hockeyiszen Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Unfortunately I do think SM was let go justly...hear me out...If you get bought out, as the skins should have done if they had to part ways, even if due to alcohol, then there's a clause in there as part of the settlement where neither party will divulge any information that can damage the other.If SM gets fired outright, as has happened here, then all bets are off - SM or likely his agent can air all the dirty laundry and dysfunction that came to make this to be.Snyder and Allen are buffoons but not stupid and have had legal consul - if they fired him outright then they are not scared of any he-said she-said crap that come-out..long way of saying is that unfortunately, the allegations are likely true and they had cause to fire him. Unrelated but related... I don't know how many of you have had issues with alcohol or have known a daily drinker who has real, fundamental problems but..You can see it in his face, from pics over th past few months and longer - the extremely puffy & bloated face, the broken blood vessles/capillaries and general rosesia...not saying anything was deserved, all i'm saying, if you know the effects of significant daily drinking you can clealy see it manifested in his pictures recently...and longer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Looking only at the alcohol side of the equation, I guess my only question is "What did the Redskins try?" I would have liked to see a leave of absence. I'd like to have seen other supports. Now, supposedly McCloughan has been to rehab and that didn't help, but when taking on a known risk like this what did they do to try to make sure it would work? Could they have done more? Should they have done more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Either way, this is Snyder's/Allen's fault. Both of whom have already proven that they can't capably run a professional football team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 The org gets no benefit of the doubt but I see the point the OP is making Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mayor of Fed Ex Field Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 In Virginia, you can't fire someone because of alcoholism. It's considered a disability. You can fire someone for drinking on the job however. But those lines are blurred, if he is allowed to drink in the owners suite during games, when he technically is "working". Once his agent came out and said "he isn't drinking", the team could fire him and did so, because Scots agent publicly said he wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyst Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 They could be in the right but this team has a history of doing it wrong so I have no faith. If you have to fire him then fire him but to get to this point it's a huge issue in their ability to handle things the right way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgundyBooger Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I'll believe it when they find a replacement. If we acquire a new GM or promote one from within in whom I'm confident, I'll give Snyder/Allen the benefit of the doubt. If the dynamic duo intend on undertaking free agency and the draft - together, by themselves - I'll know they're full of it. Scot's fault? Fine, I can buy that...BUT WHERE IS HIS REPLACEMENT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dissident2 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Honestly, I'm most upset with the lies and the situation we currently find ourselves in football-wise. Yes, SM bears ultimate responsibility for his issues with alcohol. From the moment I read that he still thought he could handle a beer with his history, I knew this day could very well come. And even if he could still "function", you can't keep that up forever, and people don't want to have a drunk walking around half lit all the time, even if he is ultimately good at what he does. So Scot is not a saint and never was and definitely should not be turned into a holy martyr in all of this. BUT ... the way the organization has handled it and the situation we now find ourselves in with the future of our team is what bothers me the most. Allen clearly lied from the beginning when he said SM would have "final say and total control" over personnel, and lies seem to be the tent poles on which this circus tent secures itself. The absolute botching of the Cousins deal just continues to mule-kick our lower haunches on a daily basis. What's so bad about that is that the success of Cousins has actually gone a LONG WAY toward healing the RG3 disappointment. In fact, when you think about it, the fact that Cousins was taken in that same draft and has blossomed like he has really lessened the blow of what we gave up for RG3. And now we're on the cusp of losing HIM, thanks to a complete lack of vision and foresight and utter incompetence. The thing I loved about Scot, despite all his problems, was that he seemed real. He seemed like a real human being, not a fem-bot or an Alec Baldwin wax figure that wasn't made properly and was found in the dumpster outside of Madame Tussauds. I think the players gravitated toward that, too, as almost all of them talk about how much they loved the guy. Maybe that explains the unfounded love for RG3 that has never come close to being reciprocated with Kirk, who's actually accomplished more. This ownership has always preferred style over substance. And they've never even had good taste in style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theTruthTeller Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 If you hire a known alcoholic who says he's not an alcoholic and insists that he's resolved past problems by drinking beer... well, you deserve whatever you get. If this were another team in the division, we'd be laughing our collective asses off at their abject stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 31 minutes ago, hockeyiszen said: You can see it in his face, from pics over th past few months and longer - the extremely puffy & bloated face, the broken blood vessles/capillaries and general rosesia...not saying anything was deserved, all i'm saying, if you know the effects of significant daily drinking you can clealy see it manifested in his pictures recently...and longer To me he has had those big jawels for cheeks and red Yeltsinish face since day 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 25 minutes ago, Springfield said: Either way, this is Snyder's/Allen's fault. Both of whom have already proven that they can't capably run a professional football team. Exactly. Snyder has long since lost the benefit of the doubt. He's proven time and time again that he's the problem. Names can change and people can be fired but there's always one constant. Until he matures and understands that no matter what he does he simply has no idea how to build a successful football team we will forever find ourselves in football hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Even if Scot was struggling with alcohol, the organization handled this very poorly. And now the public shaming from team sources is very bush league. All I know is that Bruce and Dan better hope Scot doesn't opt to sue. I've heard from Gary Fitzgerald (former skins employee) that drinking on the job is rampant at Redskins park. I think it would be hilarious if Scot's lawyer asked Dan, Bruce or Tony if they ever took a drink while on the job. Or perhaps Scot and his agent signed an NDA so we may never know his side. Either way the