Press Release: #REDSKINS PROMOTE DOUG WILLIAMS TO SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF PLAYER PERSONNEL

[RedBeast]

 

12 hours ago, RedBeast said:

WTF?

 

Where is "hello there" when you need it?

 

Hello There! Part deux?

[zoony]

Well this move went over like a turd in a punchbowl

 

Whats the worst that could happen though, really?  Skins suck for the next 10 years?  LOL  

[bowhunter]

36 minutes ago, zoony said:

Well this move went over like a turd in a punchbowl

 

Whats the worst that could happen though, really?  Skins suck for the next 10 years?  LOL  

Worst case? We suck for 4 years before Skins fans burn their Williams jerseys in protest. Ever the marketing genius, Danny sees this as a way to sell replacement jerseys and hires John Riggins ex-wife as Vice President of Player Acquisition and Harvest Fest

[William Barbour]

7 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I'm not sure why I'm engaging with you because there is a history of drive-by posting.  It wasn't long ago you asked for proof of something Bruce said to which I provided exact quotes from an official Redskins press release and never saw you return to respond.

 

But I have a few questions here...

 

Which good players did Doug bring here already, and how do you know they were 'his' guys?

 

Schaffer, as a cap guy - OK.  Campbell & Doug Williams, I'm curious where you've come to the conclusion that these guys are coveted considering I've never heard so much as a Friday rumor that any other team is interested in their services?

 

It's okay to plug your ears and not let reality ruin the Redskins for you like it does a lot of us.  I get it.  But don't just make stuff up to make yourself feel better.

 

Not sure what you mean by plugging my ears. Lanier was a guy that stands out and was brought in by Doug Williams. It's been quoted several times. He was already involved in player personnel this offseason which was stated by Bruce and Doug right before I posted my original comment.  

 

None of that is made up. 

 

Schaffer has been praised my many media members and officials around the league on Twitter as a guy who could be running an organization.  That's no made up. 

 

I'm just not sure what fans are expecting. GM Scot didn't work here. He didn't exactly bring greatness in the few years he was here. People ignore that FACT and try to blame Bruce. He hired the guy...So he's to blame for that, but He wasn't the reason the past drafts have been average at best.

 

Gruden is the biggest bright spot in this franchise right now and Bruce brought him in. Jay also has alot of say now in the player personnel which was stated by Bruce in the conference. 

 

I can quote, and show tweets, or articles. But for someone who doesn't do alot of "drive bye posting" should be able to spend a bit more time doing some research. 

 

The only fantasy here is the fact that fans can't seem to acknowledge that people can progress in positions just as well as they can regress. 

 

 

[carex]

4 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

This isn't relevant. This isn't about McCloughan (whose work with the roster couldn't be judged after 2 years even if he'd had final say--he didn't), it's about the FO structure and hiring process. 

 

if the process and structure wasn't working, so why repeat it

[Conn]

2 minutes ago, carex said:

 

if the process and structure wasn't working, so why repeat it

 

Are we having the same conversation? We've never had the proper FO structure or hiring process under Snyder, period--that's part of the problem and why we've made all the hires we have--including McCloughan, who didn't actually get final say like in a normal organization. 

[William Barbour]

4 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

This isn't relevant. This isn't about McCloughan (whose work with the roster couldn't be judged after 2 years even if he'd had final say--he didn't), it's about the FO structure and hiring process. 

People keep talking about proof. Hypocritical to make this statement if you keep asking for proof. 

 

One proven fact is Scot has yet to push for his due pay. There is only one reason why he wouldn't do that. 

 

In a league where you are judged on a year to year basis. It's additionally hypocritical to say he couldn't be judged. Our best drafts in the past decade can arguably be the ones that Scot had nothing to do with. 

[Conn]

Just now, William Barbour said:

People keep talking about proof. Hypocritical to make this statement if you keep asking for proof. 

 

One proven fact is Scot has yet to push for his due pay. There is only one reason why he wouldn't do that. 

 

In a league where you are judged on a year to year basis. It's additionally hypocritical to say he couldn't be judged. Our best drafts in the past decade can arguably be the ones that Scot had nothing to do with. 

 

Nobody is talking about the Williams "promotion" in relation to the McCloughan firing. It doesn't matter, he's gone. This is about our FO's hiring process and structure, and how we ended up with Williams. 

