Makaveli

The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

Recommended Posts

Yes!  Restructure everyone you can and take all or majority of the cap hit from our one legged QB.  The pain of this injury and signing would go away a lot faster!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

My hope is Dan gets lucky and elevates Schaffer and Kyle who at the very least are considered competent and have reputations of being good people.  And maybe that rubs off on Dan or maybe it doesn't.  But its my only hope -- that or stumbling on a franchise QB. 

 

 

Isn't he responsible for the Alex Smith contract ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FrFan said:

Isn't he responsible for the Alex Smith contract ?

 

He's the one who negotiates the contract but from what I hear Bruce sets the parameters.  So for example, its supposedly Bruce who insisted on not giving the prior Qb more than 2 years of guaranteed money in the offers that were made.  And likewise I presume he thought it was ok to give Alex 3.5 years in guaranteed money in his offer.

 

This part isn't directed at you but to make a point.  Lets say it was all Schaffer.  It would be very Dan to not forgive a mistake and IMO that's part of the culture issues.  Every GM blows contracts and picks and FA signings (granted not to Bruce's extent or where you can't keep your own QB in the building) -- as Parcells likes to say if you get it 50% right, you are doing good.   Otherwise its easy to make any GM look bad.  They all screw up every year on something.   Schaffer I know wasn't the guy who targeted Alex and I doubt he was the dude who was cool on 3.5 years guaranteed money -- my guess is they overshot Alex's contract to overcompensate because of the previous botched negotiation at QB. 

 

Could you imagine it leaking that the Redskins agreed to a trade but couldn't come to terms with Alex's agent?  Talk about Bruce being on the spot and smoked out on the prior negotiation.  It would have been embarrassing to him.    

 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest fear is that Dan is another version of George Preston Marshall. Not as a person, but as an owner and with the bad football decisions. I have a strong feeling that Dan doesn't like competence in his building. I was a fan of Bruce and willing to look the other way when things like Scot, Kirk, RG3, Shanny, etc took place because I was saying that there was enough overall progress. But why do these things seem to repeat themselves? It reminds me of Abe Pollin and the Bullets when I was a kid where he wouldn't put out a coaching search or hire the most qualified guy, but he'd hire a friend or a guy who he was loyal to. So I had to watch Wes as a coach be in way over his head and it seemed like the owner didn't care.

 

Looking at the history of the Redskins and other organizations you start to see things, Look at the guy who bought the team after Marshall - Williams. He owned the Skins and the Orioles in 83, taking both teams to the championships. He brought in Lombardi and (I think) Allen. At least he was a part of the ownership team. On one hand I want to say that Dan's resume doesn't hold water to other guys who have gone down as good owners. But I'll take it further than that, Dan doesn't recognize that things are bad. They're going off 7-9 being close and saying that the injuries were bad, and hoping everything goes right to get a chance to go to the playoff dance. Meanwhile the Chiefs fired their DC and they went to the championship game. Instead we're still trying to get +1 or +2 more games in the win column. 

 

People talk about Kyle Smith and Schaffer (and even Doug) as if they're the saviors of this franchise. I don't see it. The benefit we have is that they're under contract and inertia is a crazy thing (the devil you know vs the devil you don't), but as (1) their visibility rises and their voices inside the organization rises, and (2) the number of decisions they make increases and (3) the number of decisions they make that Dan does not agree with increases, I just see them continuing the pattern of them either folding to the system, being let go, or going somewhere else. Its like being a navigation system and telling the driver "you need to go east to get home" and the driver is going every way possible but east. Dan's more interested in sightseeing and visibility and staying in power than winning. And with that kind of a leadership structure, it doesn't matter who the lieutenants are, because the person in command can't design a good strategy, can't listen to good strategies or understand good ones from bad ones.

