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

[Peregrine]

If you really believe that what the Redskins said is true, that this has been going on for 18 months, and they just happened to chose the worst time in the world to fire him, I've got a small island to sell you for a big island price.

 

[TheBlueIndian]

6 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

It's not like this wasn't news, either.  I think the appropriate response would have been to let him know from Day 1 that if he relapses or has any issues that the team is there to help him in any way possible.  

Not a relapse he never quit. What makes you think they didn't try to support him. If what we have found out through "sources"  is to be believed they not only supported him but tried to help him by covering for him so he could keep his dignity.  

[SkinsPassion4Life]

Just now, SkinsGuy said:

 

Please.

 

You've been here less than a year, and of every post I've seen of yours, I haven't seen you write one nice or favorable thing about him.

 

I mean, the man has been fired, and you're still on this board stomping your feet and pouting about people talking favorably about him.

 

You aren't fooling anyone, you know.  

 

I'm only doing it because of the unfair treatment the organization is getting.

 

I tell it like it is regarding GMSM...you guys love praising SM for things he should not get praise for.....I wish GMSM had done a better job and was still here

[Art]

1 minute ago, Peregrine said:

If you really believe that what the Redskins said is true, that this has been going on for 18 months, and they just happened to chose the worst time in the world to fire him, I've got a small island to sell you for a big island price.

 

 

There's a reason.   

 

He was working for 18 months.   He stopped in early February.   He disappeared.   He stopped answering calls and texts.   The decision was because Scot lost it when his grandmother died and there was no choice.   Had this happened in October, it would have happened then.   You can't be in this position in the NFL and go several weeks without answering other teams calling you about stuff.   You can NOT do it.   

[SkinsPassion4Life]

Just now, Peregrine said:

If you really believe that what the Redskins said is true, that this has been going on for 18 months, and they just happened to chose the worst time in the world to fire him, I've got a small island to sell you for a big island price.

 

 

Do you really think they wanted to fire him right now?   If you do; then I have a big island for an ever bigger price to sell you.

[SkinsGuy]

4 minutes ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

 

I'm only doing it because of the unfair treatment the organization is getting.

 

I tell it like it is regarding GMSM...you guys love praising SM for things he should not get praise for.....I wish GMSM had done a better job and was still here

 

I haven't praised him for anything. Just see him as the GM who was doing his job, and I didn't have unrealistic expectations of him.

 

You are the one carrying on like you have something personal against him..

 

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

16 minutes ago, Art said:

The bottom line is the Redskins absolutely have handled the messaging around this situation like morons.   No one could reasonably suggest otherwise.

 

At the same time, the reason they fired him is because he has not been answering his phone or responding to messages the last several weeks.   The team knew he was on a bender because of his grandmother and for some time just thought he'd snap out of it.   When it became apparent his voice mail was full and he had not returned hundreds of texts for several weeks, the team realized this was going to explode and let him go.

The anonymous plant in the news was unnecessary.   But there was no choice on this.

 

 

Well then this makes more sense.  This had to be the tipping point of what seemed to be a rocky relationship.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

Just now, SkinsGuy said:

 

I haven't praised him for anything. Just see him as the GM who was doing his job, and I didn't have unrealistic expectations of him.

 

You are the one carrying on like you have something personal against him..

 

 

 

I was talking generally.....Do you know how many times I've see "GMSM is the best GM in football" comment on these forums over the past two years?

 

I have absolutely nothing personal against him....and I'm not related to Dan or Bruce.    If when they F up, I will call them out.....the people with the agenda are the ones always looking to bash the organization

[Art]

21 minutes ago, SkinsGuy said:

 

Please.

 

You've been here less than a year, and of every post I've seen of yours, I haven't seen you write one nice or favorable thing about him.

 

I mean, the man has been fired, and you're still on this board stomping your feet and pouting about people talking favorably about him.

 

You aren't fooling anyone, you know.  

 

In fairness to the guy, McCloughan did not do a very good job for us, at least insofar as bringing in talent.   I think he did a fine job setting a new philosophy.   I think his talent prowess will improve should Doctson be any good, if Smith takes another step and if we get another starter or two out of the last couple drafts, but, by in large, the Redskins have been competitive for two years with Scot in spite of him, not because of him.   The players defining our best were not his.   One can only state Crowder and Scherff have been high performers he brought in.   Cousins, Garcon, Jackson, Williams, Reid, Kerrigan, Breeland, Baker, etc., etc., etc., all predated him.

The core talent was already here for him.   He put together the least talented defense I've ever seen.   He put together the least deep defense I've ever seen.   I do not think he had enough time to do everything, but it would be fiction to state he did a great job bringing players in for us.   He stabilized our cap situation and set us forward on a good path with how to approach free agency.   His drafts will be better if a couple guys can contribute, but our strengths existed before him, and our weaknesses existed because of him in large part.   I'd ABSOLUTELY have kept him as I think over time it would have worked.   But to this point he's not been that good.

