New GM search

[Stadium-Armory]

I think the high marks we received for our draft could make the organization believe that the status quo is good enough. I'd be surprised to see us hire a new GM any time soon.

[redrobert]

4 minutes ago, Stadium-Armory said:

I think the high marks we received for our draft could make the organization believe that the status quo is good enough. I'd be surprised to see us hire a new GM any time soon.

 

Really good point, and that scares me.

[TK]

What I've heard since the Draft is basically that no one outside the organization wants a GM position here & that if Bruce appoints the "title" to anyone inside the Park it's either Eric S or D.Williams though Scott Cambell would be running personnel/scouting. This is because Bruce doesn't want a true GM, which could lend credence to the "ego" story when Scot was dismissed. There were also rumblings of Bruce having "ego" problems back when he was in Oakland but I haven't tracked any of them down 100% yet.

[TSO]

3 hours ago, TK said:

What I've heard since the Draft is basically that no one outside the organization wants a GM position here & that if Bruce appoints the "title" to anyone inside the Park it's either Eric S or D.Williams though Scott Cambell would be running personnel/scouting. This is because Bruce doesn't want a true GM, which could lend credence to the "ego" story when Scot was dismissed. There were also rumblings of Bruce having "ego" problems back when he was in Oakland but I haven't tracked any of them down 100% yet.

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

This guy would be perfect as our next GM...

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

To Burgold -- we were discussing Schaffer as the GM on the Kirk thread.  My response belongs more on this thread than there.

 

I said in this thread if its a guy in house, I'd take Schaffer.  But I still wouldn't love it.  I personally prefer the expertise of a guy who is running the ship to be personnel driven.  That's how most other teams do it -- albeit not all of them.  And it makes the most sense to me.    The main thing I like about Schaffer is at least he's regarded as one of the best in the league at what he does.  That can't be said for Campbell or Williams.

 

This franchise has a long history under Danny for not caring whether their FO has a top guy running the ship.  And its the strangest thing for me considering all Danny wants to do is win or so its been said.  It's like wanting to have the best restaurant in town, year after year it doesn't happen, and the idea of hiring one of the best chefs isn't part of the conversation.  Hey that restaurant gets 2 michelin stars, yeah they hired a top chef, but is that really important or is that just incidental?   It's the most confounding thing to me about the Danny era.  

 

And if the GM duties go back to that mode where its heck let the Packers, Seahawks, Steelers and teams like that have the top chefs -- the Redskins don't care about that type of thing -- hey do remember how Doug Williams carried us through the 1987 Superbowl, isn't it cool that now he's the GM?   If we go back to those days, I wouldn't be shocked if mediocrity follows.  

 

Mediocre chefs = mediocre food.  I don't get why Danny hasn't seen that connection over the years -- that mediocre personnel guys - mediocre team.  Most other teams indeed get it.  It's the reason why Scot's hire to me was so historic.  Danny actually hired a GM for the first time with real pedigree.  If it doesn't work out, fine, hire another guy with real pedigree.

[Skinsinparadise]

Not sure where this goes, but a good window into how one of the better front offices are run, Baltimore.  For the draft geeks here, interesting mentions about guy we've talked about including:  OJ Howard, Tim Williams, Chris Wormley.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/inside-an-nfl-draft-war-room-ravens-never-expected-to-land-humphrey-at-no-16/

[Conn]

I do not what Schaffer elevated to "GM *wink wink nod nod*" because he won't be demoted if/when things fall apart--as GM he'll be fired. We need him in the background working his contract/cap magic. He has lasted through several regimes because he's not the top guy, he's a role player. He needs to stay that way and no be put in a position where he has to get swept out when we have to fire people in the future. Same with Campbell, if we really do like his scouting ability.  He's the only guy in the building who might one day be our own Scot McCloughan.

