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

[SkinInsite]

Just now, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

That was Shanny not Allen

 

I can't believe I find myself defending Bruce Allen.  LOL. 

 

So Allen had no input when Shanny was here?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

6 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

I would love to see us hire now the guy I wanted more than Scot McC - Scott Pioli. He did an excellent job with the roster at KC, but hired the wrong HC, had to deal with a murder-suicide, and a QB that didn't stay healthy. If we could lure him away from the Falcons and sign KC to a ltd, we would be a contender.

 

Blah.

 

Just once I'd like us to hire someone who is un-pedigreed. In order to get hired here in the past, you've always needed to 1) be famous or 2) be related to someone who is famous.

Just now, SkinInsite said:

 

So Allen had no input when Shanny was here?

 

The structure of the FO when Shanahan was here can only be understood by studying runes, I think.

[SkinInsite]

Just now, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Blah.

 

Just once I'd like us to hire someone who is un-pedigreed. In order to get hired here in the past, you've always needed to 1) be famous or 2) be related to someone who is famous.

 

Nah we'll just keep Allen, who has a great track record. All the crap deals Skins made since he came on board was due to Shanny and SM.

 

Keep wining off the field. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

3 minutes ago, SkinInsite said:

 

So Allen had no input when Shanny was here?

 

He didn't have the final say in personnel, that was written into Shanny's contract. .  He was not the guy on the phone with Jeff Fisher, both of those were Mike Shanahan.  So no I am not putting that trade on him, it was Shanahan's call (literally and figuratively).  Bruce Allen was the man in charge of personnel for only one year and that draft, with no #1 pick, wasn't all that bad.  That is as far as I will go in defending Bruce Allen, I am really bummed that he will be making those picks that SM acquired. 

[Dissident2]

1 minute ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Most all of us prefer SM to Allen.  But posts like this are simply not fair.  Allen never had the 5th pick in the draft, in fact he never had a first rounder.  Given that his one draft here was really not that bad.  He was also saddled with Robert for those losing years. 

 

SM came here and built the back end.  But the love he is getting for single handily turning us from 5 wins to division champs is off target.  The vast majority fo the players on this team, including a now mature and developed Kirk Cousins, were already on the team before he arrived.  

 

I don't mean to imply that devaluing Allen means SM deserves all the credit. He's clearly missed as well in places. But Allen in that role, as he's proven throughout his career, is below average at best. Possibly even horrible. 

 

Check out this link from Bucs nation regarding the job he did, including drafts where he did have first-rounders. Here's a line that should sound familiar to all of us: "He does one thing well, and that is manage the salary cap. That's about it, though." 

 

http://www.bucsnation.com/2012/3/10/2859849/bruce-allen-worst-gm-in-football

 

Allen has a proven track record when it comes to building team talent and picking players, and to say it is not good is being kind. While I don't at all give Scot full credit for the last two years, and I do recognize some of the good picks Allen did make in 2014, I definitely don't think the success of the last two years (small as it has been) is divorced from SM's involvement. History tells us that SM knows how to put championship teams together and it tells us just the opposite when it comes to Allen.

 

The point of my post wasn't to pronounce SM as the savior without whom we are lost, but to say that we need SOMEONE in the GM role who is not Bruce Allen. 

[RandyHolt]

Dont forget, on Allen's resume, are quite a few years in dysfunctional Oakland.  So we got that going for us, which is nice. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

2 minutes ago, Dissident2 said:

 

I don't mean to imply that devaluing Allen means SM deserves all the credit. He's clearly missed as well in places. But Allen in that role, as he's proven throughout his career, is below average at best. Possibly even horrible. 

 

Check out this link from Bucs nation regarding the job he did, including drafts where he did have first-rounders. Here's a line that should sound familiar to all of us: "He does one thing well, and that is manage the salary cap. That's about it, though." 

 

http://www.bucsnation.com/2012/3/10/2859849/bruce-allen-worst-gm-in-football

 

Allen has a proven track record when it comes to building team talent and picking players, and to say it is not good is being kind. While I don't at all give Scot full credit for the last two years, and I do recognize some of the good picks Allen did make in 2014, I definitely don't think the success of the last two years (small as it has been) is divorced from SM's involvement. History tells us that SM knows how to put championship teams together and it tells us just the opposite when it comes to Allen.