 

I mean we see it with the whole "gold pants" stuff. What the heck is this and why is it taking so  much of our time in media / press conferences? Talk to me about defensive philosophy, head coaching candidates, what atmosphere you want to have, etc. Not about uniforms. Don't talk to me about raquetball partners, talk to me about a place where your employees want to stay late because they know the stuff they do counts and they matter. Set things up so that your facility is better than the one Trent Williams and Adrian Peterson built, so that they're coming to the facility in their off-time instead of staying away. Set things up so that you're a leader in the technology and in scouting and in mathematical algorithms understanding trends in sports, not doing it because you're told to. Set things up so that the work environment is an actual work environment and not a bar, and not one where our reputation is so bad that we're forced to hire somebody who'd rather be at a bar. 

 

I'm still wearing my Redskins cap cause I'm still a fan. But this is not a quick fix and I doubt a QB or a DC will be the missing ingredient. Its just gonna take a lot of patience and some hungry person to come in and change things from the top to the bottom. But I'm not letting this get me down any more. I'll still root, kinda back to buying merchandise, not going to games as much but I have different reasons for that. I'm still a fan and I'm trying to raise my family to be fans because I'm from this city and I love my city. And that's not about Snyder that's about my fellow people from DC. When we see one another wearing merchandise, we understand each others pain like few others (same with the Wizards/Bullets). And when another teams fans come over I just have to bear the insults and hopefully I can jab at them for whatever's going on with them (because although few teams are as bad as Dan, few teams have the Patriots or Spurs level of success either), and even the Patriots are cheaters. 

 

Its just a long road of being a fan. We had our glory years and we've got to bear the brunt through these next few years (decades). 

  • Like 5
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

My biggest fear is that Dan is another version of George Preston Marshall. Not as a person, but as an owner and with the bad football decisions. I have a strong feeling that Dan doesn't like competence in his building.

If I had to list the number one reason as to why I tapped out, this would be it. There's more than a passing resemblance between GPM & Dan Snyder, especially with their managerial style, PR snafus, and reluctance (if not outright hostility) toward having competent personnel in important roles. Let's not forget GPM refused to re-hire Ray Flahtery after the latter's stint in the Navy during WWII because he was the only man who could (and would) stand up to Marshall when he tried to butt into football affairs. What followed were 20 years of yes-men, has beens, and ex-players. Flaherty did the one thing you can't do with the likes of Marshall and Snyder: he bruised their egos.

 

Fortunately for fans back then, GPM was in his twilight years and declining financially so he had to sell his shares and (mercifully) piss off before kicking it in '69. Williams/Cooke built a winning culture and ushered in a new golden age for the team.

 

Dan Snyder, on the other hand, is not only a relative child among his fellow team owners (average age among NFL owners is about 70) but is making money hand-over-fist with the 'Skins despite the train-wreck he inherited and enhanced. Selling the team would be in complete conflict with his own interests and would be an exceptionally foolish financial decision to make, especially since Red Zebra broke up and he's sold off all his radio stations? 

 

Mind you, I don't think he's actively trying to sabotage the team the way GPM did toward the end of his coaching tenure but if you and yours are making money, what material incentive is there to rock the boat? Because it's the right thing to do? Because the fans and the community would appreciate it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Its just a long road of being a fan. We had our glory years and we've got to bear the brunt through these next few years (decades). 

 

It's much easier for me to take a stab at a psycho analysis of Bruce than Dan because there is so much more material about Bruce -- where we got people who have worked with him previously talking and sources about him now.  I am pretty confident in my take about Bruce I am much less so about Dan.

 

My best guess on Dan based on what I hear, extrapolating from some interviews from the past that I recently watched on youtube, and just adding some of my own guesses:

 

It starts with him having the emotional maturity of a teenager.  He displays a lot of outward arrogance to mask his deep insecurity.   He's a bit of a social misfit who likes to use his money to overcome that handicap by basking in the idea of employees pandering to him because he's the boss and also getting employees to go out and play with him. 

