I hate to say it but Snyder and Allen might have done the right thing

[Darrell Green Fan]

22 hours ago, Art said:

 

Because, as i said and we all know, the Skins handled the exit entirely wrongly with the anonymous dump on Scot.   They didn't need to do that.   Had the team given just their two sentence announcement and allowed no other info they'd have come out pretty squeaky.   But, as they are often happy to do to themselves, they botched it at the end.   

 

 

But I seem to recall the organization getting hammered throughout the league before he was finally fired and before the leak came out.  Is it really true that his VM was full?  That is what ended it in SF.

 

Seems to me there is plenty of evidence of this being more about a power struggle but I am open to learning more about the situation.   Was I wrong in assuming it was announced that he had full personnel power and that was clearly a lie?

[Campbell's_da_man]

Considering the organization, Allen probably drove SM to drink.  However, it's starting to appear that SM was beginning to lose his touch as far as drafting talent goes.  I mean, he seemed to lose some confidence in drafting quality players, so, in order to hedge his bets, he wanted more picks, because he knew it might increase his odds of finding more diamonds in the rough, to compensate for any misses in the higher rounds.  In other words, he started trading quality for quantity.  Just look at the last two MLB's he picked.  I doubt either one will ever be a starter.  Both are too small to play inside in a 3-4 scheme. 

[Art]

7 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

But I seem to recall the organization getting hammered throughout the league before he was finally fired and before the leak came out.  Is it really true that his VM was full?  That is what ended it in SF.

 

Seems to me there is plenty of evidence of this being more about a power struggle but I am open to learning more about the situation.   Was I wrong in assuming it was announced that he had full personnel power and that was clearly a lie?

 

There was never a power struggle.   Scot was never in power.   He had full control over the free agent board, draft board and draft, ultimately.   Gruden had full control over the final 53, as is proper, as well as the depth chart.   And, yes, it's 100 percent true his voicemail was full and reporters have even reported it.   It is accurate to say the team's leadership wanted Scot to be more productive as a GM as none of our success as a team in two years was due to his players.   "Do your job", is exactly a phrase he heard.   It's no secret Dan Snyder took a page out of Jack Kent Cooke's playbook.  "You want this, ok, but you better be right."   He was not right enough.   Now, we still have a batch of guys who could turn him into a genius yet.   If Doctson can play, and we get a couple other players to develop and, say, Spraight becomes a stud, then we'll be loving Scot for years.   I do think over time he'd have been fine.   He just lost his **** at the end.   You can't go dark in this league and it's not the first time he's done that.

 

[RWJ]

35 minutes ago, Art said:

 

There was never a power struggle.   Scot was never in power.   He had full control over the free agent board, draft board and draft, ultimately.   Gruden had full control over the final 53, as is proper, as well as the depth chart.   And, yes, it's 100 percent true his voicemail was full and reporters have even reported it.   It is accurate to say the team's leadership wanted Scot to be more productive as a GM as none of our success as a team in two years was due to his players.   "Do your job", is exactly a phrase he heard.   It's no secret Dan Snyder took a page out of Jack Kent Cooke's playbook.  "You want this, ok, but you better be right."   He was not right enough.   Now, we still have a batch of guys who could turn him into a genius yet.   If Doctson can play, and we get a couple other players to develop and, say, Spraight becomes a stud, then we'll be loving Scot for years.   I do think over time he'd have been fine.   He just lost his **** at the end.   You can't go dark in this league and it's not the first time he's done that.

 

The hard part now is finding someone notable that can find talent and replace Scot.  Will we?  That remains to be seen and I hope it someone other than Williams Dominick or Santos. I'd be fine with Campbell and would be intrigued with Mayock.   

[Taylor 36]

I think regardless of who we get after the draft to take over as GM (I do think we will hire someone between early May and late June), there will be ****ing and moaning by fans and the media.  The media, of course, would find a reason to **** about the Redskins no matter what, as will some fans, but the truth is that there is no perfect GM.  Everyone of them has their misses, and even the greats have plenty of misses to go along with their hits.  Bobby Beathard, the GM god of the Redskins had plenty in his career.  I only wish that when the person is hired that we give him a few years before we go bat-**** crazy about the hire.  But, I know I'm better off wishing for a Beatles reunion with Chuck Barry as the opening act (sorry, too soon?) as that is more realistic than fans being patient and not going Chicken Little for the sake of going Chicken Little.