 

[goskins10]

 

 

31 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

It's not like McCloughan was operating heavy machinery.  I don't care if our GM is a drunk.

 

It's not like this wasn't news, either.  I think the appropriate response would have been to let him know from Day 1 that if he relapses or has any issues that the team is there to help him in any way possible.  

 

Snyder and Allen did not do the right thing.  They didn't try to help, as far as I can tell.  There was a battle of egos that got in the way of what was looking to be a properly constructed football team.  They let their egos and personal feelings get in the way of the greater good which is wins and continuity.  It has been reported that the Skins have been shredded in league circles for what they've done.  They've done nothing to distance themselves from the notion that they're buffoons and constantly screw up.

 

That is why this wasn't a good move.  The only way this could be a good move is if they somehow get a GM who can take what Scot had started and bring it to the next level.  I doubt they can because they've shown time and time again that they'll boof the pooch whenever possible.

 

 

 

 

This is the exact problem with this whole thing. You and I and the rest have no idea what they did or did not do to try and help him! It was reported BTW that the team helped him get some rehab. But fair enough. Like everything else nothing has been confirmed.

 

Not picking on you specifically as others have made these same statements. People are so quick to vilify they make statements like the one above "They did not do the right thing."! In this post it convicts Dan and Bruce for doing the wrong thing and then says "They did nothing as far as I know." Right, you do not know. I do not know. So why convict them as guilty when you do not know what has actually happened? Again this is not aimed directly at the poster quoted above. It's just an example and more of a general question.

 

To what end would it be to air everything that happened that got them to this point? All it would do is satisfy fans ridiculous idea that they are entitled to know everything. We are not entitled. Quite frankly it's none of our business. I am no big fan of Bruce or Dan. But this is getting ridiculous. The hate for hate sake is off the charts.

 

And sorry, I don't very often agree with @SkinsPassion4Life but they are 100% right. Any FAs that work out will be attributed to it being Scot's board. Any that do not work out will be Bruce being a buffoon. It's a total double standard.

 

I am very sad that Scot M is gone. I disagree with SP4L and others that Scot did just an OK job. I thought he did much better. Especially when I look at the back end of the roster - STs has not been this good for a while. So I do not blame Dan and Bruce for taking a chance or him. The upside was crazy. It did not work out. Scot could not control his demons. Have to move on.

 

And it serves no good purpose to air out how everything that happened. He truly was falsely fired he will have one hell of a lawsuit. And maybe he does. But let's see the facts for grabbing the torches and pitch forks and drawing conclusions without data to support them.

 

 

[maskedsuperstar]

52 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

It's not like McCloughan was operating heavy machinery.  I don't care if our GM is a drunk.

 

It's not like this wasn't news, either.  I think the appropriate response would have been to let him know from Day 1 that if he relapses or has any issues that the team is there to help him in any way possible.  

 

Snyder and Allen did not do the right thing.  They didn't try to help, as far as I can tell.  There was a battle of egos that got in the way of what was looking to be a properly constructed football team.  They let their egos and personal feelings get in the way of the greater good which is wins and continuity.  It has been reported that the Skins have been shredded in league circles for what they've done.  They've done nothing to distance themselves from the notion that they're buffoons and constantly screw up.

 

That is why this wasn't a good move.  The only way this could be a good move is if they somehow get a GM who can take what Scot had started and bring it to the next level.  I doubt they can because they've shown time and time again that they'll boof the pooch whenever possible.

 

 

The league doesn't know what happened!! It's the Redskins! They are at fault. Who cares if Scot had a problem. He has an eye for talent. He gets a pass. ???

 

[maskedsuperstar]

51 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

If you really believe that what the Redskins said is true, that this has been going on for 18 months, and they just happened to chose the worst time in the world to fire him, I've got a small island to sell you for a big island price.

 

Scot hasn't been part of the front office for months. Scot doesn't get a pass. "It's okay Scot! We know you have an issue. Just get us players. It will be okay"

Just stop! 

[Spaceman Spiff]

2 hours ago, Art said:

 

In fairness to the guy, McCloughan did not do a very good job for us, at least insofar as bringing in talent.   I think he did a fine job setting a new philosophy.   I think his talent prowess will improve should Doctson be any good, if Smith takes another step and if we get another starter or two out of the last couple drafts, but, by in large, the Redskins have been competitive for two years with Scot in spite of him, not because of him.   The players defining our best were not his.   One can only state Crowder and Scherff have been high performers he brought in.   Cousins, Garcon, Jackson, Williams, Reid, Kerrigan, Breeland, Baker, etc., etc., etc., all predated him.