 

The point of my post wasn't to pronounce SM as the savior without whom we are lost, but to say that we need SOMEONE in the GM role who is not Bruce Allen. 

 

 

You don't need to convince me.  I somehow find myself defending Allen but only because people want to put our record when Shanny was calling the shots on him or they want to give SM total credit for the turn around when the vast majority of the players responsible were already here before SM arrived.  But I clearly don't want Bruce Allen in charge of personnel. 

[SkinInsite]

It's amazing how neither Shanny or Allen wanted RG3 yet some how we wound up trading our future for him.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

41 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

*Sigh*

 

For 20 pages we beat to death Chris Russell's comments on the Sports Junkies.  The much discussed highlights included his claim that SM was sent home from Redskins Park on Feb 20.  That may or not be true, the team had not denied it.  Russell also reported that SM was not at the combine and that he is no longer running the team and basically has no authority any more, that role has now passed to Allen, Gruden, Williams etc.   He also reported that this friction between Allen and SM has been going on for a while now. 

 

His report was met with a lot of criticism here, many actually were trying to convince us that the grandmother story was viable.  LOL  Your response was to post links titled "Yellow Journalism" and to rant on about "rabid speculation" etc.   Seeing as the reports that Russell made appear to be gaining traction, there is clear evidence that SM is no longer running the team and the word now is it's only a matter of time before he is sent home, I was simply suggesting if his reports do in fact appear to be on point you may want to take back all those nasty comments about Russell and the others who were simply doing their jobs which is to dig out information and report it.  .

 

 

 

 

Two questions:

 

1) Do you feel there was no speculation, then? Because about 6 different explanations for Scot's absence has been bandied about in the media--with half of them lacking in logic so badly that even some prominent media members have laughed it off. They can't be ALL true, can they? lol...Why do you think other media members said they wouldn't join in the speculation and would instead wait to get more facts if nobody was speculating and were all just reporting well-researched facts?

 

2) Did you actually read my earlier post? lol...I listed the things I would have a reason for apologizing for, since those things are the only things I have discounted from the get-go. Nothing you listed above was on my list. What you did list:

 

- Scot was sent home. Not on my list because I never questioned whether he was "sent" home, "asked" if he could go home, or if it was mutually agreed-upon. I couldn't give two ****s.

 

- Scot was not at the combine. Well, no **** lol...also not on my list because that's a statement of fact.

 

- Scot no longer running the team. Scot was never running the team, Allen always was as Team President. Brewer's article tried to portray it as some behind-the-scenes secret but from day one it was spelled out what Scot's responsibilities and powers would be. "Running the team" was never, ever one of them. Why would I apologize for something everyone should have known for 2 years?

 

- Scot has no authority anymore. That very well may be, but I never argued against that, either. I have argued over WHY he doesn't, if indeed he doesn't. Massive difference to anyone paying attention. That's where the rampant speculation comes in, assigning the "why" to everything from jealousy, ego, sock color, you name it. And I also already said numerous times that Keim's reporting of multiple player agents speaking with Scot that very week while he was away from the combine pokes a sizeable hole in Russell's claims that he has no authority over anything. Agents don't bother wasting time talking to someone who has no authority over anything.

 

- Friction between Scot and Bruce. No reason whatsoever to apologize if that turns out to be true because I never claimed it wasn't true...again, I took issue to the reasons given FOR that friction (and for the billionth time, things like ego, jealousy, Cullen Jenkins lol). For all we know the friction could be tied to Scot drinking too much or things said to the press or to leaks. Those are all friction-worthy. Not to mention that friction is normal and isn't automatically a sign of anything bad or of one side being wrong and the other being right, which is alluded to often in the press (if there is friction, you just knowwwww Allen's at fault).

 

I have nothing whatsoever to walk back, outside of it being proven somehow that Allen's ego and jealousy screwed up the front office or that Cullen Jenkins was a significant-enough player acquisition to cause problems. I hate having to bulletpoint this ****, but it feels like it's the only way to get this point across lol...again, read thesubmittedone's post expressing the exact same things I have been saying about how even if some speculation ends up being true it doesn't excuse the press' actions one iota.

