The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

[Conn]

7 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

Wait, I thought everyone was saying it was plain to see back on page 14? lol...

 

Sure. And some disagree, and that's why the thread is 277 pages. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

4 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Sure. And some disagree, and that's why the thread is 277 pages. 

 

So if the ones who disagree never posted on this thread, it would have died on page 16. Cool.

[Conn]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

 

So if the ones who disagree never posted on this thread, it would have died on page 16. Cool.

 

Of course not. It's an ever-expanding chronical of whatever people think of him. Even if everyone agreed, it wouldn't stop being compiled. Not sure what point you're trying to make, or if there is one. Usually I can see whatever irony or hypocrisy you're poking at and revealing, and I nod along. I assume you think this thread is pointless because it's just people ****ing for the sake of ****ing, sometimes needlessly or undeservedly. That's probably true, and yet still describes the majority of the content on any fan message board. 

 

He's the guy we are told is in charge. Whether people like or dislike him or the job he's doing, whether there is agreement or not on any of it, it's not a topic that will die off. Especially throughout the offseason. 

[Dissident2]

9 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

He's the guy we are told is in charge. Whether people like or dislike him or the job he's doing, whether there is agreement or not on any of it, it's not a topic that will die off. Especially throughout the offseason. 

 

And especially when you have yet another day like yesterday when the gutless team president lets his coach take the full brunt of questions about the Trent Williams issue without ever addressing the issue himself, without ever taking some of the pressure off his football guys, the way someone with character, an actual spine, and a legitimate understanding of what being a "leader" means would do. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

13 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Of course not. It's an ever-expanding chronical of whatever people think of him. Even if everyone agreed, it wouldn't stop being compiled. Not sure what point you're trying to make, or if there is one.

 

 

You said this:

 

"...no reason for the thread to be done until his legacy is plain to see."

 

I jokingly said that everyone already felt Bruce's legacy is plain to see a long time ago...meaning, the thread is not tied to or affected by fans' needing to wait and see on anything concerning Bruce Allen.

 

You just now said basically the same thing I just did lol...that this thread is still going on because it's a repository for all things Allen, not because we're waiting on his legacy to be clearly established and then it'll die off.

[Skinsinparadise]

Hopefully next year, we aren't reading a story like this about Kyle Smith on another team.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bakedtater1]

I hate seeing those words on this site..I know it's from a tweet but fly eagles fly shouldn't be able to fly around here.

[Skinsinparadise]

10 worst contracts in the NFC East according to a Philly reporter.  Naturally the Eagles have zero of the worse 10.   We got 4 of the top 10.  Giants tied at 4 too.  And Dallas with 2 according to this guy.  I agree with some of this and disagree with some, too.

 

The 10 worst contracts in the NFC East

https://www.phillyvoice.com/10-worst-contracts-nfc-east/

 

 

 

Good article about the Yankees obsession with culture.   The team has been ravaged with injuries right up there with anything the Redskins went through last year. Though granted its apples to oranges on multiple fronts when you compare baseball to football.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/06/08/the-secret-formula-behind-yankees-unrelenting-winning-culture/

[Conn]

Don't really disagree with anything in that article. Maybe the Alshon Jeffery deal belongs? Can't really pick one I think is worse to boot off though, and he could play up to it this year.

 

I think some of it is a little unfair. The Norman contract was fine for his level of play at the time, and we can get out of it easily in the future.

 

I think many here would disagree with the Landon Collins contract inclusion. I'm excited about him of course but I've also seen many many people who aren't Eagles writers also say it was too much for essentially a box SS. Including some well-informed die hards here. So I have a hard time arguing with it's inclusion.

[goskins10]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

10 worst contracts in the NFC East according to a Philly reporter.  Naturally the Eagles have zero of the worse 10.   We got 4 of the top 10.  Giants tied at 4 too.  And Dallas with 2 according to this guy.  I agree with some of this and disagree with some, too.

 

The 10 worst contracts in the NFC East

https://www.phillyvoice.com/10-worst-contracts-nfc-east/

 

 

 

Good article about the Yankees obsession with culture.   The team has been ravaged with injuries right up there with anything the Redskins went through last year. Though granted its apples to oranges on multiple fronts when you compare baseball to football.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/06/08/the-secret-formula-behind-yankees-unrelenting-winning-culture/

 

He must have written this before the Carson Wentz deal was signed...  LOL  

[PartyPosse]

4 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Don't really disagree with anything in that article. Maybe the Alshon Jeffery deal belongs? Can't really pick one I think is worse to boot off though, and he could play up to it this year.

 

I think some of it is a little unfair. The Norman contract was fine for his level of play at the time, and we can get out of it easily in the future.

 

I think many here would disagree with the Landon Collins contract inclusion. I'm excited about him of course but I've also seen many many people who aren't Eagles writers also say it was too much for essentially a box SS. Including some well-informed die hards here. So I have a hard time arguing with it's inclusion.