[William Barbour]

1 minute ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Nobody is talking about the Williams "promotion" in relation to the McCloughan firing. It doesn't matter, he's gone. This is about our FO's hiring process and structure, and how we ended up with Williams. 

Okay. So when you post about Scot defending him....nevermind. 

 

Now I remember why I "drive by post"about around here. ????

 

Carry on.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

38 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

 

Not sure what you mean by plugging my ears. Lanier was a guy that stands out and was brought in by Doug Williams. It's been quoted several times.

 

I'm just not sure what fans are expecting. GM Scot didn't work here. He didn't exactly bring greatness in the few years he was here. People ignore that FACT and try to blame Bruce. He hired the guy...So he's to blame for that, but He wasn't the reason the past drafts have been average at best.

 

The only fantasy here is the fact that fans can't seem to acknowledge that people can progress in positions just as well as they can regress. 

 

 

My apologies, I'm not sure how I forgot about the great Anthony Lanier.  I'm not dissing the guy and I hope he pans out, but thats digging pretty deep in an effort to make a point.

 

Again, this isn't about Scot.  However your interpretation of facts are skewed.  The Redskins roster was in shambles when he showed up.  We were picking guys up off the street and they were playing the next Sunday.  There is a reason most every knowledgeable fan of the team was filled with glee upon his arrival.  It has less to do with him and more to do with actually getting a proven commodity to build a roster for once in Snyders ownership.  You know, like the successful teams do.  

 

If Scott is so terrible he can only produce drafts that are "average at best" (not sure how you've come to that conclusion in 2 seasons but whatever) than why did Bruce employ his scouting service, hire him as what was supposed to be general manager, and then follow his draft board and free agency plan after he was fired?

 

The real fantasy here is you actually being able to provide anything of merit to prove that anyone currently in our FO has progressed at their position.  Oh that's right, Anthony Lanier.  Anthony freaking Lanier.

 

 

[Conn]

3 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

Okay. So when you post about Scot defending him....nevermind. 

 

Now I remember why I "drive by post"about around here. ????

 

Carry on.

 

You literally quoted a post where I said "this isn't about McCloughan" and then accuse me of moving the goalposts when I essentially repeat "this isn't about McCloughan". This is all about the Williams promotion and how its representative of our flawed FO structure/hiring process. As I've repeated over and over again, despite you wanting to make it about McCloughan. I just happened to make an offhand comment about Scot in response to the person I quoted, that you took out of context. Try reading the whole conversation.

[William Barbour]

1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

My apologies, I'm not sure how I forgot about the great Anthony Lanier.  I'm not dissing the guy and I hope he pans out, but thats digging pretty deep in an effort to make a point.

 

Again, this isn't about Scot.  However your interpretation of facts are skewed.  The Redskins roster was in shambles when he showed up.  We were picking guys up off the street and they were playing the next Sunday.  There is a reason most every knowledgeable fan of the team was filled with glee upon his arrival.  It has less to do with him and more to do with actually getting a proven commodity to build a roster for once in Snyders ownership.  You know, like the successful teams do.  

 

If Scott is so terrible he can only produce drafts that are "average at best" (not sure how you've come to that conclusion in 2 seasons but whatever) than why did Bruce employ his scouting service, hire him as what was supposed to be general manager, and then follow his draft board and free agency plan after he was fired?

 

The real fantasy here is you actually being able to provide anything of merit to prove that anyone currently here has progressed at their position.

 

 

Jay Gruden back to back winning seasons and an overall winning record as HC here....... Progression. 

 

Bruce Allen Hired the guy.....Progression.

 

Our Salary cap position is light years ahead it was 5 years ago....Progression

 

All this with the SAME Front Office excluding one single man.....Progression.

 

Do I need to look this up for you? I'm sure these facts can be found on NFL.com, ESPN.com, or Fantasyland.com

 

2 of those are legit sites.

 

 

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

You literally quoted a post where I said "this isn't about McCloughan" and then accuse me of moving the goalposts when I essentially repeat "this isn't about McCloughan". This is all about the Williams promotion and how its representative of our flawed FO structure/hiring process. As I've repeated over and over again, despite you wanting to make it about McCloughan. I just happened to make an offhand comment about Scot in response to the person I quoted, that you took out of context. Try reading the whole conversation.

Dude. You.made a backend defensive comment and lead with "It's not about him".

 

This isn't about Doug Williams, (even though he shouldn't be judged on a position he hasn't performed in yet. )

 

See how that works? 