 

He doesn't have the social-emotional intelligence to read situations well or the intelligence of how to build a winner.  I do think he wants to win.  One interview that I watched where he said he wants to put on a SB trophy his dad's name came off poignant and real to me.  I identify with it some myself because my fandom is also about my dad and I lost him too so I can identify some with his story.  He goes to his dad's grave supposedly every game day.  I don't think any of that is phony.  But I don't really care anymore that he wants to win -- because I don't think he has the intelligence or emotional maturity to pull it off.   

 

He wants people around him that feed his ego as opposed to challenge him.   Vinny was hard for him to let go of because like him -- Vinny was also socially a bit of a nerd (but in a goofy way versus Dan's more withdrawn version of it) and they bonded over that coupled with a bit of an us versus the world manta.  Vinny would do Dan's bidding without challenging him.  

 

I think his relationship with Bruce is more complex than it was with Vinny.  Bruce is more of the cool kid in high school who otherwise wouldn't socialize with Dan.  And he's Redskins royalty to Dan because Dan lives and dies by Redskins nostalgia.   Bruce can be socially smooth.  Being pals with Bruce feeds Dan's ego.  Bruce is the dude that Dan wants to be.  Bruce is arrogant and socially comfortable.  They both share their hatred for the media.  Bruce can charm people in a way that Dan can't.  And like Dan, Bruce can be ruthless and run people over to get what he wants.  Dan gives Bruce more leeway than he ever gave Vinny -- right down to letting Bruce represent Dan in some owner meetings without Dan even being there. 

 

 Bruce knows who to play on Dan's emotions and as Liz Clark likes to say -- Bruce is living the dream by basically running this team with almost no interference from anyone with the exception of Dan himself on occasion.   They go out drinking with each other a lot and feed each other egos like freshman in college who hit the bars and in drunken stupor tell each other how they can get any model they want or whatever other glory story they want to believe. 

 

Back to Dan alone.  I do believe he doesn't mess with the roster that much albeit he still does sometimes.  But he 100% sets the culture which IMO is much more important than meddling with the roster.  And the culture reflects his personality which is based on:  arrogance, immaturity, impatience, scapegoating, divisions.  In short, you need to be an expert on office politics at PHD level to survive that jungle.   Bruce is the king of that jungle under Dan because it all fits his personality perfectly and he doesn't have to go off type because that's how the Prince of Darkness (as he was labeled in Tampa) rolls.   

 

As for Jay, I don't think he's a great coach and I do think he has his share of flaws.   But he's a good coach who has the right skills to survive there.   I have sympathy for him because unlike Dan and Bruce the picture painted about Jay is he's a good guy.  He survives by going with the flow where Dan-Bruce don't feel threatened by him.  He is the type who can go drinking with Dan and Bruce and make them feel at ease.  And I don't fault Jay for it -- I actually admire him on that count.  You got to be good to deal with the office politics there.  So on one token I am frustrated that Jay in a sense because I think he is a major roadblock to bringing change -- because he's part of the crowd convincing Dan everything is on the right track.  So Jay helps Bruce's job security and vice versa.   But on the same token, Jay has no choice but to play that card.  So I can't fault him for it.

 

As much as i've slammed Bruce and Dan over the years I think I am also one of the most optimistic critics.  When guys like Sheehan among others say this team will never win with Dan as the owner, I 100% disagree.    While I agree with the spirit of the point which is Dan will never learn and always get in his own way.  I disagree that you can't overcome it with good luck.    And I can cite examples of where its happened that way to other dysfunctional organizations. 

 

Heck reading that long article about the Browns up and downs in recent years is as dysfunctional if not twice much as anything that's happened here.  But they struck gold with Mayfield and now they think they are on track and can overcome it.  In a short sample they did.  Will see if they continue to do so going forward.  For me personally, I want to see this team crash this year for 2 reasons:

 

1. Cost Bruce his job.  Yeah Dan is the much bigger problem.  But if i have a kid who gets himself in trouble regularly -- I don't want him hanging out with a fellow trouble maker where they egg each other on.  I'd rather take my chances with him hanging with a better crowd and hopefully that tames some of his worst impulses.