The core talent was already here for him.   He put together the least talented defense I've ever seen.   He put together the least deep defense I've ever seen.   I do not think he had enough time to do everything, but it would be fiction to state he did a great job bringing players in for us.   He stabilized our cap situation and set us forward on a good path with how to approach free agency.   His drafts will be better if a couple guys can contribute, but our strengths existed before him, and our weaknesses existed because of him in large part.   I'd ABSOLUTELY have kept him as I think over time it would have worked.   But to this point he's not been that good.

 

I understand this line of thinking.  However, it's been documented that Bruce overrided some of the things that Scot wanted to do.  

[Sea Bass]

3 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

Look at his drafts in SF and Seattle

 

Which drafts do you consider to be "his" drafts?

[Art]

14 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

I understand this line of thinking.  However, it's been documented that Bruce overrided some of the things that Scot wanted to do.  

 

No, it has not been documented.   It's been "rumored" and printed, which is not necessarily factual.   Here is a fact.   Scot was in total control of the draft, 100 percent.   Scot was in total control of the free agent list and priority.  But, Scot had nothing to do with the acquisition.   He simply gave a list and the team tried to acquire based on parameters.   Scot had total control of the PRE training camp roster.

 

Once training camp started, the coaching staff had a greater role and where disagreement on a roster cut took place the team did side with the coaching staff who had to actually put the guys on the field and this is ENTIRELY normal.  Gruden has and should have control over the roster composition.

 

[Peregrine]

4 hours ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

 

Do you really think they wanted to fire him right now?   If you do; then I have a big island for an ever bigger price to sell you.

So, they couldnt have fired him a week from now?

 

Do you seriously think the Redskins have handled this well?  Because if so, I have an even smaller island, for an even bigger price for you.

[Art]

10 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

So, they couldnt have fired him a week from now?

 

Do you seriously think the Redskins have handled this well?  Because if so, I have an even smaller island, for an even bigger price for you.

Actually, they couldn't have fired him a week from now.

 

They gave him time.   They were even going to let him miss the combine and maybe still save things.   But as free agency was bearing down and the team's GM was not returning calls or return contacts from other teams the team HAD to fire him so other teams could contact OTHER PEOPLE in the organization.   As an example, we couldn't possibly trade Cousins if our GM wasn't taking calls.

No, the team did not handle it well.   But they fired him the only time they could given the situation.

 

[SkinsPassion4Life]

29 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

So, they couldnt have fired him a week from now?

 

Do you seriously think the Redskins have handled this well?  Because if so, I have an even smaller island, for an even bigger price for you.

 

I think the plan was to let him go after the draft, but things got out of control...the "dysfunction" narrative became too much and they had to let him go right now.

 

 

[Peregrine]

5 hours ago, Art said:

 

There's a reason.   

 

He was working for 18 months.   He stopped in early February.   He disappeared.   He stopped answering calls and texts.   The decision was because Scot lost it when his grandmother died and there was no choice.   Had this happened in October, it would have happened then.   You can't be in this position in the NFL and go several weeks without answering other teams calling you about stuff.   You can NOT do it.   

So then what you are saying is the Redskins had no issues with him for 18 months, and as things were going, would have kept him.  But thats NOT what they told everyone in their release, they said the reason they fired him was that this had been going on for 18 months.  And if they lied about this 2 weeks ago when Bruce Allen said it was a family matter, and if they lied about it a couple of days ago, why, oh why, would we believe they arent lying about it now?

 

Also, to suggest that the Redskins couldnt go a week "without answering other teams calling you about stuff" is to ignore what they said about the fact that they were already handling everything in his absence.  They had already told the other teams thats what they were doing, and had Bruce talking to them.  

53 minutes ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

 

I think the plan was to let him go after the draft, but things got out of control...the "dysfunction" narrative became too much and they had to let him go right now.

 

 

Which turned out to be an even bigger disaster, so they made a PR based call, that made their public perception look even worse, after they had already really messed up their PR in the first place.  They didnt have to let him go, they made a poor decision to do it at the wrong time, again, because they were trying to cover up other poor decisions and hadnt thought any of them through.

[Thinking Skins]

10 hours ago, Art said:

 

There's a reason.   

 

He was working for 18 months.   He stopped in early February.   He disappeared.   He stopped answering calls and texts.   The decision was because Scot lost it when his grandmother died and there was no choice.   Had this happened in October, it would have happened then.   You can't be in this position in the NFL and go several weeks without answering other teams calling you about stuff.   You can NOT do it.   

THats an interesting perspective that I hadn't considered. So you're saying that if say on March 6th, with the media already in a frenzy about Scot, if he had answered his phone and told them stuff, this wouldn't have happened? 