I think it's as dumb as grading a draft pick before they play a single down. Maybe wait and see them perform before declaring them overpaid. Beat writers like this are why Sports and the Internet don't mix.

[clskinsfan]

5 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Don't really disagree with anything in that article. Maybe the Alshon Jeffery deal belongs? Can't really pick one I think is worse to boot off though, and he could play up to it this year.

 

I think some of it is a little unfair. The Norman contract was fine for his level of play at the time, and we can get out of it easily in the future.

 

I think many here would disagree with the Landon Collins contract inclusion. I'm excited about him of course but I've also seen many many people who aren't Eagles writers also say it was too much for essentially a box SS. Including some well-informed die hards here. So I have a hard time arguing with it's inclusion.

 

And IMO that definition of Collins is BS. The guy can do it all. He just wasnt getting any help at all in NY. Now, I am not saying he will here either. But Collins is far from a box safety.

[Nerm]

43 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

He must have written this before the Carson Wentz deal was signed...  LOL  

 

I was thinking that too.  As for the Cowboys RT (Collins), I agree that Dallas could have kept him for less.  But, I think Jerry Jones acknowledged when they signed him that he was being unfairly underpaid on his rookie contract. The Cowboys tend to "make things right" for players that outperform their pay.  Part of his extension was an acknowledgment that his rookie contract should have included millions more than he ended up getting.  I don't know if that is the best decision from a cap perspective, but I think it does reduce worry from players about how they will be treated by the team in the future.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

On 6/7/2019 at 6:39 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

Hopefully next year, we aren't reading a story like this about Kyle Smith on another team.

 

 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

On 6/9/2019 at 11:07 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

10 worst contracts in the NFC East according to a Philly reporter.  Naturally the Eagles have zero of the worse 10.   We got 4 of the top 10.  Giants tied at 4 too.  And Dallas with 2 according to this guy.  I agree with some of this and disagree with some, too.

 

The 10 worst contracts in the NFC East

https://www.phillyvoice.com/10-worst-contracts-nfc-east/

 

 

 

Good article about the Yankees obsession with culture.   The team has been ravaged with injuries right up there with anything the Redskins went through last year. Though granted its apples to oranges on multiple fronts when you compare baseball to football.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/06/08/the-secret-formula-behind-yankees-unrelenting-winning-culture/

I can't argue that Alex Smith and Josh Norman have bad contracts. Though if Smith had stayed healthy and played reasonably well (better than he was playing) it would have been ok.  But he played poorly then had a potential career ending injury.  

 

Paul Richardson's contract is bad (so far) because he's been hurt, which you could say was predictable because of history.

I don't think we know anywhere near enough to say whether or not the Landon Collins contract is good or bad.

 

I think the Vernon Davis contract is atrocious, however.  They're paying a ton of money for a receiving TE who's like 98 years old and can't block.  To go along with with younger version of himself who also gets a lot of money, can't stay healthy and can't block.

 

If you wanted one area where the 'Skins REALLY should have done more this off season, it was TE.  Because they have such a tell based on personnel.  

 

I'd almost be included to move Reed to outside WR, put Quinn in the slot, Richardson on the other side, and go from there.  Because lining Reed up on the line or asking him to set the edge is like banging your head against a concrete wall.  Replace Reed with Davis.  Same thing.

[Skinsinparadise]

I'll say this if the Redskins are who most in the national media, draft geeks and Vegas think the Redskins are -- then we'd likely be having a top 5 pick next year and in turn I presume we'd be looking at an overhaul in the coaching and front office.   I just watched this segment below where Burleson said he thought the Redskins will be better than the Giants and they considered that a hot take on that show with Scharger and the other guy disagreeing.  Wow.   L. Reddick said the other day he thinks the Giants are better.  The football magazine I purchased also predicted the Giants having a better season. 

 

I am not optimistic about the season.  But I don't think it's quite as bad as most expect it to be.  Feels to me 7-9, 8-8.   And I don't get all those who think the Giants are better.  Will see.  

 

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

18 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I'll say this if the Redskins are who most in the national media, draft geeks and Vegas think the Redskins are -- then we'd likely be having a top 5 pick next year and in turn I presume we'd be looking at an overhaul in the coaching and front office.   I just watched this segment below where Burleson said he thought the Redskins will be better than the Giants and they considered that a hot take on that show with Scharger and the other guy disagreeing.  Wow.   L. Reddick said the other day he thinks the Giants are better.  The football magazine I purchased also predicted the Giants having a better season. 

 

I am not optimistic about the season.  But I don't think it's quite as bad as most expect it to be.  Feels to me 7-9, 8-8.   And I don't get all those who think the Giants are better.  Will see.  