 

2.  Get that franchise QB.  Because my top way to fix this team is dumb luck in the draft so lets increase the odds it goes down.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Just going though a long article about Browns ownership.  If you read the whole thing, Haslam comes off like a meddling nut.  Dan on steroids.   But he lucked out on a franchise QB.  And unlike Dan he will willing to take a step back in order to take a step forward.  In a weird way, the fact that Haslam is impatient with everyone and doesn't have Dan's social phobias gives him an edge.  Haslam doesn't need a GM to hold his hand in owner meetings and to deal with the public.  So he doesn't depend on anyone. 

 

But Haslam is a nut because he meddles with just about everyone and is never satisfied and will dump some people at the drop of a hat.  I'd still take him over Dan, though.  But if you read that whole article, it doesn't come off like the Browns finally figured it out -- comes off that they are lucky they tanked for Mayfield.  Haslam meddles with his coaches and GM, his finger prints are on everything.  Just saying this because it gives me some juice for my only hope with this team -- some dumb luck in the draft where we land on a franchise guy and win in spite of a dumb owner. 

 

I wouldn't call it 100% dumb luck.  Haslam did hire Dorsey and allowed Dorsey to do his job which was to draft their QB of the future.  IMO that's what drove him to fire Sashi Brown when he did.  Haslam knew they'd have the #1 pick in the draft and wanted a football guy making that pick, not the guys who passed over Wentz, Watson and Trubisky.  They couldn't miss on that pick.  And it wasn't an easy pick like a Peyton Manning or an Andrew Luck.  Dorsey was forward thinking enough to draft a 6-0 tall QB #1 overall who wasn't a Michael Vick type of athlete which threw off the Mayock's and Kiper's because you're only supposed to take prototype FQB prospects at #1.   

 

Haslam seems to be where Dan was early in his ownership, impatient yet willing to try new things (Spurrier's offense in the NFL, raiding the RFA market).  Only difference is Dan's never been on board with a complete tear down like Jimmy was.  Dan was always trying to find shortcuts.  Will have to see where Haslam is in year 20.  Dan's seems to resort to just surrounding himself with people he likes and hope for the best.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, drowland said:

 

I wouldn't call it 100% dumb luck.  Haslam did hire Dorsey and allowed Dorsey to do his job which was to draft their QB of the future.  IMO that's what drove him to fire Sashi Brown when he did.  Haslam knew they'd have the #1 pick in the draft and wanted a football guy making that pick, not the guys who passed over Wentz, Watson and Trubisky.  They couldn't miss on that pick.  And it wasn't an easy pick like a Peyton Manning or an Andrew Luck.  Dorsey was forward thinking enough to draft a 6-0 tall QB #1 overall who wasn't a Michael Vick type of athlete which threw off the Mayock's and Kiper's because you're only supposed to take prototype FQB prospects at #1.   

 

Haslam seems to be where Dan was early in his ownership, impatient yet willing to try new things (Spurrier's offense in the NFL, raiding the RFA market).  Only difference is Dan's never been on board with a complete tear down like Jimmy was.  Dan was always trying to find shortcuts.  Will have to see where Haslam is in year 20.  Dan's seems to resort to just surrounding himself with people he likes and hope for the best.  

 

100% is extreme.  I don't think Dan needs 100% dumb luck either.  He has some redeeming features.  It's not like what he does is 100% wrong across the board.  But by dumb luck I mean that Dan is enough of a problem that he needs a mega game changer to overcome it.  And in football that usually means a franchise QB.   That was practically the thesis of the whole article about the Browns -- they were zigging and zagging and all of a sudden Mayfield changed things.  