[Wyvern]

I really hope the Skins don't put in a quasi-GM such a Campbell, Williams, or Santos.  The Redskins need to look for a bona-fide GM outside the Skins organization.  One reason, is that the Skins scouting department has needed to be overhauled-- but very little has changed in it over many years.  It's still over-represented in the pro side scouting at the expense of the college side scouting; and there doesn't ever seem to be much turned over, even during some fairly poor drafting years. Any 'real' GM committed to building through the draft would address that imbalance, and also replace some of the holdovers responsible for some of the fizzles during the 15 years of SnyderSkin drafts.  (I do recall how Shanahan was blamed for some of the bad drafts, but even Gibbs was advised to pick up some lemons too!)

 

I noted how the Redskins website is now giving a lot of praise to Scott Campbell for the 2014 draft, but I vaguely remember the skins FO had started to tap into McCloughans scouting consults leading up to that draft.  (And it's never mentioned how Campbell has been around for some of the less productive drafts.)

 

I've also gone back and read some of the speculation (Hogs-Haven article of April 2015) on how much McCloughan was likely to turnover the Skins scouting department staff and structure -- mindful McCloughan had a history of doing so, while he was with other organizations.  Bottom line, McCloughan was not able to do this with the Redskins, and in a break with his traditional pattern, indicated that things would stay in place.

 

I found that really odd, because there were scouts on the Redskins staff he'd probably have wanted to replace, including the one he'd fired while he was in San Francisco (Jim Zeche).  And this January, there were a lot of 49'ers scouts/executives who had become available (Baalke, Malaspina) who McCloughan had hired or worked with.

 

Bottom Line #1:   I suspect the personnel issue was another 'sticking point' between McCloughan and Allen -- especially when some of McCloughan's former associates could have been brought in.  (FYI, the Skins don't pay their scouts very much -- so it might have involved higher salaries to attract better scouting -- another Allen no-no.)

 

Bottom Line#2:  The Skins FO structure currently doesn't support a real NFL-style of GM, and may be resistant to handing over the power to do so.  So it remains to be seen how much real "reform" Skins fans could expect from within the Redskins FO, especially in regards to its talent acquisition methods, etc., espeically if Snyder/Allen don't really want that kind of reform.  So Williams, Campbell, Santos -- as insiders -- would probably not be promoted, unless they were amenable to live within the limits of a "quasi-GM" role.

[Renegade7]

If it's true Scott was going to trade Cousins, which I believe there's some truth to it, I'd support canning him, drinking or not.  Franchise QBs are too hard to come by, and I'm not sold Cousins wants out of DC.  There's no telling the ramifications of getting rid of Cousins and getting his replacement wrong.

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

14 hours ago, Campbell's_da_man said:

Considering the organization, Allen probably drove SM to drink.  However, it's starting to appear that SM was beginning to lose his touch as far as drafting talent goes.  I mean, he seemed to lose some confidence in drafting quality players, so, in order to hedge his bets, he wanted more picks, because he knew it might increase his odds of finding more diamonds in the rough, to compensate for any misses in the higher rounds.  In other words, he started trading quality for quantity.  Just look at the last two MLB's he picked.  I doubt either one will ever be a starter.  Both are too small to play inside in a 3-4 scheme. 

 

Agreed on Allen!

I don't think dealing for more draft picks had much to do with lack of confidence, as a confident GM knows he can find gems in the middle to later rds. I believe it had more to do with how void we were of talent upon SM taking over, and the need for more quality/quantity over 1 impact player.

Let's not forget; under Snyder/Allen or Snyder anyone, we can't sniff the playoffs, and are predominantly the laughing stock of the league with 1 disastrous signing or draft pick after another....SM had us heading in the right direction, my belief is; Snyder is hell bent on proving to the world he is a football man, so as he tears down the team, he needs someone else to build it back up, and as soon as the team starts to turn around, he wants to take back control in an attempt to try and finish the job, and take credit for the teams success!!