 

The drinking part of the story is something I don't understand because until now I NEVER heard about this being a problem. Now we've got unnamed sources going to WP talking about it, supposed players saying they knew and didn't know he was drunk (possibly in the locker rooms and at games). Galdi saying he heard stories, Paulson saying that Redskins park is a bunch of drunks. All this came out ONLY AFTER the Cooley statement about his drinking. 

 

My putting 2 and 2 together was that if these rumors were true that he had indeed been "sent home" for the public drinking but with a bad cover of the grandma's death. If that was indeed "the straw" then it offers a different explanation. 

 

I still fault the Skins a lot less than I fault the media - especially Chris Cooley - for this. It seems like he uses his show to publicly deface people he has a problem with based on "speculation", what I think of as his personal beefs.

 - He did the same thing with Duke Ihenacho and the number controversy without any citation to back it up.

 - He did the same thing with Bruton.

- He did the same thing with Orakpo.

 

Its cool that he can do the analysis of the video, but I stopped listening to it because there is so much speculation that taints your judgement of a player (and coaches). If he guesses that we're in a cover 3 and its really a cover 6, then his grades are wrong. And how often is he correct?

 

I have so many questions, but I'm getting off subject. He (not the Skins FO) started spreading rumors about the drinking using his radio show as a platform and won't be punished for it because it made ratings go up. Then the rest of the media jumped on it like wolves. Interesting how the initial Mike Jones story in the WP that talked about Allen silencing Scot didn't make any mention of the drinking. Then once it became a story, suddenly WP has (FO?) sources telling them about his drinking? 

 

I think the FO has been classy in this by not throwing an employee under the bus. The media on the other hand smells real foul right about now. 

[Art]

It isn't that he wasn't answering the media.   No one cares about that at Redskins Park.

 

He wasn't answering other GMs calling and texting to talk.    His voicemail at Redskins Park was full.   Calls were not going through.   He wasn't answering any texts from TEAMS.   This has actually been reported AS such so it's not a secret.   Other personnel people were asking media guys if they knew what was happening.   Well before the combine and before the news really started flaring up.

After two weeks he kind of came back but was not doing well.   He was still pretty hammered.   The Feb. 20 thing wasn't that he was being fired.   Even him missing the combine wasn't.   When Bruce said the team thought he'd be back after the combine, I think that's true.   They figured he was just on a bender and would get it back together.   Once they realized how much he'd been missing it forced their hand.   And they needed him responsive once free agency started.   It was clear he wasn't ready to be that I believe.   

 

This happened when it did because Scot didn't handle the death well at the same time his job was the most stressful and pressing and he had a serious relapse.   The Cooley speculation wasn't directed by the team, but at the same time, Cooley knows the deal.   It wasn't idle.   He wasn't GUESSING.   

 

[RedskinsMayne]

How do you know his voicemail was full, art?

[Bonez3]

Based on the information that is confirmed, looks like the Skins 'tried to cover for him'. Kinda like a friend would, buying time to hopefully get ship right again. I tend to believe the Skins wanted him to get it together and like most of us, had faith in his vision and long term plan.

 

But it seems he went off the grid, and that forced their hand. Only question you have go to is, how much did the Skins enable him. I suspect they gotta look at the idea of accountability if he was drinking as much as some of the reports suggest prior to the grandmother dying.

[Thinking Skins]

What about the initial Mike Jones report? That looks like a job done by his team to sway the fans. It could be just WaPo, but Mike Jones generally has more credibility than to just publish a fluff piece.  Was that not put out by Scot or his team? 

[RWJ]

1 hour ago, Art said:

It isn't that he wasn't answering the media.   No one cares about that at Redskins Park.

 

He wasn't answering other GMs calling and texting to talk.    His voicemail at Redskins Park was full.   Calls were not going through.   He wasn't answering any texts from TEAMS.   This has actually been reported AS such so it's not a secret.   Other personnel people were asking media guys if they knew what was happening.   Well before the combine and before the news really started flaring up.

After two weeks he kind of came back but was not doing well.   He was still pretty hammered.   The Feb. 20 thing wasn't that he was being fired.   Even him missing the combine wasn't.   When Bruce said the team thought he'd be back after the combine, I think that's true.   They figured he was just on a bender and would get it back together.   Once they realized how much he'd been missing it forced their hand.   And they needed him responsive once free agency started.   It was clear he wasn't ready to be that I believe.   

 

This happened when it did because Scot didn't handle the death well at the same time his job was the most stressful and pressing and he had a serious relapse.   The Cooley speculation wasn't directed by the team, but at the same time, Cooley knows the deal.   It wasn't idle.   He wasn't GUESSING.   

 

Art who do YOU think replaces Scot as GM to assume the same responsibilities he had?  Mayock, Williams, Dominick (I certainly hope not), Santos or someone we haven't heard of yet.  I certainly hope it's someone outside the organization.