 

As for how smart the choice was of going Mayfield over Darnold or whomever is besides the point.  I think Dan and Bruce and Kyle Smith, etc for example can sort through Tua, Fromm and Herbert or at least they'd have a fighting chance to get it right.  Part of the reason why I hang on the 2020 draft is I think there are multiple right choices at that position.  Heck the Jets think they struck gold with Darnold so it remains to be seen if there was only one franchise QB in the 2018 draft. 

 

Agree on the point about Dan not willing to do a rebuild and I made that point in my original post on this.  Haslam doesn't come across like an impetuous owner who finally learned to be patient and back off.   The dude comes off as a hands on lunatic as for involving himself in everything -- coaches, scheme, draft picks, on and on.  The part I liked best was when Haslam agreed on tanking but even on that once it was going down -- he couldn't emotionally deal with it.  Sounds very Dan like.    And to Haslam the tanking was too extreme and he wanted to win more games.  So lets play the luck variable -- what if they did win more games and the Jets had the first pick and drafted Mayfield?  I recall reading predraft the Jets loved Mayfield. 

 

The article gave the vibe that Haslam is who he is and won't change.   And yeah he is willing to keep trying new things but not always in the best way because some of it comes off very Steinbrenner like where he has whims and acts on them a lot. 

 

It doesn't to me paint a picture of an owner who matured but an owner who at the moment has a good GM and they found a franchise QB.  The vibe I got reading that article is Dorsey probably wouldn't have lasted for long if they didn't get the QB position right because Haslam isn't a patient dude and likes to keep mixing it up. 

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recognize I’m in the minority, but I thought Bruce came off well this week.  Enough so that he should speak more often.  No matter what he said, he was going to be hammered by some media members.  But I felt much better having that guy in charge than the Cerrato / Zorn connection.  His points were logical.  I’d still rather have a top, proven personnel guy like an Ozzie Newsome, but I think Bruce and Snyder are their own worst enemies by not talking more.  They let the negativity build up too much. 

 

i’m also getting tired of the nonstop negativity towards the team. Not that they don’t deserve much of it due to their overall body of work under Snyder, but it’s gotten a little over the top. 

 

I’m intrigued to see how they respond this off-season.  The pressure is decidedly on. 

Edited by Andre The Giant
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One hundred percent of us would fire Allen if we could.  One hundred percent of us would volunteer to help move Dan Snyder's stuff out of the building if he'd agree to sell.  It wouldn't matter if the new owner was an obvious D-bag we'd embrace him(her) like the second coming.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read what I never even knew, that apparently McVey won state in Georgia, and beat out Calvin Johnson for player of the year.  Just more fuel on the unbelievably sad fire that the Rams having not seen McVey in person knew what he was, when Allen, who had him for 8 years, did not know who Sean McVey was.  Bruce Allen will go down as one of the 5 worst GMs in NFL history.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

One hundred percent of us would fire Allen if we could.  One hundred percent of us would volunteer to help move Dan Snyder's stuff out of the building if he'd agree to sell.  It wouldn't matter if the new owner was an obvious D-bag we'd embrace him(her) like the second coming.

 

If Bruce leaves it would be a fun week or so basking in it.  If Dan sold the team it would be epic like the team just won the SB.

 

54 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:

I recognize I’m in the minority, but I thought Bruce came off well this week.  Enough so that he should speak more often.  No matter what he said, he was going to be hammered by some media members.  But I felt much better having that guy in charge than the Cerrato / Zorn connection.  His points were logical.  I’d still rather have a top, proven personnel guy like an Ozzie Newsome, but I think Bruce and Snyder are their own worst enemies by not talking more.