 

Maybe you dont. 

 

But I won't hijack this thread anymore. I think Bruce has been doing better and learned from past mistakes. Doug should be given a chance in a front office that hasn't been able to succeed with the loved traditional setting. 

[Conn]

13 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

Doug should be given a chance in a front office that hasn't been able to succeed with the loved traditional setting. 

 

We have never once had a traditional FO structure since Snyder bought the team. That's the problem and where the concern lies. 

[Ron78]

It certainly doesn't speak to change in the organization, but it is a great opportunity for Doug.  I am happy for him at least.

[onedrop]

Dan Snyders need to hire tie ins from his youth/the team's glory years serves as nothing but a massive anchor holding the Skins down and preventing forward progress. 

 

Dan, please stop acting like a little boy playing with his father's team from yesteryear and behave like a man with a billion dollar franchise in 2017. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

8 hours ago, William Barbour said:

Jay Gruden back to back winning seasons and an overall winning record as HC here....... Progression. 

 

Bruce Allen Hired the guy.....Progression.

 

Our Salary cap position is light years ahead it was 5 years ago....Progression

 

All this with the SAME Front Office excluding one single man.....Progression.

 

Do I need to look this up for you? I'm sure these facts can be found on NFL.com, ESPN.com, or Fantasyland.com

 

Ah, I see you conveniently drove by the majority of my post to hit on the very last bit and this is all you can come up with.

 

But since we're cherry picking arguments....I'm pretty sure our cap situation was awful in the first place because Bruce chose to dump contracts in a non-capped year after an agreement was made not to do so.

[goskins10]

7 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Ah, I see you conveniently drove by the majority of my post to hit on the very last bit and this is all you can come up with.

 

But since we're cherry picking arguments....I'm pretty sure our cap situation was awful in the first place because Bruce chose to dump contracts in a non-capped year after an agreement was made not to do so.

 

That is patently false. The bad contracts were signed by Vinnie before BA got here. D Hall and Haynesworth were signed in 2009 to horrible contracts. MS and BA tried to use the uncapped season to get rid of those contracts. Had they not done so the team would still have been in CAP trouble. They would have had to pay the contracts and the resulting CAP hits in the next few years. So blaming Bruce for the CAP issues is factually incorrect.

 

Also, this whole "there was an agreement" thing is total bull**** and you know it. Nod nod - wink wink agreements are garbage. The only reason they got away with the penalties is because the players signed away their right to sue the owners for anything that happened before the new CBA was signed - they were only considering the Drew Brees/Peyton Manning and others pending lawsuits. They had horrible representation and paid for it. Dumb on their part but let's not act like the owners were angels here and BA was a cheater.

 

I am not a big BA fan but let's not make stuff up just to make a point.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

6 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

That is patently false. The bad contracts were signed by Vinnie before BA got here. D Hall and Haynesworth were signed in 2009 to horrible contracts. MS and BA tried to use the uncapped season to get rid of those contracts. Had they not done so the team would still have been in CAP trouble. They would have had to pay the contracts and the resulting CAP hits in the next few years. So blaming Bruce for the CAP issues is factually incorrect.

 

Also, this whole "there was an agreement" thing is total bull**** and you know it. Nod nod - wink wink agreements are garbage. The only reason they got away with the penalties is because the players signed away their right to sue the owners for anything that happened before the new CBA was signed - they were only considering the Drew Brees/Peyton Manning and others pending lawsuits. They had horrible representation and paid for it. Dumb on their part but let's not act like the owners were angels here and BA was a cheater.

 

I am not a big BA fan but let's not make stuff up just to make a point.

He said our cap situation is way better off than it was 5 years ago.  5 years ago our cap situation was in bad shape because Bruce and Shanny tried to use the uncapped season to dump the contracts. 

 

I didn't say that Bruce created those bad contracts.  Just or unjust, we took penalties due to actions that Bruce took to dump those contracts in the uncapped year. 

[Taylor 36]

43 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Ah, I see you conveniently drove by the majority of my post to hit on the very last bit and this is all you can come up with.

 

But since we're cherry picking arguments....I'm pretty sure our cap situation was awful in the first place because Bruce chose to dump contracts in a non-capped year after an agreement was made not to do so.

