exception of Cravens).

 

So you see the balance of power has fully shifted to the person who got the Cousins decision correct from the start (Gruden signs two year extension) and a move away from the guy who got it wrong.

 

That's my take on the situation.  Doesn't mean I agree with it.  I think the correct move was to tell Scot after 2015 that he has a blind spot for the QB position and that we're overriding you - if Cousins isn't the real thing, then we'll have bigger fish to fry then paying a guy the league average salary to be a league average QB.  So you override him there on his blind spot, but continue to give him all the input he wants on the other decisions.  Scot has a great track record with defense (although he's come up snake eyes so far with the Redskins), so you stick it out with him another couple of years and see if he can get the magic back.

 

Kicking Scot out the way that they did is going to make it hard for them to recruit another guy with similar pedigree/talent.  They didn't just part ways, they made him look like an idiot.  And pretty quickly after hiring him barely 2 years ago.

[JSSkinz]

I'm having trouble buying into the fact that Bruce and Dan are pushing Scott out of the organization for no reason.  He's only had 2 seasons and that's not enough to build a team, also it makes Bruce look bad for making the hire.  Something has to be going on, all the speculation that its ego's and this and that just don't make sense for grown men who run a billion dollar corporation.

 

Where is Wikileaks when you need them?

[justice98]

19 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I liked Kyle. I just hated Haslett. I was pretty upset with his bridge burning dad too, but I was okay with Kyle.

 

Yeah, I don't think people minded Kyle, it was Poppa Shanny and Haslett people we had enough of.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

28 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

That's not what they said. They said the team did make a statement and many are ignoring it and going on wild speculation rants.

 

It's clear there is something going on. Of course no one can ignore that. But the point @tshile was making is let's see what is actually happening before assuming we know.

I'm not seeing anyone assuming they know anything, just speculation and hunches based on the information we have.  Sure, technically the information we have is rumors but when it's coming from everywhere, including reputable folks, it's safe to say that one thing is for certain...the statement from the team is BS.