 

I agree that Bruce and even more so Dan not talking helps fuel the negativity towards them versus helps.  As a speaker, Bruce to me is political and bland and his answers can come off duplicitous but where he huts himself is he often adds to that mix some dumb statement which ends up being a punchline.   This time, he avoided that misstatement so for him that was one of his best performances.  But I agree its better for him to talk than not talk -- otherwise it comes off like he wants to do his thing in the dark without facing the music.  Dan I actually think is a better speaker than Bruce albeit he's not a great public speaker either.   It would serve him to speak.  At the very least it would come off like he's interested in giving his vision whatever that is to fans.

 

As for Bruce versus Vinny, its a tight decision for me.   I like Bruce better in two ways which is holding on to draft picks and not mortgaging the future as to how salaries are structured.  But Bruce also comes off sleazier and less likable than Vinny and he also produces a really boring product which IMO is a big part of Dan's issue with getting fans in the stands. In the past, with Vinny you had incompetence but with some pizzaz now we got incompetence with an extra helping of sleaze and a boring product.  

 

But to each their own on that front.  I think Bruce has done more to damage the team's image than Vinny.    The question is what's next?  Bruce is going to have one more go to fix things.    I am guessing he will fail.  but you never know.  But agree with the idea is it will help much more than hurt if they speak more. 

 

54 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:

 

i’m also getting tired of the nonstop negativity towards the team. Not that they don’t deserve much of it due to their overall body of work under Snyder, but it’s gotten a little over the top. 

 

 

Sheehan had a good point about this IMO this week which is the negativity should ramp up not ramp down.  In his view, Dan has to have things crash around him if there is ever a chance that he will wake up and learn otherwise he will keep finding excuses.  I agree with that -- its my take too.  Darkest before the dawn.   Some people who cover the team say Dan-Bruce really love and hang on the 10% or so of fans that have their back no matter what to reassure themselves they are operating the right way. 

 

The way I look at it is if you have a pal who is an alcoholic...   Who is the better friend -- the one who reassures the dude that he isn't drinking that much or its not that bad -- or the tough love person who says dude I am not going to hang with you anymore until you stop drinking?

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Veryoldschool said:

One hundred percent of us would fire Allen if we could.  One hundred percent of us would volunteer to help move Dan Snyder's stuff out of the building if he'd agree to sell.  It wouldn't matter if the new owner was an obvious D-bag we'd embrace him(her) like the second coming.

If es embraces it then I'll embrace it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allen said we were just 2 games out of making the playoffs. Yeah, if those 2 games were against the Eagles. But other than the Eagles clobbering us, we were more like 3 games out. He can spin it any way he wants, but we know exactly where we'll be again at the end next year.

Edited by BleedBNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Now he wanted to swing the other way.

 

 

Heh heh...

 

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tshile said:

Local media is gutless. They got exactly what they wanted - Bruce to sit down with them, and they asked soft ball bull**** with no follow ups. 

 

Gutless. 

But I thought the board consensus was that media has it out for the team. I guess 20 years of 💩💩 on-field product has finally opened some people’s eyes. Not directed at you, just an observation about the change in the perceptions on the board over the years. 

 

One of you mentioned the similarity to  Abe Polin’s ownership of Les Boulez. True, Polin had a host of flaws as an owner but being a toxic presence for the team wasn’t one of them. When he was getting close to the end, in spite of everything I think most of the city wanted to get a championship as much for him as for the city. Abe may have been a cheap, obstinate owner who valued loyalty too much, but he was a good guy which actually counts for something. I think it’s the difference between lovable losers like Les Boulez and a team you hate to love anymore, like the Skins. Battered fan syndrome’s handle describes it perfectly.

 

I don’t really care about Bruce all that much because I think he’s only a symptom of the disease, i.e. Snyder. Therefore, our focus needs to be on humiliating Dan as much as possible, as often as possible. When his peers are openly laughing in his face on the regular, I think he’ll sell. However, the pain of being a laughingstock has to exceed the benefit of the dough and getting to schmooze with the players and bigwigs. If he doesn’t sell, at least he’ll be suffering in much the same way we are in exchange for his annual charity check from the NFL. 