 

To a certain segment of our fan base, though, if Scot is indeed fired it means all the speculation was true and the media was "right all along"...I'm guessing your among the group who thinks that way.

[Darrell Green Fan]

7 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Two questions:

 

1) Do you feel there was no speculation, then? Because about 6 different explanations for Scot's absence has been bandied about in the media--with half of them lacking in logic so badly that even some prominent media members have laughed it off. They can't be ALL true, can they? lol...Why do you think other media members said they wouldn't join in the speculation and would instead wait to get more facts if nobody was speculating and were all just reporting well-researched facts?

 

2) Did you actually read my earlier post? lol...I listed the things I would have a reason for apologizing for, since those things are the only things I have discounted from the get-go. Nothing you listed above was on my list. What you did list:

 

- Scot was sent home. Not on my list because I never questioned whether he was "sent" home, "asked" if he could go home, or if it was mutually agreed-upon. I couldn't give two ****s.

 

- Scot was not at the combine. Well, no **** lol...also not on my list because that's a statement of fact.

 

- Scot no longer running the team. Scot was never running the team, Allen always was as Team President. Brewer's article tried to portray it as some behind-the-scenes secret but from day one it was spelled out what Scot's responsibilities and powers would be. "Running the team" was never, ever one of them. Why would I apologize for something everyone should have known for 2 years?

 

- Scot has no authority anymore. That very well may be, but I never argued against that, either. I have argued over WHY he doesn't, if indeed he doesn't. Massive difference to anyone paying attention. That's where the rampant speculation comes in, assigning the "why" to everything from jealousy, ego, sock color, you name it. And I also already said numerous times that Keim's reporting of multiple player agents speaking with Scot that very week while he was away from the combine pokes a sizeable hole in Russell's claims that he has no authority over anything. Agents don't bother wasting time talking to someone who has no authority over anything.

 

- Friction between Scot and Bruce. No reason whatsoever to apologize if that turns out to be true because I never claimed it wasn't true...again, I took issue to the reasons given FOR that friction (and for the billionth time, things like ego, jealousy, Cullen Jenkins lol). For all we know the friction could be tied to Scot drinking too much or things said to the press or to leaks. Those are all friction-worthy. Not to mention that friction is normal and isn't automatically a sign of anything bad or of one side being wrong and the other being right, which is alluded to often in the press (if there is friction, you just knowwwww Allen's at fault).

 

I have nothing whatsoever to walk back, outside of it being proven somehow that Allen's ego and jealousy screwed up the front office or that Cullen Jenkins was a significant-enough player acquisition to cause problems. I hate having to bulletpoint this ****, but it feels like it's the only way to get this point across lol...again, read thesubmittedone's post expressing the exact same things I have been saying about how even if some speculation ends up being true it doesn't excuse the press' actions one iota.

 

To a certain segment of our fan base, though, if Scot is indeed fired it means all the speculation was true and the media was "right all along"...I'm guessing your among the group who thinks that way.

 

You asked me what Russell said, I provided the answer.  I didn't need a 9 paragraph response to get my point across. If you want people to read every word of your posts please make them easier, few take the time to read every word of a 9 paragraph post. Sure SM reported to Allen but he "ran the team" in charge of personnel.  Now that appears to be no longer the case. 

 

My point remains you keep criticizing the reporters for providing reports, "wild speculation" according to you.  "Yellow journalism" you screamed.  If they are right then yes I would be "one of those people" who feel the reporters were unfairly criticized seeing as, you know, they were right. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

35 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

So, if you were God-king of the message board, what WOULD we talk about?

 

Um...football? Ferrets, too.

[Dissident2]

12 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

That was Shanny not Allen

 

I can't believe I find myself defending Bruce Allen.  LOL. 

 

Take it for what it's worth coming from Shanahan, but he's on record saying he didn't want to do that trade at all. 