 

If we have to elevate anyone in-house just to have the title placard on someone's desk, I guess it should be Doug Williams (even though he's not qualified) because he's useless in the organization otherwise and won't be missed if things go badly and firings happen. 

 

But none of us should be happy with that or with the fact that the Bills are interviewing all the legit candidates we should be (but are unable to because of our attachment to Bruce Allen).

[Thirtyfive2seven]

What a nightmare.  Instead of Vinny we have Bruce.  Heck, maybe Vinny was even better at personnel.  Bruce hasn't a clue in that department.  Snyder has just continued to surround himself with yet another yes man.  The next GM will be an internal hire and will continue in that capacity until Bruce is let go after more losing seasons.  The problem is that the Redskins are starting to actually acquire talent and it'll be hard for them to suck but once this organization let's Kirk go maybe it won't be that hard.

[JaxJoe]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Not sure where this goes, but a good window into how one of the better front offices are run, Baltimore.  For the draft geeks here, interesting mentions about guy we've talked about including:  OJ Howard, Tim Williams, Chris Wormley.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/inside-an-nfl-draft-war-room-ravens-never-expected-to-land-humphrey-at-no-16/

I agree that it is odd that we have avoided a General Manager over all these years.  Not just by the people we have hired, but the actual job description of the role has never been a position that had authority of all coaching and player personnel.  The irony was in full display when Scott Campbell gushed about Ozzie Newsmen in his pre-draft presser.  

[Conn]

I think the group we have now is better than Vinny at scouting talent and acquiring it at a cost that matches value around the league. I also don't think Bruce is a "yes man" in the way that Vinny was, because I really don't think Snyder is meddling at all. I think Bruce is more of a buffer between Snyder and the rest of the decision-makers, and that mostly the football people (for better pr worse) are running things. 

 

That doesn't make him an ideal candidate to run the FO, especially since he'd never hire someone to be his own boss, in the administrative or personnel sense. 

 

And the longer Gruden stays, the more say he has and power he accumulates. Even setting aside Bruce (which we'll never do), no legit GM candidate would stand for a coach he didn't choose sharing personnel power with him. Unless he has history with the Grudens, which again gets us back into nepotism and a FO tree that just doesn't have a lot of success or talent in it. 

 

If we re-sign Kirk, we'll probably be able to hover between 9 and 11 wins for 5 years or so, even with clowns at the helm. If we let him leave, the incompetence of the organization will show itself quickly unless we luck into a QB prospect that meshes perfectly with Gruden next year. I don't see us being bad enough to get a good shot at that. 

 

Me personally, would I like to see a fresh start at GM with a legit personnel wiz like the Colts are getting? Of course. 

 

Do I acknowledge that it will be impossible to attract someone like that with Allen in the organization? Yes.

 

Do I acknowledge that it's also unlikely we could attract someone like that even without Allen, with an entrenched HC and an up-in-the-air QB situation? Yeah, it might be more difficult. But it would be possible.

 

Will I be content with the current FO situation as long as we re-sign Kirk and stay relevant/competitive through his prime? If I'm being honest, yeah. If 9-11 wins per season is behind door number 1 for the foreseeable future, idk that I'd have the balls to throw that away even for a guarantee at a proper FO structure under a controlling personnel GM.

 

Of course the best of both worlds would be firing Allen and hiring a legit GM candidate with a college personnel background from a successful organization, who likes Gruden and wants to pay Kirk. But I don't see a reality in which Snyder is convinced Allen is a problem without the team hitting rock bottom again.

[Tsailand]

37 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I really don't think Snyder is meddling at all.

 

Snyder was in the "war room" during the recent draft.

Snyder was the biggest obstacle to Kirk starting.  Eventually he allowed it.

Snyder was heavily involved in the RG3 trade.

 

40 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Of course the best of both worlds would be firing Allen and hiring a legit GM candidate

 

I would be OK with Allen staying on as team president to get the stadium deal done and serve as a buffer between Snyder and humans.