team looks bad and takes a huge fat L on this one; something they've been very good at since 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankRizzo Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 1 minute ago, Taylor703 said: Exactly. Snyder has long since lost the benefit of the doubt. He's proven time and time again that he's the problem. Names can change and people can be fired but there's always one constant. Until he matures and understands that no matter what he does he simply has no idea how to build a successful football team we will forever find ourselves in football hell. The organization has been toxic and classless in all of their dealings since he bought the team. This is only the most recent and IMO most shameful example of it. I can deal with the team sucking but this behavior is inexcusable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said: If you hire a known alcoholic who says he's not an alcoholic and insists that he's resolved past problems by drinking beer... well, you deserve whatever you get. He was worth the risk. It didn't work out, but we're no worse off than we were before. We got two draft classes that look pretty good from him for our trouble, I'll take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankRizzo Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Just now, Boss_Hogg said: Or perhaps Scot and his agent signed an NDA so we may never know his side. I'd be willing to bet that this is the case and they probably have one of the most robust NDA's ever constructed. This team loves to operate in the shadows. I wish I understood it. The only reason I can think of is that they are ashamed of the way they act, but that's probably giving them too much credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Yah Im not sure what profession this would be okay in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJHJR86 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 SM doesn't come out of this looking like an angel, but it's still hard to hold anyone accountable other than Snyder/Allen. If this coward unnamed source quoted in the WaPo article as saying that the past "18 months" have been awful is correct, why did they drag this out and wait to fire him? Why not fire him on the 20th when the murmurs started? Why were they dragging this out for weeks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 3 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said: SM doesn't come out of this looking like an angel, but it's still hard to hold anyone accountable other than Snyder/Allen. If this coward unnamed source quoted in the WaPo article as saying that the past "18 months" have been awful is correct, why did they drag this out and wait to fire him? Why not fire him on the 20th when the murmurs started? Why were they dragging this out for weeks? Because they are publicly shaming Scot to make them selves look like the innocent ones. This is a trash organization from top to bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJHJR86 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 3 minutes ago, Boss_Hogg said: Because they are publicly shaming Scot to make them selves look like the innocent ones. If that was their intent, they are complete morons. No one, outside of a few fans, are on the side of Allen/Snyder. They are getting crushed in the media, both local and national, and rightfully so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek1973 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 20 minutes ago, Taylor703 said: Exactly. Snyder has long since lost the benefit of the doubt. He's proven time and time again that he's the problem. Names can change and people can be fired but there's always one constant. Until he matures and understands that no matter what he does he simply has no idea how to build a successful football team we will forever find ourselves in football hell. Are you saying that Scott has not? How many teams have fired him for his drinking problem in the past besides the Redskins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theTruthTeller Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 2 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said: He was worth the risk. It didn't work out, but we're no worse off than we were before. We got two draft classes that look pretty good from him for our trouble, I'll take it. It really wasn't. They should have made the offer conditional on abstention and tested him regularly. When you're an addict, your addiction takes precedence over everything else. His draft classes are no better than the online draft quides. Finding a starting guard with the #5 pick is hardly an achievement. Crowder remains the only pick that played better than his draft position warranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Just now, TheGreek1973 said: Are you saying that Scott has not? How many teams have fired him for his drinking problem in the past besides the Redskins? What did I say about Scott? My post was obviously Snyder related. Look, I get you're no fan of McCloughan because this isn't the only site I've seen your post your dislike of him on but Snyder has been an absolute disaster since he bought the team. He's ran off good coaches, alienated front office members and treated fans like garbage. He's had 18 years to get this right and we're still dealing with the same **** we've dealt with from here for years. McCloughan is just another bug smashed on the Snyder windshield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 2 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said: It really wasn't. They should have made the offer conditional on abstention and tested him regularly. When you're an addict, your addiction takes precedence over everything else. His draft classes are no better than the online draft quides. Finding a starting guard with the #5 pick is hardly an achievement. Crowder remains the only pick that played better than his draft position warranted. But this right here is why this is ultimately their fault. Given the dysfunction of this franchise since 1999, the only decent personnel guy they could hire was one who was very likely to have issues with alcohol. So, on a macro level, their crappy environment is what is causing them to have to hope that high-risk people work out in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 6 minutes ago, Taylor703 said: Exactly. Snyder has long since lost the benefit of the doubt. He's proven time and time again that he's the problem. Names can change and people can be fired but there's always one constant. Until he matures and understands that no matter what he does he simply has no idea how to build a successful football team we will forever find ourselves in football hell. Well... even if Scot was a drunk. Let's say, for sake of argument, that part is true. They hired him. They vetted him. They knew full well his history. Even in his short time here, Scot seemed to build a team that was becoming capable. If they were going to hire a known risk, then they should have thought about the possible repercussions. Now, here we are going into the draft with nobody who knows football actually running the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonArtest15 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 They did Scot dirty...starting from when the FO had Cooley plant the seed a few weeks back, the grandmother excuse, etc. This is a clown show at it's finest. We had something good going here, and now there are more questions than answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.