We saw this with Marty S., the guy did a tremendous "TREMENDOUS" job straightening out Snyder's mess, and taking us out of cap hell...and was rewarded by Snyder how???  YOUR FIRED!!!  And that "IS" Dan Snyder!!!

 

[Conn]

16 hours ago, Campbell's_da_man said:

I mean, he seemed to lose some confidence in drafting quality players, so, in order to hedge his bets, he wanted more picks, because he knew it might increase his odds of finding more diamonds in the rough, to compensate for any misses in the higher rounds.  In other words, he started trading quality for quantity.

 

What in the entire hell are you talking about here. Getting as many draft picks as possible by trading back was always a philosophy he spoke about. And every team in the league knows more picks increases your odds of hitting. It had nothing to do with "losing confidence". What a weird thing to say.

 

Some people just love to hear themselves spitball things. The connections people make in their own minds and then spout as fact are incredible.

[Darrell Green Fan]

14 hours ago, Art said:

 

There was never a power struggle.   Scot was never in power.   He had full control over the free agent board, draft board and draft, ultimately.   Gruden had full control over the final 53, as is proper, as well as the depth chart.   And, yes, it's 100 percent true his voicemail was full and reporters have even reported it.   It is accurate to say the team's leadership wanted Scot to be more productive as a GM as none of our success as a team in two years was due to his players.   "Do your job", is exactly a phrase he heard.   It's no secret Dan Snyder took a page out of Jack Kent Cooke's playbook.  "You want this, ok, but you better be right."   He was not right enough.   Now, we still have a batch of guys who could turn him into a genius yet.   If Doctson can play, and we get a couple other players to develop and, say, Spraight becomes a stud, then we'll be loving Scot for years.   I do think over time he'd have been fine.   He just lost his **** at the end.   You can't go dark in this league and it's not the first time he's done that.

 

 

Thanks, I do feel a bit better.  But I still have a lot of issues, how can the team give him full power on the draft yet force him to retain their scouts?  But I agree and have posted that the wins came from mostly players already on the roster and his "low risk" free agents ended up very costly as they left the same hole to be filled. And no you cannot go dark, this was the risk when he was hired.

 

But this entire situation has still left me with such a bad taste, especially if it's true that SM wanted to extend Kirk years ago.

[bedlamVR]

I wonder .. if your in a team - in anything - and your boss has a drinking problem and starts messing up - missing meetings disappearing for days at a time .

 

Do you think outsiders or other people in the same organisation  look at your team and think wow their boss is a mess but everyone else is awesome - or do you think your entire team is a joke ? 

 

People wit drinking problems or other issues that impact on work not only waste their talent but they are toxic to people around them .. 

 

Everyone keeps saying why did Scot not bring his people in ... who are his people - he got fired TWICE for his issues with drinking . Who is going to tie their careers to that ? 

 

I think it is shovking that people simply won't accept a guy who got fired twice for drinking and associated behaviour ( and let's get this right - he did not get fired for turning up to work hung over or bleary eyed) and by his own admission never stopped drinking got fired again for the same issue ; but people would rather accept an over reaching conspiracy theory that re-enforces their opponion of the Redskins - a multi billion $$ organization is run by a bunch of clueless idiots . 

 

I think scot if anything got too much praise and the real turn around in fortunes has been down to Jay - who I was very down on in year one - but has done a fantastic job even when the groceries - Matt Jones for example have been less than inspiring ... 

 

and also when did winning become only about the front office ? Do we praise bobby bethard or joe Gibbs for the 3 super bowl victories ? 

 

I totally agree the team dumping on Scot as he left the building was classless and uneccacery but I don't see how the sky is falling now he has gone ..

[Darrell Green Fan]

Good points.  But do you really think not one scout from his past would work for him?  Doesn't it seem strange that the entire scouting staff was retained intact?  Sure Grudog had final roster control, as all coaches do, but it still seems clear to me that we were promised one thing regarding SM's power and later leaned of another situation.  I still see Bruce as a yes man and a little weasel.   What is wrong with the GM talking  to players?  I saw Moneyball and when music was playing after a loss Billy Bean was having none of it!  ?