 

Just so long as he stepped away from personnel entirely and let the new GM have complete control, like we were told Scott had.

 

 

 

[TSO]

3 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

But none of us should be happy with that or with the fact that the Bills are interviewing all the legit candidates we should be (but are unable to because of our attachment to Bruce Allen).

 

Yeah, seeing the Bills actually interviewing people juxtaposed to the way we're dealing with it has been pretty disappointing for me. 

 

It lends credence to everything that has been suggested thus far by TK recently and what JLC has said about where we're going with this. 

 

I've said all along that it's simple to me. I wanted to see what we're doing with that role and if we don't do it the right way by interviewing the best and the brightest, then filling that position with someone who will actually have power... that's all that really needs to be said regarding what happened with Scot. I'm simply not going to buy anymore that it was really an issue with him. Even if he was an issue, it wouldn't be anything close to the bigger issue of Allen's ego or just the general FO dysfunction that leads to constant power plays since Snyder bought the team. 

 

Allen should just give himself the GM title and stop bull****ting in that case as well. No one is going to buy an internal promotion of Shaffer or Williams. Or at least I won't. I'd respect him more if he did that and was just like "yeah, I know how to handle everything better than Scot so just wait and see".

 

I'll be skeptical since, you know, the vast majority of successful organizations have a strong, talent evaluating, GM in charge of personnel (what a crazy thing to want, right?) but at least no one will have to "take the fall" besides him. He'll have to own it. 

[bedlamVR]

On 03/05/2017 at 5:47 AM, TK said:

What I've heard since the Draft is basically that no one outside the organization wants a GM position here & that if Bruce appoints the "title" to anyone inside the Park it's either Eric S or D.Williams though Scott Cambell would be running personnel/scouting. This is because Bruce doesn't want a true GM, which could lend credence to the "ego" story when Scot was dismissed. There were also rumblings of Bruce having "ego" problems back when he was in Oakland but I haven't tracked any of them down 100% yet.

 

 

Sorry I am still not buying people are scarred off by Bruce Allens ego. Because you know no one else in football has an ego .

 

What I do know is there are numerous "journalists" in the DC ego who do not like Bruce Allen personally - and he clearly does tick people off by circumventing the local press and there is a degree of ego and animosity there that needs to be accounted for in 'reports' of unreasonable behaviour ... 

 

I am also not sure people don't want the job ... there are 32 of these jobs in the world . I think we might be low balling in terms of financials and I can image some people are entrenched in their positions where there is a line of succession in a well run department (e.g. Ravens, Green Bay) but other than that I cannot see people are scared off because "it's the redskins "... 

 

There are people who would want this opportunity . 

 

The other point is people don't move organisations around the draft . If anything will happen it will happen over the next few weeks / months . 

 

Peoople overlook when we hired Scott he was not in traditional NFL employment . Yes he was a good hire but had been fired from the 49ers and Seahawks quite publically and so there was always risk with this hire . The skins gave him another chance but people are responding as if we destroyed his career - they "red skinned him" . I have no ill will towards Scott and wish him the best but I just wish people would accept this for what it is and move on - a risky hire that went bad  - no harm no foul. 

 

It should be seen as a positive the skins even explored the GMSM options in the first place - but because people are jaded nothing the FO does is seen in anything but the most horrific light of a dumpster fire .. 

 

be more positve 

 

and if a hire comes let him fail rather than condeming him as another lucky sycophant from the moment he is announced ... 

 

just a thought 

 

[bedlamVR]

10 hours ago, Tsailand said:

 

Snyder was in the "war room" during the recent draft.

Snyder was the biggest obstacle to Kirk starting.  Eventually he allowed it.

Snyder was heavily involved in the RG3 trade.

 

 

I would be OK with Allen staying on as team president to get the stadium deal done and serve as a buffer between Snyder and humans.

 

Just so long as he stepped away from personnel entirely and let the new GM have complete control, like we were told Scott had.

