RemoveSnyder Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 41 minutes ago, rebornempowered said: in my opinion, he should be fired for not getting a deal done with Kirk anyway. Well, I hope you're paying attention now. The Cousins situation continues. Since McC isn't in the building, perhaps you'll hold someone responsible for the here after. I think I will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I think they did the right thing as well. But they didn't handle the fallout well, granted, when youre trying your damndest to to take care of a guy thats neck deep in alcohol, and he goes AWOL and mouthing to the media (that already hates you), its pretty hard to imagine a plan B for that. There is no right answer at that point. So they nutted up and did what they had to do, and I respect them for that. Lesson of this tale is you probably shouldn't hire an alcoholic (that is in denial) to be an NFL Executive, after he's already been axed in two other places Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Why am I Mr. Pink? Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 7 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said: Is it right that virtually everyone who leave here leave on bad terms? Is that a coincidence? I heard we are referred to as the "reverse car wash" - you come in clean and leave dirty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rskins06 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Springfield said: 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. Look, everyone deserves a second chance. SM is/was a great talent evaluator and obviously convinced DS and BA that the past was behind him. Why wouldn't they give him a second chance? They gave him a chance, HE (no one else) relapsed, HE started drinking again, HE put DS and BA in a bad position and if reports are true, THEY (DS and BA) gave him an opportunity to get treatment. NO ONE else should be blamed for this. This BS about them hiring him, knowing about his past puts the responsibility on their shoulders is BS! Some can't get past their blind hatred for DS and BA to see the fact they did EXACTLY what they had to do! He was fired for cause, if it wasn't justified, then you can bet the story will come out. However, fairly certain DS and BA have been fully briefed by legal counsel on what they could and could not do. Of course, all of this is IF you believe the media reports and "anonymous" sources about him drinking again. However, if he ISN'T drinking, what cause would they have to up and fire him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 2 hours ago, BurgundyBooger said: 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? it' s a bad time of year for that, right now because you have to get permission to hire from other teams, so we'd have to get anther guy out of work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onedrop Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 If breathing air was deemed to be the "right thing" those two clowns would choke to death. With this absolute joke of a franchise I have become the guy that just lost the last reserve of hope I didn't even know I had because I thought I'd already given up all hope. In no other area of my entire life have I ever experienced such monumental, consistent, laughably predictable, total and complete failure and dysfunction. Hell, I don't think I've ever even witnessed a one sided **** show relationship such as this of ANY kind, EVER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I hate to say it, but Danny boy and Bruce can **** themselves or each other. Any 'skins fan that would give these two ****ers any credit for anything right now might as well go to Ashburn and bend over their desk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 17 minutes ago, Why am I Mr. Pink? said: I heard we are referred to as the "reverse car wash" - you come in clean and leave dirty. Id say a twice fired alcoholic is already dirty upon arrival, but thats just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 2 hours ago, zoony said: Yah Im not sure what profession this would be okay in Assuming he was drinking on the job - and you basically have to assume that - the firing is 100 percent justifiable. I can even sort of forgive the weeks of lies up to this point. The lies were laughable, but I can see it. However, smearing him in the Post on the way out is just not cricket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 He may have needed to be fired. Like the RG3 situation, we probably wont know the truth until a few years later when players with no dog in the fight start to speak up. But the timing was ****ed up. Really really ****ed up. Like, the first day of free agency ****ed up. You cant suggest other wise here. That was a total failure. The press release was ****ed up. Refusing to talk to anyone about firing your GM on the first day of free agency is a **** up. And saying that this is the last time you will talk about it is a double **** up. And saying that you are busy with free agency (again, without your GM) is pretty ****ed up. As a fan I wanna know whats going on. I pretty much pay the bills, so atleat let me know whats up. Doing the dirtball unnamed source thing, that we all have to understand by now is part of the program here (every time, really?), is pretty ****ed up. But firing him may or may not have been a correct move. Depends on if they are telling the truth when leaking that his drinking is a problem (which was ****ed up) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Why am I Mr. Pink? Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 6 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: Assuming he was drinking on the job - and you basically have to assume that - the firing is 100 percent justifiable. I can even sort of forgive the weeks of lies up to this point. The lies were laughable, but I can see it. However, smearing him in the Post on the way out is just not cricket. I dont know, it sounds like something Rickey Cricket would def do ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 2 hours 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. If this were another team in the division, we'd be laughing our collective asses off at their abject stupidity. Scott never said he wasn't an alcoholic. He literally admitted at the press conference that it was a problem he's working on everyday. This was handled in an absolutely embarrassing way ... smearing him in the Post and lying to everyone for two weeks like we're all imbeciles ... an absolute Mickey Mouse club as usual. Making the Bullets organization look top-class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I got a great idea. Bring Vinny Cerrato back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 3 minutes ago, Sticksboi05 said: Scott never said he wasn't an alcoholic. He literally admitted at the press conference that it was a problem he's working on everyday. This is what he said in that famous ESPN article. He literally made the "I can stop any time I want" argument on the record with them. "I'd think to myself, 'OK, Scot, why not have a beer? It never affected your life before; you went from being an area scout to being general manager. Don't touch the vodka, don't touch the hard stuff. But if you want to have a beer, have a beer.' So that's where I got to. I stopped going to AA." That's what he says he will tell NFL teams if they come calling now. He knows he sounds as if he's splitting hairs about the distinction between beer and hard liquor, and he's aware of the fact that conventional wisdom says recovery is an all-or-nothing proposition -- even if some evidence suggests most heavy drinkers, which McCloughan says he's not, are functional. "If I was an alcoholic and had a beer, I'd have two, then four, then six, then ... you know, you can't stop," he insists. "I can. I can have a beer and I'm fine. I don't need any more." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 1 hour ago, SkinsGuy said: It was NOT Scott's job to "to get a deal done" with Cousins. He was not the money man. That responsibility falls to Team President Bruce Allen and to Eric Schaffer. Whose hair did Kirk tossle again? Who needed to see more? I think most of us saw enough in '15. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sknsrbck26 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 26 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: Assuming he was drinking on the job - and you basically have to assume that - the firing is 100 percent justifiable. I can even sort of forgive the weeks of lies up to this point. The lies were laughable, but I can see it. However, smearing him in the Post on the way out is just not cricket. I agree you do have to assume that he was drinking on the job. Which in the NFL, may or may not, be the norm. However, I think this ignores the tremendous amount of reporting that this had nothing to do with drinking, and was more along the line of Bruce wanting to get rid of him for whatever reason that may be. To the smear, I think one would have to assume that this came straight from the organization. However, it could also be any number of the leaks that come out of Redskins Park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I think we are ignoring a big issue from before that we all chalked up to a jealous wife tweeting... We are focusing on the alcohol, but what if it has more to do with him possibly having extra circular activities with a female reporter and him leaking information to her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 In some ways, given how thin-skinned Snyder is, for the Redskins to make this move when they did and incur the backlash that they are...maybe something really bad had to have happened. Ugh, here I go trying to build a narrative around a horrible organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 5 minutes ago, rebornempowered said: Whose hair did Kirk tossle again? Who needed to see more? I think most of us saw enough in '15. Doesn't matter whose hair Cousins "tossled" in an emotional moment after the game. Allen and Schaffer handled the contracts. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK_HOG Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Cousins seems to think Allen is the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Rskins06 said: Look, everyone deserves a second chance. SM is/was a great talent evaluator and obviously convinced DS and BA that the past was behind him. Why wouldn't they give him a second chance I suspect it was that combined with fact that the Redskins hired McCloughan as a consultant and really liked his breakdowns and analysis. They figured if he was producing this kind of work he was ready to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsPassion4Life Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 The Skins are terrible at PR....because of that; they let the media set the narrative instead of them being ahead of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Why am I Mr. Pink? Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 20 minutes ago, UK_HOG said: Cousins seems to think Allen is the problem If true, and this seems to line up with the most likely scenario ..... **** Bruce. If we could have had this done for 19M last year but Bruce didnt want to .... **** Bruce. **** Bruce. 17 minutes ago, SkinsPassion4Life said: The Skins are terrible at PR....because of that; they let the media set the narrative instead of them being ahead of the game. if the Skins wanted to get ahead of the game, they would offer Kirk 24m per and leak it. But Bruce doesnt want to do that ... only reason I can think is bc his panties are in a bunch. Is he putting personal ego and emotions ahead of whats best for the team? what the hell is going on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Obvi Dan is siding with already after turning down Kirk. So sadly this will do nothing to oust Bruce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.