 

Quote

“Dan knew I wasn’t very happy about what we did, but he wanted everybody to celebrate how smart we were, so we jumped on his plane and met the other owners on his yacht,” Shanahan said. “Everyone was celebrating. I just didn’t think it was very smart to give up that much for a guy who we didn’t even know if he could drop back and throw. When I finally sat down with Dan, I said, ‘Hey, you own the team. We can work with him and do some things. But we haven’t seen anything on tape that warrants giving [up] this type of compensation.’ To me, it was absolutely crazy.”

 

So if he's telling the truth there (again, recognizing the source), then who did make sure that deal happened? At the very least, Allen deserves some of the blame for the RG3 debacle. It seems like it took SM and Gruden to finally convince those guys it wasn't going to work. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 minute ago, Dissident2 said:

 

Take it for what it's worth coming from Shanahan, but he's on record saying he didn't want to do that trade at all. 

 

 

So if he's telling the truth there (again, recognizing the source), then who did make sure that deal happened? At the very least, Allen deserves some of the blame for the RG3 debacle. It seems like it took SM and Gruden to finally convince those guys it wasn't going to work. 

 

I'm done defending Bruce Allen, that was never my intention.  If you want to claim that it was all Bruce's idea than that's fine.  We really don't know.  I find it hard to believe that Shanny didn't want Griff.  He was in charge of personnel, it was his reputation on the line. If he didn't want him he could have not done the deal.  Saying this now, from a guy who has admitted to lying often to the press, does not carry a lot of weight in my opinion. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

6 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

I have nothing whatsoever to walk back, outside of it being proven somehow that Allen's ego and jealousy screwed up the front office or that Cullen Jenkins was a significant-enough player acquisition to cause problems. I hate having to bulletpoint this ****, but it feels like it's the only way to get this point across lol...again, read thesubmittedone's post expressing the exact same things I have been saying about how even if some speculation ends up being true it doesn't excuse the press' actions one iota.

 

To a certain segment of our fan base, though, if Scot is indeed fired it means all the speculation was true and the media was "right all along"...I'm guessing your among the group who thinks that way.

 

I don't think anyone at the WAPO or on this site thinks that the root of any problems within our front office was solely related to a player like Cullen Jenkins.  It's an example of heads butting within the front office over personnel.  That's the sad part, is that a player as non-important as Cullen Jenkins could potentially cause friction upstairs.  I'd imagine that differing opinions on a guy like say, Kirk Cousins, or DJax, could cause a lot of problems.

 

 

[Dissident2]

16 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

If you want to claim that it was all Bruce's idea than that's fine.  We really don't know.  

 

Of course I don't want to claim that. That's why I used the word "some" in reference to any blame that Allen should get for the RG3 debacle. You said he was "saddled" with him. Like someone else pointed out, I think he was partially complicit in that saddling. I do agree, though, that you have to take everything Mike says with a mountain of salt. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

24 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

You asked me what Russell said, I provided the answer.  I didn't need a 9 paragraph response to get my point across.

 

You didn't need two paragraphs and me asking three separate times, either, did you lol...but that's what it apparently took.

 

If you want people to read every word of your posts please make them easier, few take the time to read every word of a 9 paragraph post.

 

That was difficult to read? Really?...I may have found the problem lol...

 

 

Sure SM reported to Allen but he "ran the team" in charge of personnel.  Now that appears to be no longer the case.

 

Not sure why this is in here. This speaks directly to what you already said--and I already responded to--in terms of Scot no longer having any power or authority.

 

 

My point remains you keep criticizing the reporters for providing reports, "wild speculation" according to you.

 

Not just me...others in the media as well, and not just the guy who wrote the "yellow journalism" piece.

 

 

"Yellow journalism" you screamed.

 

I "screamed" lol

 

I posted an article from a media member who wasn't liking the way some of his brethren in the press were acting. He wasn't screaming, either lol. I wanted to illustrate that the "dysfunction" wasn't limited to the Skins' FO...the media has it's own dysfunction as well.

 

 

If they are right then yes I would be "one of those people" who feel the reporters were unfairly criticized seeing as, you know, they were right.

 

Yeah, I see the problem, then.

 

Paraphrasing something else I wrote a long time ago: This qualifies as logic to some fans:

 

Reporter writes: "Redskins name is racist, and Dan Snyder is owner. He's short, and his feet stink. Redskins will go 5-11."