 

 

 

 

Synder was in the "war room" big whoop ... i am not sure what you want - a total absentee owner who has NO interest in the team or any desire to see if improve as long as it keeps generating cash ... 

 

also - we are told Snyder was the impediment to Cousins starting ... but wait ... could it not be Cousins himself that influenced that decision ..  after all previous to 2015 what had he done to make anyone think he was the guy ...

 

also it is easy to sit here two years later on with the benefit of hindsight and say it was a no brainer to start KC but if I was the owner sat in my office I have what I thought was the face of the franchise for the next 15 years at QB a guy who set all kinds of rookie records and was rookie of the year two short seasons ago ... a guy my football people suggested should have his option picked up earlier in the season ... I think I would need to be convinced moving on was the right thing to move on to a guy who was benched mid game for colt McCoy the previous season ... 

 

and finnally i still have never seen anything from the time of the GMSM hire that would remotely suggest Scott had  complete control of anything . Why is this myth constantly peddled ? 

[Skinsinparadise]

37 minutes ago, bedlamVR said:

 

 

Sorry I am still not buying people are scarred off by Bruce Allens ego. Because you know no one else in football has an ego .

 

There are people who would want this opportunity . 

 

The other point is people don't move organisations around the draft . If anything will happen it will happen over the next few weeks / months . 

 

and if a hire comes let him fail rather than condeming him as another lucky sycophant from the moment he is announced ... 

 

just a thought 

 

 

It's all possible. John Keim basically said on a radio interview that some top potential people don't want this job -- I forgot how he explained it but if I recall it was something related to Bruce-expected freedom or maybe I am confusing his implication with Laconfora who said the same thing.  But Keim also said some guys would take the job.   Laconfora said some of the really top tier people wouldn't take it, but some on the level below likely would. Laconfora said reasons being for those who wouldn't take it:  Bruce Allen, they weren't offering big money, and the team is known for being cheap compared to other teams on scouting. 

 

For me, I'll give Bruce the benefit of the doubt when he actually hires someone. If he hires within and especially if its Doug -- IMO it comes off that inside politics in Redskins Park is more important to Bruce than winning -- Danny, too.  So lets see what they do.

 

http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/31168/redskins-still-need-gm-long-term-deal-with-kirk-cousins

Who will be the next GM? The Redskins fired Scot McCloughan in March and said they'd find a replacement after the draft. It's now after the draft. Washington has a long list of candidates, with several in-house. It's possible the Redskins could promote someone such as Eric Schaffer, their chief negotiator, and then hire another personnel guy. There will be some outsiders who won't want the job, but some definitely will.

[bedlamVR]

No - I totally expect some of the top tier guys won't take it because many of those top tier guys are in good jobs already - Eric DeCosta (for example) is not going to move ANYWHERE because he is Ozzie Newsomes aire apparent - He has pulled himself out of consideration for at least 5 GM jobs since 2009 (including the seahawks) ... Not a Bruce Allen is the devil situation but because they don't want to move for any reason.  But i do think Keim and JLC are right in their assessments  

 

I also do not know how to counter the argument - "well an internal hire is all about appeasing Bruce than trying to win"... other than to say we have been winning  (9-7 8-7-1)- we are able to attract and sign quality FA at not outrageous contracts we have a path and a plan and are trying to establish an identity - for the first time in a long time we have continuity - we are making smart decisions and locking promising players up on decent contracts before they hit free agency ... If winning to you is to bring someone from the outside to 'shake things up' and change what we are doing - then what guarantee do we have that will work or will be better?

 

- The only analagy i can think of off the top of my head is 2005 we are running old school redskins football the offense is efficient but boring and we make the second round of the playoffs... we need to change the offense ... we bring Al Saunders in and boom - the wheels fall off..