What agreement?  There could not have been any legal agreement to cap contracts or handling of contracts in an uncapped year.  And, if we are being truthful here, Bruce and Shanny dumping bad contracts was do to how the contracts were setup BEFORE they got here.  There are a lot of things to hang Shanny and Bruce for, but blaming them for Capgate is definitely not one of them.

8 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

He said our cap situation is way better off than it was 5 years ago.  5 years ago our cap situation was in bad shape because Bruce and Shanny tried to use the uncapped season to dump the contracts. 

 

I didn't say that Bruce created those bad contracts.  Just or unjust, we took penalties due to actions that Bruce took to dump those contracts in the uncapped year. 

It was unjust, so you can't fault Bruce for doing something that was legal and then getting fined for it.  That's like blaming the driver of a car for getting a parking ticket when he parked in an open, unmarked space in a free parking lot.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

For the record, that doesn't even make the list of stuff I don't like about Bruce Allen.

 

Im sure I'm on record here hating it as much as everyone else.

 

I was simply providing a taste of his own medicine by cherry picking an argument and spinning it.

[goskins10]

8 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

He said our cap situation is way better off than it was 5 years ago.  5 years ago our cap situation was in bad shape because Bruce and Shanny tried to use the uncapped season to dump the contracts. 

 

I didn't say that Bruce created those bad contracts.  Just or unjust, we took penalties due to actions that Bruce took to dump those contracts in the uncapped year. 

 

You are ignoring the principal part of the facts . The CAP penalties were not the initial cause of the CAP problems. They tried to get rid of CAP problems created by the previous front office. The penalties amounted to the about the same amount of CAP hit if they did nothing. They would have been in the same or worse CAP situation had they done nothing - just in a different form.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

42 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

You are ignoring the principal part of the facts . The CAP penalties were not the initial cause of the CAP problems. They tried to get rid of CAP problems created by the previous front office. The penalties amounted to the about the same amount of CAP hit if they did nothing. They would have been in the same or worse CAP situation had they done nothing - just in a different form.

Would it be fair to say had the penalties not been imposed there would have been better ways to distribute the cap hits rather than take them all over 2 years?

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Would it be fair to say had the penalties not been imposed there would have been better ways to distribute the cap hits rather than take them all over 2 years?

 

Yes and no. If you do that, you kick the can down the road to subsequent years. That is exactly what they did during the penalty years. They kicked a few contracts down the road that they would have normally done during those 2 yrs.

 

Lets just go through the numbers - The Redskins dumped $21M of Haynesworths contract into a 2010 roster bonus so it never hit a capped season. They dumped $15M of Halls contract into 2010 also. That oddly enough adds up to exactly $36M. So they either pay it then or pay it later. Could it make maneuvering a little easier during those specific 2 yrs if they could spread it out a little more? Of course. But then it takes some flexibility away later. It's a rob Peter to pay Paul scenario.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Chris Russelll surprisingly likes this move lol...

 

https://www.dchotread.com/2017/06/14/changes-or-status-quo

 

"The players on the field and everything else took a backseat to the official restructure of the front office.

What didn’t take a backseat? Criticism for Bruce Allen, Dan Snyder and the Redskins.

Surprise! Or maybe not.

It’s part of the territory and certainly the Redskins deserve plenty of it. They really haven’t earned the benefit of the doubt.

However, in this case, I feel the criticism is a bit unfair, if not unwarranted.

Bruce Allen is the President of the organization. Of course, he has ultimate power over anybody under him. That’s never going to change. It didn’t change with Scot McCloughan either, but many were wrongly convinced that it had. For some reason.

Move past the organizational depth or power chart. Here’s what is important and this is the way it largely works on the football field too. Those who shine and out-perform others will be given more power, control and influence off the field and/or will get more playing time on the field.

 

That’s the way it works. It’s pretty simple. That’s the way it worked at Redskins Park when Scot McCloughan was hired. He was given a long rope and quickly lost control.

 

[...]I know this: Dan Snyder is taking a more active role in certain situations. Bruce Allen wants to be known/is more of a football guy than people want to admit, but it is far from his strength. Eric Schaffer continues to evolve on the football side, while being a stud at everything else.

Doug Williams is a football person and the furthest thing from a businessman. What Williams does better than football evaluation is being a good people person. That’s important.

It’s important to coaches, players, scouts and administrators along with Allen and Snyder.

Fans don’t care about communication, leadership and organization until it is a disaster. They should, because in some cases, everything might appear to be fine and dandy on the surface, while they are a bubbling disaster on the inside.