[bedlamVR]

@DGF  I think you have to remember Scot had been out of football for at least a year - and I have no idea just how much power or reporting responsibility he had in Seattle under Schnider . 

 

Some scouts may may well have liked Scot but would they have liked him enough to leave jobs elsewhere to come work for a drunk ? I know scouts jobs are not the most secure of employment routes but I cannot imagine there would have been a que - as far as we know scot could have gone through his list of contacts as soon as he arrived and no body wanted to come ... people seem to me to be putting 2 and 2 together (Scot arrived no personnel overhaul + Scot being fired  = Scot was oppressed = Dan Snyder is the devil) .... but this was not a story in 2015 or 16 in the run up too the drafts . 

 

I think we have a problem now that the skins fanatics will not accept anyone the skins put forward as a GM if it come from within or from  Bruce Allen ...which is a shame because we might just have competent and qualified people on staff ... I  mean Eric DeCodta and John Schneider both spent time in the front offices of the Redskins and we let them walk away. 

 

 

People  have this opinion of Allen as a weasel but I happen to think Allen is the epetemy of a football guy ... he has connections and experience coming out of the wazu. I just don't think he is a great personnel guy - and I think he knows it - which is why he turned to Scots consultancy in the first place . I think Allen likes to big picture deals like the new stadium deal that are necessary but don't affect the product on the field - which makes me very sceptical about the power grab story . 

 

I think if the Redskins do one thing they need to improve their press relations - be boring and woo the press with new facilities etc and make sure any player who talks to the media is sufficiently media savvy 

[Skinsinparadise]

9 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

 

People  have this opinion of Allen as a weasel but I happen to think Allen is the epetemy of a football guy ... he has connections and experience coming out of the wazu. I just don't think he is a great personnel guy - and I think he knows it - which is why he turned to Scots consultancy in the first place . I think Allen likes to big picture deals like the new stadium deal that are necessary but don't affect the product on the field - which makes me very sceptical about the power grab story . 

 

 

I've said this on other threads but IMO whether Bruce wanted control or not, I think his next move would be telling.  I think they should be savvy enough PR wise to understand that hiring from within won't be greatly received by everyone in the fan base -- especially in the context of this story.  So, if Bruce makes that type of hire anyway IMO it gives a strong vibe that control is something hotly desired.  

 

Do we ever hear any NFL pundit type talk about other teams coveting Scott Campbell (who helped preside over Vinnys drafts among others), Alex Santos (FA hasn't been hot IMO under him) or Doug Williams?   I don't know much about Doug, only one I've heard talk about him of late was Grant Paulsen who said people he knows in the building says Doug is unimpressive at scouting/player evaluation but he's a great guy.   And some beat reporters say they expect Doug to be the hire largely because no one in that building is closer to Bruce and they think the fan base would be into the hire because of 1987 Superbowl good feelings.    

 

My one wonder on this stuff discussed relating to Scot is one of the reporters (I think it was Keim?) said agents were still talking to Scot leading up to the combine.  And if Scot's the guy who makes the lists and Bruce is the one who does the chasing of said lists, I'd presume Bruce/Schaffer not Scot would be the key guy to get on that phone on the brink of FA.  Though obviously, everyone needs to pick up their phone to run a business.  Chris Russell who talks about this stuff more than anyone as far as I noticed, said the tweet from Scot's wife with the rings set the team off as the final straw coupled with the photos on twitter with Scot wearing full Redskins gear.   Multiple reporters have suggested Scot's power has gradually waned, culminating in him not being consulted at the end of the year on Kirk and they gave him the exclusive tag without consulting with him first.  Russell said Scot's power diminished as far back as August 2015. 

 

If Scot wasn't the right guy because of his baggage, OK.  There wasn't really a power struggle, OK.  Then, lets see if they hire a guy who is highly regarded in personnel -- a DeCosta type versus someone with an undistinguished resume but is tightest with Bruce.    I am not saying I know where this is going -- hopefully it goes in the right direction. 