 

I think we are on a stedy path - I would have preferred if we could be going forward with GM-SM but we aren't - Its over move on and have some faith that the changes he put up place (if any) are resiliant enough to last longer than he did .   

[Reaper Skins]

Snyder needs Allen to get a new stadium.  He's not going anywhere, and definitely not before that deal gets done.

[Skinsinparadise]

4 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

No - I totally expect some of the top tier guys won't take it because many of those top tier guys are in good jobs already - Eric DeCosta (for example) is not going to move ANYWHERE because he is Ozzie Newsomes aire apparent - He has pulled himself out of consideration for at least 5 GM jobs since 2009 (including the seahawks) ... Not a Bruce Allen is the devil situation but because they don't want to move for any reason.  But i do think Keim and JLC are right in their assessments  

 

I also do not know how to counter the argument - "well an internal hire is all about appeasing Bruce than trying to win"... other than to say we have been winning  (9-7 8-7-1)- we are able to attract and sign quality FA at not outrageous contracts we have a path and a plan and are trying to establish an identity - for the first time in a long time we have continuity - we are making smart decisions and locking promising players up on decent contracts before they hit free agency ... If winning to you is to bring someone from the outside to 'shake things up' and change what we are doing - then what guarantee do we have that will work or will be better?

 

- The only analagy i can think of off the top of my head is 2005 we are running old school redskins football the offense is efficient but boring and we make the second round of the playoffs... we need to change the offense ... we bring Al Saunders in and boom - the wheels fall off..

 

I think we are on a stedy path - I would have preferred if we could be going forward with GM-SM but we aren't - Its over move on and have some faith that the changes he put up place (if any) are resiliant enough to last longer than he did .   

 

Laconfora and Keim outright said, Laconfora in particular that there are qualified people for this job who would consider other jobs in the NFL but not this one for the reasons I gave in my post and yeah Bruce is one of those variables.  LaConfora is the one who emphasized Bruce.  But who knows? 

 

As for why rock the boat?  The win-loss record under Bruce is worse that it was under Vinny Cerrato.  It's horrendous.  Maybe its a coincidence, maybe it's not but this team became a winner in the last two seasons while Scot was here.  If we are talking about not rocking the boat and going with Bruce and Scott Campbell -- this isn't a new movie but one we've seen and it hasn't been hot win-loss wise.  Aside from the magical RG3 2012 season and the last two years with Scot here -- the team has been abysmal and not exactly the model of success.   

 

Some would say Scot got lucky with Kirk.  But even running with that point who did we hear stand up on the table for Kirk?  Scot and Jay.  There was no mention of Doug Williams being the guy pushing it.  Bruce according to one report actually had to be convinced about Kirk let alone being on the forefront of pushing the decision.

 

As for the Saunders analogy -- its not sexy but why mess with success?  It presumes two things. 1.  Scot was a nonfactor here.  Maybe so, who knows?  2.  The Redskins are just a bit smarter than the rest of the league -- albeit there is no demand for Campbell or Doug elsewhere or if that demand does exist it goes well below the radar and doesn't result in even interviews -- and conversely there are specific people who are mentioned frequently as being emerging talent evaluators -- but Bruce is a step ahead and thinks their guys are better than the personnel guys who have buzz around the league.  

 

 I found it telling that Casserly when hired by the Jets to help their GM search years back.  And he's around this team plenty.  He didn't push Doug or Campbell as recommendations.  They didn't even get interviews.  Do we ever hear these guys in the mix for anything? Have we heard even once that they are considered among the top evaluators in the league?   And they've been around the league for a long time, so there has been plenty of time for the league to catch on.  And this point goes double to Doug considering I've heard Paulsen said he has two sources who tell him Doug is outright weak on personnel.  

 

And if there is anything to the gas station conversation that apparently was had between someone and Scot -- he told the guy they need to bring someone else in who really knows personnel, Doug doesn't know personnel.   I've heard nice things about Campbell from in house statements from Redskins people here and there.  So at least he has that going for him.  My hunch is Campbell is competent but nothing special.  