 

 

 

2

 

First guy in that video says the Skins "need to earn something from me" because they've only had one winning season in the last 6 yrs. Um, the Giants have had only one winning season in the last 6 yrs...the Skins have had two.

Record over the last 6 yrs
Skins 38-57-1
Giants 38-58

 

Yet it's the Skins that need to "earn" something. Okay.

 

These shows seem like a live-action version of fan message boards lol...

[Coach Janky Spanky]

2 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

First guy in that video says the Skins "need to earn something from me" because they've only had one winning season in the last 6 yrs. Um, the Giants have had only one winning season in the last 6 yrs...the Skins have had two.

Record over the last 6 yrs
Skins 38-57-1
Giants 38-58

 

Yet it's the Skins that need to "earn" something. Okay.

 

These shows seem like a live-action version of fan message boards lol...

 

Yes, the Skins most definitely do need to "earn" something.  I think fans (myself included) forget just how bad to mediocre we have been the last 18 years.   

 

Since 2000-01 season, inclusive:

 

Super Bowl wins:  Redskins 0; Giants 2

Playoff wins:  Redskins 1; Giants 10

Seasons with 11 wins or more:  Redskins 0; Giants 4

Seasons with four wins or fewer:  Redskins 3, Giants 2 

 

 

 

[goskins10]

16 minutes ago, Coach Janky Spanky said:

 

Yes, the Skins most definitely do need to "earn" something.  I think fans (myself included) forget just how bad to mediocre we have been the last 18 years.   

 

Since 2000-01 season, inclusive:

 

Super Bowl wins:  Redskins 0; Giants 2

Playoff wins:  Redskins 1; Giants 10

Seasons with 11 wins or more:  Redskins 0; Giants 4

Seasons with four wins or fewer:  Redskins 3, Giants 2 

 

 

 

 

I get what you are saying. We have all felt the futility over really the last 20+ years. But in fairness what does the record in 2000 have to do with right now? With this coming season? None of those players or coaches are here. 

 

And the question on the video was not who has been the best franchise or who will have more wins for the entire NFL. It was specifically who will win more this season the Giants or the Redskins. While it's certainly no slam dunk, the Redskins are better a least one paper than the Giants and have been the last 4 or season which is much more relevant to how they will do this coming season. 

 

They got rid of the best player on each side of the ball in OBJ and Olivier Vernon and anyone one of the top D players in Collins and unless all their top draft picks turn into instant studs, they having not much to replace them. And Eli will be starting. They are living in the past with him. He has not been good for several years. They do have Barkley and still a decent but not nearly as good front 7. 

 

Neither team is likely to go anywhere. But if I were to put money on it, I would take the over for Washington (provided a tie is a push). Even with an 11-5 2016 season the Giants are 25-38 over the last 4 yrs vs Wash at 31-32-1. Not saying that is a great record but it is better than the **** the Giants have put up. That's a 2nd a 3rd and 2 4ths vs the redskins with 1 st and 3 rds.

 

Again, this is not to say either are going to be "good". But us better than the Giants? I like those odds better than the reverse. 

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

52 minutes ago, Coach Janky Spanky said:

 

Yes, the Skins most definitely do need to "earn" something.  I think fans (myself included) forget just how bad to mediocre we have been the last 18 years.  

 

 

 

He said they needed to earn something because they've only had one winning season over the last 6 years. Six.

 

Not 22. Not "since 2001". Six.  That was his argument and reasoning. That is why he said the Skins would not have a better record than the 

Giants this year.

 

You're arguing in support of something nobody said.

[Coach Janky Spanky]

2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

He said they needed to earn something because they've only had one winning season over the last 6 years. Six.

 

Not 22. Not "since 2001". Six.  That was his argument and reasoning.

 

You're arguing in support of something nobody said.

 

I'm "arguing in support of" exactly what he said:  that the Redskins need to earn something.  I'm just using different numbers than he is to do so. 

 

Fine, we all know from your post above that the Redskins and Giants have each won 38 games over the past six seasons.  We all know from my post above what the numbers are from 2000 to present.

 

I don't know why the commentator chose six years, but let's go a little further to ten years.   In those extra four years, the Redskins won 25 games.   The Giants won 36 games and a Super Bowl.   

 

But here's another number for you:  40.   The Giants were beating the Redskins 40-0 the last time I walked out of FedEx Field.  

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

5 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

First guy in that video says the Skins "need to earn something from me" because they've only had one winning season in the last 6 yrs. Um, the Giants have had only one winning season in the last 6 yrs...the Skins have had two.

Record over the last 6 yrs
Skins 38-57-1
Giants 38-58

 

Yet it's the Skins that need to "earn" something. Okay.

 

These shows seem like a live-action version of fan message boards lol...