Such was the case with the Redskins and  McCloughan for well over the last year. Nobody asked and the Redskins hid it the best they could, until they couldn’t anymore and yet an entire fan base still blindly defends someone they don’t have a full grasp on, because they don’t want to hear it.

Williams works well with EVERYONE in the building and stepped up his role, leadership, organization and vision in the darkest days of a messy off-season.

 

[...]Moving past the obvious, because that’s where we are at and always have been, here are a few reasons why I think Tuesday was a good day for the future of the Redskins.

1 – Some in the NFL have a negative opinion of Doug Williams and his work ethic. Totally their right and it certainly is something I’ve heard as well....I can guarantee you this: If Dan Snyder, Bruce Allen, Jay Gruden, Eric Schaffer and others thought that Doug Williams was lazy or had a bad work ethic – they would NOT have promoted him.

 

[...]3 – As you go along in life, most people get wiser and better at whatever their craft is. I know I am a better broadcaster now than I was 20 years ago or 10 years ago, even though I was paid better and had a national stage. That’s the truth. I’m a lot better now than I was then....Williams is a better talent evaluator today than he was three years ago, when he came back to the Redskins. I know this for a fact. He’s a better evaluator of talent than he was in Tampa, because he worked at his craft. It became his passion.

Williams is a better leader than he was three years ago. He’s a better leader than he was as a player.

Yet many will choose to completely ignore the reality and only rely on past impressions and judgements.

I won’t and you should not either.

 

[...]6 – The Redskins are being criticized for promoting from within, simply because the critics feel that the men who were promoted will be puppets for Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen.

I can assure you, they won’t be. Doug Williams has never been afraid to take a stand and fight for what he believes in. Kyle Smith is A.J. Smith’s son and the apple didn’t fall far from the tree. That’s a good thing for the Redskins. The younger Smith is not going to be afraid to take a position and fight for what he believes in. That’s the way his Dad operated every single day of his NFL career and you can bet that Smith has some of that in his DNA.

Remember when Jay Gruden told you in a million ways that Robert Griffin III couldn’t play in the NFL or play for him and nobody wanted to believe him? He was accused of being a racist and clueless by many, for no legitimate reason at all. They had no clue and yet they still have prominent jobs. Shame on them.

Gruden wasn’t too far away from being fired at several points over this specific issue and survived. He also proved his point and received a contract extension.

The notion that “promoting from within” is not the right way to run your company is simply preposterous. All great companies and organizations identify what they have and reward, financially or with a title, and hopefully with both.  The only reason why the critics are down on this is because of past history and “track-record” which is often confused for a guarantee of something happening again. It doesn’t and there are no guarantees, one way or the other.

 

[...]Here’s the bottom-line: Williams has the same responsibilities that a football general manager has. His job title is NOT IMPORTANT in any way. He’s not going to be involved in contracts and the salary cap. Eric Schaffer does that in a masterful way. And Smith’s elevation, while retaining Campbell more than allows the Redskins to make up for what they lost on the evaluation side with McCloughan’s firing.

It’s very simple. The Redskins are a better organization today than they were on Monday. They’re a much better building than they were four months ago and this has a real chance to work. "

 

 

 

'The hell? lol...

 

 

[Darth Tater]

When Scott was removed, we knew there were only two possibilities. 

 

1) Hire a young executive who was surrounded by success (so, we really couldn't do this internally)

2) Do what we did which was the more conservative approach

 

When Bobby Beathard was hired, he was a relatively young executive rising up the ranks.  Yes, he had been part of a couple of SB clubs but those clubs were filled with HOF players and innovative coaches he had very little to do with finding. Bobby was a risky hire that worked out (maybe the Squire squeezing EB out was actually good for us fans as JKC probably was better at sniffing out unproven talent). Snyder has made some very risky maneuvers and has been burned. Unlike EB, there is no one to out maneuver Snyder in the board room.  I think Snyder's issue has less to do with him meddling and more to do with an inability to find unproven talent for his front office. 

 

I think it is also highly likely that Bruce Allen really wants to be the GM (or GM-like) anyway and remembers how he was relegated to little more than a PR guy by many Redskins fans. Since Williams is not the GM, Allen can claim a much larger share of any future success than he could have with Scott. If we believe in a conspiracy which some evidence suggest is questionable, he also has a scapegoat ready for any failure.