 

As for Doug even within house or people talking him up. I've yet to hear once, this dude is a great personnel guy.    All I hear is it would be an historic hire.  He's a great guy.  Bruce loves him, etc.  IMO the complements thrown Doug's way are telling because even the people selling him are avoiding the subject at hand -- is he brilliant at personnel?    It would be like me applying for a job as a chef and people saying I am great guy to be around, I am a good team player.  I get along great with the restaurant owner.  But no one is saying I am a good chef.

 

Edit:  I got no problem with Bruce if he hired a guy who is considering among the top evaluators in the league.  I think if he did that it would be telling and I'd see his side more on whatever went down with Scot.  This next decision on GM to me is huge.    My feelings about Bruce is mostly wait and see driven.  But I don't like the smoke on the GM search so far -- so tough for me to give him the benefit of the doubt until the hire happens.

[JaxJoe]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Laconfora and Keim outright said, Laconfora in particular that there are qualified people for this job who would consider other jobs in the NFL but not this one for the reasons I gave in my post and yeah Bruce is one of those variables

I'd like to hear more specifically from these sources why these "qualified candidates" won't consider working for Bruce Allen.  Is it personality?  His management style?  Lack of freedom?  The job description?

 

I don't buy for a second it's because of ego because every executive I've met is full of ego - not necessarily a negative aspect.

[Skinsinparadise]

Just now, JaxJoe said:

I'd like to hear more specifically from these sources why these "qualified candidates" won't consider working for Bruce Allen.  Is it personality?  His management style?  Lack of freedom?  The job description?

 

I don't buy for a second it's because of ego because every executive I've met is full of ego - not necessarily a negative aspect.

 

LaConfora suggested it was because true GM's have final say and they don't believe Bruce would give them final say or something to that effect

[JaxJoe]

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

LaConfora suggested it was because true GM's have final say and they don't believe Bruce would give them final say or something to that effect

That makes perfect sense.  If I were a successful GM or an up-and-coming assistant from a successful organization and witnessed how an organization is run and compared that role with the job description the Redskins are offering, I wouldn't want it either.

 

The next question I have is:  Are there successful teams out there that have similar GMs in the role we are advertising?

[RWJ]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

LaConfora suggested it was because true GM's have final say and they don't believe Bruce would give them final say or something to that effect

For external keep an eye on Mike Lombardi whom Allen was associated with in Oakland.  He might work with Allen or Dominick whom I don't want to see come to the Skins.  Again, if internal than it should be Scott Campbell out of the entire bunch. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, JaxJoe said:

That makes perfect sense.  If I were a successful GM or an up-and-coming assistant from a successful organization and witnessed how an organization is run and compared that role with the job description the Redskins are offering, I wouldn't want it either.

 

The next question I have is:  Are there successful teams out there that have similar GMs in the role we are advertising?

 

There are people who are deputy types to GMs with good reputations, if I recall I included some names on this thread from an article I found.

4 minutes ago, RWJ said:

For external keep an eye on Mike Lombardi whom Allen was associated with in Oakland.  He might work with Allen or Dominick whom I don't want to see come to the Skins.  Again, if internal than it should be Scott Campbell out of the entire bunch. 

 

Apparently, Dominik and Doug don't get along and Doug was let go under Domink's stewardship so that likely keeps him out of the running.  

[RWJ]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

There are people who are deputy types to GMs with good reputations, if I recall I included some names on this thread from an article I found.

 

Apparently, Dominik and Doug don't get along and Doug was let go under Domink's stewardship so that likely keeps him out of the running.  

That works for me but then that's a positive for Doug Williams.  Out of all the personal people we have on the team he's the one I don't want to see get the gig as GM.  I'd be intrigued with Louis Riddick if they could convince him to become GM.  Don't know the chances of that happening but....you know.