 

Redskins go 5-11. That means his logic and analysis was dead-on accurate, people should stop criticizing him.

 

I won't recommend you read thesubmittedone's posts anymore...they are far too lengthy.

[sebestian]

Good afternoon gentlemen.  I was also questioning and have an interest in Louis Reddick. I believe he used to work for Washington and seems extremely knowledgable regarding cap issues and talent evaluation.  I like the way he presents.  

 

Just wondering everyones opinion if the team goes outside the organization for a new GM. 

 

HAIL

[Peregrine]

The 106.7 people are apparently out trying to get photos of Scott, so they posted one on twitter.  It is sure to basically be completely unhelpful, as it shows him looking a bit ragged, but decked head to toe in Redskins gear.  At this point I think its patently obvious there's both more and different to this than both people and media think there is.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

32 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

I don't think anyone at the WAPO or on this site thinks that the root of any problems within our front office was solely related to a player like Cullen Jenkins.  It's an example of heads butting within the front office over personnel.  That's the sad part, is that a player as non-important as Cullen Jenkins could potentially cause friction upstairs.  I'd imagine that differing opinions on a guy like say, Kirk Cousins, or DJax, could cause a lot of problems.

 

 

For me, it wouldn't be Jenkins causing friction upstairs...it would be something else far more significant and that the friction was already there (which I think you were saying anyway). Kind of like how there's a story about a teenager who kills his parents because they wouldn't let him play on his X-Box for 30 more minutes...Um, no, that's not why he killed them. It was due to something far more serious that was already in existence long before then.

 

 

12 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

The 106.7 people are apparently out trying to get photos of Scott, so they posted one on twitter.  It is sure to basically be completely unhelpful, as it shows him looking a bit ragged, but decked head to toe in Redskins gear.  At this point I think its patently obvious there's both more and different to this than both people and media think there is.

 

Yeah, I saw the pic...guessing that was his wife with him?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

50 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Blah.

 

Just once I'd like us to hire someone who is un-pedigreed. In order to get hired here in the past, you've always needed to 1) be famous or 2) be related to someone who is famous.

 

I want that too, but I don't believe our FO can pick a gem. 

 

We tried to go outside the box and ended up with Jim Zorn. I realize that wasn't Allen, but no one here has proven that they have an eye for unproven talent yet. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

13 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

You didn't need two paragraphs and me asking three separate times, either, did you lol...but that's what it apparently took.

 

 

 

 

That was difficult to read? Really?...I may have found the problem lol...

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure why this is in here. This speaks directly to what you already said--and I already responded to--in terms of Scot no longer having any power or authority.

 

 

 

 

 

Not just me...others in the media as well, and not just the guy who wrote the "yellow journalism" piece.

 

 

 

 

 

I "screamed" lol

 

I posted an article from a media member who wasn't liking the way some of his brethren in the press were acting. He wasn't screaming, either lol. I wanted to illustrate that the "dysfunction" wasn't limited to the Skins' FO...the media has it's own dysfunction as well.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I see the problem, then.

 

Paraphrasing something else I wrote a long time ago: This qualifies as logic to some fans:

 

Reporter writes: "Redskins name is racist, and Dan Snyder is owner. He's short, and his feet stink. Redskins will go 5-11."

 

Redskins go 5-11. That means his logic and analysis was dead-on accurate, people should stop criticizing him.

 

I won't recommend you read thesubmittedone's posts anymore...they are far too lengthy.

 

 

Actually I'm pretty much done reading your posts. 

[actorguy1]

Playoff Beard?!!!

[Peregrine]

9 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

Yeah, I saw the pic...guessing that was his wife with him?

Blonde hair so Id say thats the best guess.

[Cooleyfan1993]

1 minute ago, actorguy1 said:

Playoff Beard?!!!

Or....the beard of an alcoholic? ?

[MassSkinsFan]

1 hour ago, MartinC said:

There is ZERO that was dysfunctional about giving a talented personnel guy an opportunity while being aware of the risks and being vigilant for issues.

 

This was EXACTLY the sort of move the team everyone loves to hate, the Patsies, would make.