[RedBeast]

I hope that a real GM search is conducted and we bring in multiple highly qualified candidates after the draft and not some talking head.

[bedlamVR]

SIP ... When Eric DeCosta was there an outcry that he left - How about John Schnider ? 

 

My point is for all we know Doug Williams could be the next great GM (for instance) but some of the fan base would not give him a chance because of his ties to Bruce Allen. - completely missing the fact that Williams has been a scout has been involved in college and high school coaching and has good connections there has very good experience in the FO roles in the NFL and was a player at the NFL level  - I have no idea about him in terms of personnel evaluation and realistically neither does anyone else on the  outside.... except those in the organisation and I know a lot of people were surprised when Dominik was chosen over Williams after Allen was fired in Tampa prompting Williams to go on a rant in 2011 

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/21/doug-williams-says-good-ol-boy-network-is-alive-and-well-in-front-office/

 

BUT we should pass on him because - well you know Bruce Allen is power mad - mad !  tell yell ya

 

I have nothing against conducting an extensive GM search but lets not throw the baby out with the bath water here . If the structure of Snyder writing cheques  - Allen winning off the field - and keeping Snyder away from the team  - Scot scouting and selecting the players - and keeping Allen away from the talent - and Jay bringing it all together  was supposed to be a winning formula then why should it be any different if we change one of the names ..

 

All the fans cannot be appeaesed all the time - only winning will fix that ... 

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I've said this on other threads but IMO whether Bruce wanted control or not, I think his next move would be telling.  I think they should be savvy enough PR wise to understand that hiring from within won't be greatly received by everyone in the fan base -- especially in the context of this story.  So, if Bruce makes that type of hire anyway IMO it gives a strong vibe that control is something hotly desired.  

 

Do we ever hear any NFL pundit type talk about other teams coveting Scott Campbell (who helped preside over Vinnys drafts among others), Alex Santos (FA hasn't been hot IMO under him) or Doug Williams?   I don't know much about Doug, only one I've heard talk about him of late was Grant Paulsen who said people he knows in the building says Doug is unimpressive at scouting/player evaluation but he's a great guy.   And some beat reporters say they expect Doug to be the hire largely because no one is that building is closer to Bruce and they think the fan base would be into the hire because of 1987 Superbowl good feelings.    

 

My one wonder on this stuff discussed relating to Scot is one of the reporters (I think it was Keim?) said agents were still talking to Scot leading up to the combine.  And if Scot's the guy who makes the lists and Bruce is the one who does the chasing of said lists, I'd presume Bruce/Schaffer not Scot would be the key guy to get on that phone on the brink of FA.  Though obviously, everyone needs to pick up their phone to run a business.  Chris Russell who talks about this stuff more than anyone as far as I noticed, said the tweet from Scot's wife with the rings set the team off as the final straw coupled with the photos on twitter with Scot wearing full Redskins gear.   Multiple reporters have suggested Scot's power has gradually waned, culminating in him not being consulted at the end of the year on Kirk and they gave him the exclusive tag without consulting with him first.  Russell said Scot's power diminished as far back as August 2015. 

 

If Scot wasn't the right guy because of his baggage, OK.  There wasn't really a power struggle, OK.  Then, lets see if they hire a guy who is highly regarded in personnel -- a DeCosta type versus which someone with an undistinguished resume but is tightest with Bruce.    I am not saying I know where this is going -- hopefully it goes in the right direction. 

 

This this is a mixed bag of news.  There should be little question that Scott was presented to the fanbase as the guy in charge of personnel.  The fact that agents were still calling him right up to the end kind of confirms this. If they started taking control from him as far back as 2015 then we were lied to.  If this is all about drinking and going dark I have no issues but this appears to be much more than that.  If a pic of 3 SB rings is enough to set them off then yes they are little weasels. 

45 minutes ago, bedlamVR said:

When Eric DeCosta was there an outcry that he left - How about John Schnider ? 

