Conn Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Looks like an alcoholic on a cold night. Pretty much how he looks on the sideline from Oct-Dec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbit Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 3 minutes ago, lavar1156 said: Some bombshells in here. Bruce Allen and Snyder can go F themselves. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2017/03/08/redskins-gm-scot-mccloughan-has-no-role-in-current-free-agency-decision-making/?utm_term=.9b76fca8c0fb Really if that's what this is all about, Scot M is an idiot He possibly shares same temper and "mindset" as his wife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Mike Jones lays it all out with a lot of detail. His version is that its a power struggle Bruce and Jay. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2017/03/08/redskins-gm-scot-mccloughan-has-no-role-in-current-free-agency-decision-making/?utm_term=.f6cdf3ba9fdc When it came time to form the initial 53-man roster for the 2016 season, people familiar with the deliberations said some of the decisions McCloughan lost out on included the calls to keep center Kory Lichtensteiger and linebacker Trent Murphy on the roster, as well as aging nose tackle Kedric Golston over free-agent signing Cullen Jenkins. Golston wound up missing the season due to injury, and the Redskins promptly re-signed Jenkins. When it came to backup wide receivers, McCloughan also preferred speedy wide receiver Rashad Ross to coaching staff favorite Ryan Grant. Although Gruden and McCloughan clashed over the two, McCloughan deferred to the coach, and Ross spent much of the year behind Grant before getting cut late in the year. McCloughan was said to have come under further scrutiny from Allen once wide receiver Josh Doctson – selected in the the first round of the 2016 draft despite more pressing needs on defense – was placed on injured reserve midway through the season, having missed all of training camp and preseason while playing in just two regular season games because of perplexing Achilles’ tendon injuries. Exacerbating the Doctson decision was the fact Washington’s defense struggled mightily, ranking near the bottom of the league in many key statistical categories. Those woes cost the team several close games, and Washington missed the playoffs by just one game. The handling of Kirk Cousins and his contract also represented an area of disagreement. McCloughan had told people around the league that if he had full control, the Redskins would have signed the quarterback to a multiyear contract in 2016, avoiding the use of two straight franchise tags with long-term resolution. That angered Allen, who in turn started blaming his general manager in league circles for all of the negative media leaks about Cousins. Allen publicly has taken an “all in” approach on the quarterback. But sources say he is still hesitant to give the quarterback a lucrative multi-year deal. McCloughan entered his third offseason with the team feeling greater pressure, people familiar with his thinking say. And Allen — perhaps jealous, as some within the organization believed, of McCloughan’s standing with players, fans and media for transforming the roster –further tightened the screws on his general manager. Allen even barred him from meeting with the media to give his his usual postseason evaluation and offseason outline at January’s Senior Bowl. The following week, team PR relayed from Allen that McCloughan would not be permitted to speak to reporters at the combine. No reason was ever given. But team radio station talk show host and former Redskin Chris Cooley speculated it could have had to do with a possible alcohol relapse. The Redskins never issued a statement defending McCloughan, and Cooley – who drew criticism for making what was viewed as a reckless statement – wasn’t reprimanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar1156 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Snyder is the one who doesn't want to pay Kirk. This all goes back to RGIII. Unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertbeagle85 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 14 minutes ago, lavar1156 said: Some bombshells in here. Bruce Allen and Snyder can go F themselves. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2017/03/08/redskins-gm-scot-mccloughan-has-no-role-in-current-free-agency-decision-making/?utm_term=.9b76fca8c0fb Yep I agree Snyder has proven our and over he doesn't know how to run a team when it comes to winning. His ego gets in the way. This team is doomed until he is out of the picture and that won't happen anytime soon. Why is Allen here. The guy is a bum. Stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 If Jones is right, then this team is doing its absolute best to get rid of my passion for this team. I can understand butting heads between Jay and Scot, I'd be kinda pissed if they didn't have that passion, but Bruce? Ugh. Not jumping to conclusions, but this whole thing just makes me sick, especially with how the rest of the division looks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 1 minute ago, desertbeagle85 said: ..... This team is doomed until he is out of every picture and that won't happen anytime soon. Until they're nailing his coffin shut. This franchise is WAY too much of a cash cow for him ever to let go whilst he's still drawing breath. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbit Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertbeagle85 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 9 minutes ago, Gibbit said: Really if that's what this is all about, Scot M is an idiot He possibly shares same temper and "mindset" as his wife The GM wanting to make the personnel decisions makes him a idiot. Crazy I thought that's what he's suppose to do. Hm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbit Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 3 minutes ago, desertbeagle85 said: The GM wanting to make the personnel decisions makes him a idiot. Crazy I thought that's what he's suppose to do. Hm Quote These sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the situation, said McCloughan has grown increasingly frustrated by ongoing frictions with Allen over personnel decisions and with the team’s failure to come to his defense when former tight end Chris Cooley said on the Redskins-owned radio station that McCloughan’s drinking may explain his absence. The atmosphere reached a boiling point late last month, three individuals said, and McCloughan left Redskins Park for three days in the week leading up to the scouting combine, which ended last Sunday. Eventually, the decision was made that McCloughan would not attend the combine. His scouting staff didn’t