 

Edited by The Sisko
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

He doesn't have the social-emotional intelligence to read situations well or the intelligence of how to build a winner.  I do think he wants to win.  One interview that I watched where he said he wants to put on a SB trophy his dad's name came off poignant and real to me.  I identify with it some myself because my fandom is also about my dad and I lost him too so I can identify some with his story.  He goes to his dad's grave supposedly every game day.  I don't think any of that is phony.  But I don't really care anymore that he wants to win -- because I don't think he has the intelligence or emotional maturity to pull it off.   

 

 

See, I'm past the whole "he's a fan" and being satisfied with that. He's not smart. And beyond that, he refuses to hire smart people. Just about every person minus Kyle and Schaffer who he's had in house whose been seen as smart has been fired. Is that a coincidence? If I'm a "fan" and i want a trophy, then I'm going to do all that I can to get one. Not hire a guy then fire him a year later because I want to be more involved (Marty). I'm not going to buddy up with a player so much that he's ignoring the coaches (CP and RG3 at least). I'm not going to hire guys and have some disputes take place about who has final say (Shanny and Scot) and which way we want to take the team. How long was this board asking him to invest in scouts? I think we still are. When did he finally invest in BLEDSO? How much do we invest in analytics? 

 

 

There's no monopoly on good ideas so I'm not saying that I've got the only ones, but the guy sees success staring at him in the face. Just look at Jerrah and what he did - he brought in Parcells then appointed his son as GM. Now, its not like they're world beaters but I'd love to be in their position instead of ours. Not to mention what the Giants and Eagles have done. Look at what the Ravens have done, right up the river. Its like hes hanging onto a Beta Player because it belonged to his dad, not realizing that the entire world went to VHS, then DVD, then Blu Ray, then streaming. And he's trying to run a franchise with that Beta Player type ideas. And when somebody comes in and says "Beta players can't compete today" he fires them for insubordination. 

 

But hey, life is short. This is why Madden was created. Now I can just go into franchise mode and relieve stress without thinking about how badly Danny is going to mess things up and just think that one day it'll all be over. 

39 minutes ago, The Sisko said:

One of you mentioned the similarity to  Abe Polin’s ownership of Les Boulez. True, Polin had a host of flaws as an owner but being a toxic presence for the team wasn’t one of them. When he was getting close to the end, in spite of everything I think most of the city wanted to get a championship as much for him as for the city. Abe may have been a cheap, obstinate owner who valued loyalty too much, but he was a good guy which actually counts for something. I think it’s the difference between lovable losers like Les Boulez and a team you hate to love anymore, like the Skins. Battered fan syndrome’s handle describes it perfectly.

 

 

I agree with this somewhat. Yeah we have different emotions toward them but similar frustrations. I remember thinking that with Ted we were finally in good hands. I don't believe that nearly as much any more because he's still employing Ernie, but at least he won a cup with the Caps so I give Ted some leverage about knowing how to build a winning team. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there a different expectations for GMs with an elite QB versus one without? Should there be?

 

Serious question. 

Edited by wit33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2019 at 11:59 AM, Warhead36 said:

The 7-9 record is a mirage. We're closer to a 3-13 caliber team than 13-3 caliber.

 

DVOA says we were the 29th best team last year.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Its like hes hanging onto a Beta Player because it belonged to his dad, not realizing that the entire world went to VHS, then DVD, then Blu Ray, then streaming. And he's trying to run a franchise with that Beta Player type ideas. And when somebody comes in and says "Beta players can't compete today" he fires them for insubordination.

 

That's a great analogy, I'm definitely stealing that. :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruce BetaMax Allen

Dan iMax Snyder

 

I am rolling today. Not.  This thread needs more humor, clearly. 

 

Lost in all this insanity, is Doug Williams.  That's the guy I would target for an interview, if I were a lurking reporter here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.