 

My point is for all we know Doug Williams could be the next great GM (for instance) but some of the fan base would not give him a chance because of his ties to Bruce Allen. - completely missing the fact that Williams has been a scout has been involved in college and high school coaching and has good connections there has very good experience in the FO roles in the NFL and was a player at the NFL level  - I have no idea about him in terms of personnel evaluation and realistically neither does anyone else except those in the organization and I know a lot of people were surprised when Dominik was chosen over Williams after Allen was fired in Tampa prompting Williams to go on a rant in 2011 

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/21/doug-williams-says-good-ol-boy-network-is-alive-and-well-in-front-office/

 

BUT we should pass on him because - well you know Bruce Allen is power mad - mad !  tell yell ya

 

If Doug Williams is trying to impress by trotting out Josh Freeman as his "I told you so" moment then color me unimpressed. 

[bedlamVR]

In 2011 Josh Freeman was really burning bright - he was a very hot QB until Josh Freemans personality kind of derailed that - Context is important I doubt now that Doug would be so quick to pick out Freeman as someone to talk about . 

[Conn]

The fact that a Redskins fan would try to talk themselves into believing that Doug Williams could ever be as qualified a GM candidate as someone who worked their way up through a good personnel department for an entire career....it's staggering. It's like your mind is already protecting you from the inevitable outcome and putting up shields. 

 

There's a reason he's bounced around from place to place, going from front office to coaching to front office to coaching and back again every few years. It's because he's got the name and the connections but not the game.

[Darrell Green Fan]

24 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

The fact that a Redskins fan would try to talk themselves into believing that Doug Williams could ever be as qualified a GM candidate as someone who worked their way up through a good personnel department for an entire career....it's staggering. It's like your mind is already protecting you from the inevitable outcome and putting up shields. 

 

There's a reason he's bounced around from place to place, going from front office to coaching to front office to coaching and back again every few years. It's because he's got the name and the connections but not the game.

 

This is exactly what I meant with a post the other day.  Doug Williams' resume is simply not impressive.

[RedBeast]

NOOOOO TO DW as GM

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

SIP ... When Eric DeCosta was there an outcry that he left - How about John Schnider ? 

 

My point is for all we know Doug Williams could be the next great GM (for instance) but some of the fan base would not give him a chance because of his ties to Bruce Allen. - completely missing the fact that Williams has been a scout has been involved in college and high school coaching and has good connections there has very good experience in the FO roles in the NFL and was a player at the NFL level  - I have no idea about him in terms of personnel evaluation and realistically neither does anyone else on the  outside.... except those in the organisation and I know a lot of people were surprised when Dominik was chosen over Williams after Allen was fired in Tampa prompting Williams to go on a rant in 2011 

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/21/doug-williams-says-good-ol-boy-network-is-alive-and-well-in-front-office/

 

BUT we should pass on him because - well you know Bruce Allen is power mad - mad !  tell yell ya

 

I have nothing against conducting an extensive GM search but lets not throw the baby out with the bath water here . If the structure of Snyder writing cheques  - Allen winning off the field - and keeping Snyder away from the team  - Scot scouting and selecting the players - and keeping Allen away from the talent - and Jay bringing it all together  was supposed to be a winning formula then why should it be any different if we change one of the names ..

 

All the fans cannot be appeaesed all the time - only winning will fix that ... 

 

 

 

Actually that article link makes me less impressed with Doug versus more (though still love Doug the player) -- for the reasons that he had to give an example for why he was the smart guy in the room and the example he gave was for a player I am unimpressed with.  And the position in question would be his wheel house I'd presume. 

 

As for even if its doesn't look sexy on the surface but give it a chance idea... we've seen that movie before, it wouldn't be anything new.    Yeah Vinny might not have been the most touted personnel guy out there, but lets see..Yeah Gibbs was a great coach, not a personnel guy but lets see what he brings, Bruce was out of a job and not known for his drafts but lets see...Shanny according to many in the Denver media was chased out of there because of his personnel decisions not coaching -- but lets see maybe he will be a good personnel guy here....