learn of that development until boarding the plane to Indianapolis. So our GM wasn't at combine because of ****ing Cooley according to this guy....if that's true. Scot M is ****ing stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 That article paints a disgusting picture. Why can't I shake the feeling that it's more correct than not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 If this article is on the money, Bruce wants it to be "In Bruce We Trust". Cringe worthy stuff. So judging by that article, Scot would have unlikely let Garcon go. Scot would have likely signed Kirk last year. Bruce isn't even sure if he wants Kirk now let alone signing him last year. There were a few things i was holding back from my lunch with Scot to protect him as a source because he was such a cool guy but at this point I gather it doesn't matter. One of those items was I presented the idea to Scot that in my view Colt isn't a viable alternative to being a starter to Kirk because of among other reasons that he's injury prone. He agreed with me. On the other hand, I recall one of the beat reporters saying in the past that Bruce is a big Colt guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertbeagle85 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, Gibbit said: So our GM wasn't at combine because of ****ing Cooley according to this guy....if that's true. Scot M is ****ing stupid Lol Can you read The article says that Allen is the reason he wasn't at the combine. The Cooley thing was just one of many things they haven't agreed about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, Gibbit said: So our GM wasn't at combine because of ****ing Cooley according to this guy....if that's true. Scot M is ****ing stupid If that's what you got from the article, I don't know what to tell you. That was clearly a small part of the situation. Scot not actually having final say over his roster is clearly what the real problem was (according to Jones and Clarke in the article). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 It almost seems like Bruce and the team intentionally didn't dispute the Cooley comment to spite McCloughan. Given his history ... so ****ed up of the team. I can never be "done" with them ... but I don't know anymore. It's not even Dan for me at this point. It's Bruce. Dan needs to sever Bruce and empower Scot. Ugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Just now, ConnSKINS26 said: That article paints a disgusting picture. Why can't I shake the feeling that it's more correct than not? Because you're a Redskin fan that bar the odd season has never known anything else but complete dysfunctionality? I really thought things were changing around here when we hired Mac. That we were finally becoming a professionally run football team. It's the hope that kills you. And not just the hope for wins. But the hope we can just be frigging normal and do things right. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander -JB- Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Really really really hard to put any words to all of what has transpired over the past couple of days. Just typical. That's the word. Typical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar1156 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Bruce is whatever Dan tells him to be. This whole Dan isn't involved crap is BS. He still can't help himself. And btw he's still holding a grudge against Kirk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: If this article is on the money, Bruce wants it to be "In Bruce We Trust". Cringe worthy stuff. So judging by that article, Scot would have unlikely let Garcon go. Scot would have likely signed Kirk last year. Bruce isn't even sure if he wants Kirk now let alone signing him last year. There were a few things i was holding back from my lunch with Scot to protect him as a source but at this point I gather it doesn't matter. One of those items was I presented the idea to Scot that in my view Colt isn't a viable alternative to being a starter to Kirk among other reasons that he's injury prone. He agreed with me. On the other hand, I recall one of the beat reporters saying in the past that Bruce is a big Colt guy. Just to put a devil's advocate spin out there... I do find it odd how much Scott revealed to you and how much of his inner thinking and blueprints he divulged to someone not on the team. Given the degree of paranoia we see in the NFL... I find it very strange and can imagine a son of George Allen in particular would find such loose lips upsetting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertbeagle85 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 1 minute ago, JamesMadisonSkins said: It almost seems like Bruce and the team intentionally didn't dispute the Cooley comment to spite McCloughan. Given his history ... so ****ed up of the team. I can never be "done" with them ... but I don't know anymore. It's not even Dan for me at this point. It's Bruce. Dan needs to sever Bruce and empower Scot. Ugh Pretty much bud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 17 minutes ago, lavar1156 said: Snyder is the one who doesn't want to pay Kirk. This all goes back to RGIII. Unbelievable. Guess he wasn't invited to the family thanksgiving dinner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZRagone Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said: It almost seems like Bruce and the team intentionally didn't dispute the Cooley comment to spite McCloughan. Given his history ... so ****ed up of the team. I can never be "done" with them ... but I don't know anymore. It's not even Dan for me at this point. It's Bruce. Dan needs to sever Bruce and empower Scot. Ugh Given the way they went about things with Jim Zorn, is it really hard to believe that could've been the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 7 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said: That article paints a disgusting picture. Why can't I shake the feeling that it's more correct than not? Oh c'mon Conn..........the media is just jumping to conclusions about all this stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drowland Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 So Scot wanted to cut Murphy? That's interesting. Kory, Golston and Grant I understand. I know a lot of people wanted to see more Ross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANONYMOUS SOURCE. Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 If a co-worker puts you on blast nationally via innuendo or other, and your boss doesn't back you up then I see no issue bailing on them. Especially if it's not true. Im pretty sure this is the last team meltdown I'm willing to endure, life's short.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.