 

The examples you give of Schneider and Decosta leaving -- actually helps bring my main point home.  I think many of us have become more sophisticated and cynical consumers.  We've seen so many variations of the same problem that it finally sunk in.   Speaking for myself, i didn't care one whit at the time of the hires what the reps were of the personnel guys -- I was focused on the coaches.  My last rodeo of trusting it was Shanny.  Yeah I heard the red flags of both him and Bruce on personnel (Though Bruce was known as a strong money guy which I liked) but I didn't care.  I wanted Shanny's offense.  My thought was who cares that Seattle had John Schneider.   I recall actually going on to Seattle's fan board years back before the 2012 playoff game and they were laughing at me saying we got John Schneider, you got Danny Snyder, case closed.  But I'd say in recent years its really come home -- that is who is shopping for the groceries is just as important if not more than who is cooking the meal. 

 

I agree that everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt but the idea of the Redskins putting someone in charge of personnel and that hire gets shrugs around the league isn't a novel thing, its business as usual.  And I'd hate it for it to be Doug for two reasons:  1.  I've just not heard anything that the dude is a stud at picking players.  He's had multiple opportunities to be promoted or be taken by other teams to be their GMs, it hasn't happened, I can't even recall discussion about it like Denver was hot on Doug Williams but decided to go elsewhere with their decision.  After being let go from Tampa, Doug kept working but he was out of the NFL until Bruce rehired him  2.  He's right now an icon with this franchise and justifably so -- I'd hate to see it ending up ugly here for him like it has for others.  I'd like to see his rep untarnished.  

 

Heck I am even uncomfortable saying I don't want him as the GM, I don't like having conversation about why I don't want Doug Williams as GM.  I'd like Doug's rep to stay pristine.  If he's the next GM, I have concerns that he doesn't come out of it with a pristine reputation.   I do agree that the hire might be well received in some quarters because everyone seems to think that Doug embodies class and he's a historical figure -- but I suspect that sheen might be lost quickly.  And I'd hate to see that.

[clskinsfan]

On 3/18/2017 at 2:13 PM, Sea Bass said:

I don't want Bruce to be the boss.

 

I want a "real football GM" to be the boss.

 

It's like Dan is trying to do everything except the one thing we have been asking from the beginning.

 

Get a "real football GM" (not Bruce, a "football" GM).  Give him the keys, and then go away.

 

I got some news for you. There is NO owner in the NFL that just "goes away". These are billionaires that got to where they are through controlling their own environments. A "real football GM" doesnt change that for any of these owners. They are and will always be the final say on everything in their company. 

On 3/19/2017 at 10:12 AM, Campbell's_da_man said:

Considering the organization, Allen probably drove SM to drink.  However, it's starting to appear that SM was beginning to lose his touch as far as drafting talent goes.  I mean, he seemed to lose some confidence in drafting quality players, so, in order to hedge his bets, he wanted more picks, because he knew it might increase his odds of finding more diamonds in the rough, to compensate for any misses in the higher rounds.  In other words, he started trading quality for quantity.  Just look at the last two MLB's he picked.  I doubt either one will ever be a starter.  Both are too small to play inside in a 3-4 scheme. 

I dont think Scott needed any help from Allen to "drive him to drink". His history is pretty well known at this point.

[Sea Bass]

2 hours ago, clskinsfan said:

 

I got some news for you. There is NO owner in the NFL that just "goes away". These are billionaires that got to where they are through controlling their own environments. A "real football GM" doesnt change that for any of these owners. They are and will always be the final say on everything in their company.

 

That's his problem.  This isn't mergers and acquistions.  It's football.

 

Robert Kraft actually used to be a meddling owner, when he was young.  He grew up, so should Snyder.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/patriots-owner-robert-krafts-balancing-act

 

"Kraft’s story is about the value of an owner letting go and leaving the football decisions to the experts. "

 

" At first, like many other new owners, Kraft was keen on playing with his new toy ....  Today, Kraft’s public persona is that of a wise and optimistic cheerleader—the owner who remembers the names of all his players, remains responsive to the demands of fans, signs the checks, and otherwise stays out of the way."

[Est.1974]

5 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

This is exactly what I meant with a post the other day.  Doug Williams' resume is simply not impressive.

 

He'll be in the role by June.