 

What got my attention about it is they aren't unique.  Personally I think the Redskins are better than the Giants.   And yeah some of the national pundits, draft geek types, Vegas guys, and power ranking types do indeed have the Skins above the Giants -- most actually have the Giants as the better team.   And most seem to think this team is on a crash course for a top 5 pick in next years draft.

 

Personally, I think this team is on a crash course for same old same old as for recent years which is something like 7-9, 8-8.  IMO its not a great roster.  It's not awful either.  It's so so.  It has some strong units.  Some weak units.  Good depth at some positions.  Weak at others.  The main course to win in the NFL is typically the passing game and on paper we have one of the weakest units on that front.  So I gather that's whats driving this.  But I think the D line and run game are good enough to keep this team from stinking.  I am guessing we will have our usual O line crash with injuries (with a lack of depth to offset it) but until that happens they will hang in there OK.  

 

Guys like Sheehan would say ignore everyone but Vegas -- and that Vegas is usually on to something albeit they are far from perfect.  If so I should place my bets 😀 since they are mostly spelling out doom. 

 

If I had to choose I actually rather the naysayers be correct and they go 4-12 or 5-11 than what I project which is 7-9, 8-8 -- if that record is what's needed to get Dan to put a real personnel guy (Kyle Smith) in charge of personnel.   If those are the two choices.  My top preference by a mile naturally is a playoff year.  

 

I'd guess right now

Eagles 11-5

Dallas 10-6

Redskins 8-8

Giants 5-11

[Califan007 The Constipated]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I'd guess right now

Eagles 11-5

Dallas 10-6

Redskins 8-8

Giants 5-11

 

 

I agree with ya about the crash-course results, as well as being ok with 4-12 if it puts Smith in charge moving forward...for some reason, though, I think both Dallas and Philly will be 9-7. Skins 7-9 and the Giants will be last whatever record that brings to them.

 

That all changes if either Haskins or Jones (or both) surprise everyone and start playing like they belong from day one. If that happens, all bets are off for all four teams.

[Skinsinparadise]

10 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

I agree with ya about the crash-course results, as well as being ok with 4-12 if it puts Smith in charge moving forward...for some reason, though, I think both Dallas and Philly will be 9-7. Skins 7-9 and the Giants will be last whatever record that brings to them.

 

That all changes if either Haskins or Jones (or both) surprise everyone and start playing like they belong from day one. If that happens, all bets are off for all four teams.

 

 I have many in my family who are Giants fans I end up watching almost every Giant game.  And in my view, Beckham was huge for them.  Even in games where he wasn't putting up big numbers -- he dictated coverage and opened things up for others.  Gettleman for his high profile mistakes IMO actually has drafted fairly well.  And he's doing one part of it right in that he's focusing on the D line and O line.  However, IMO they are missing too many pieces now and have too many wildcards to be competitive.  So I see them 5-11 tops.  My fear for them is they end up so bad that they get J. Jeudy from Alabama who ironically plays a lot like Beckham IMO.  I want Jeudy here not in NY. 😀

 

The Eagles are loaded.  I see them 11-5.  Good offense.  Good defense.  Good special teams.  Their achilles heel is clearly can Wentz stay healthy?  We can tout for example our D line but it was the Eagles D line that had the monster PFF numbers last year not ours.  They are so balanced.  And they are good at using EVERY resource available to upgrade their roster.  They felt the running game and passing game needed more weapons.  So they made good trades and drafted IMO good players and now both positions look like a strength.  Part of the reason why I'd love Kyle to be elevated is I'd like to see the Redskins drafting prowess extended to pro personnel -- that is, FA and trades.  When it comes to pro personnel IMO the Eagles kick our butts.   I think we can compete with the Eagles in the draft but not pro personnel IMO.   I think Alex Santos gets a pass typically because he's so low profile so know one talks about him.  But to me as good as Kyle has been at drafting -- the pro personnel department led by Santos is one of the weakest in the NFL. 

 

Cowboys:  I am not a Dak guy.  But they win with sort of the Alex Smith strategy.  That is, a QB who doesn't win the game but also doesn't lose the game.  Ride with a running back who is a dominant.  Control the clock.  And their defense is really good.  It's better than our defense.  Our D line IMO might be better than theirs but not by a mile.  But we have just guys at MLB and they have monsters at that position who can shut down the run.  B. Jones is a star in the secondary.  They have their own more celebrated version of Kyle Smith in Will McClay who does mess with all personnel (college and pro) from what I understand.  I think its a 10-6 team. 

 

Redskins:  Haskins is the lottery ticket and as I said before he can be the guy who ultimately takes them out of the dungeon but I doubt that's happening this year.  Both McLaurin and Harmon was among my guys in the draft.  But I don't see either one as a #1 WR.  But I think they can be strong #2 types especially McLaurin.  But that might take some time.  I think the O line looms as a ticking time bomb just like the previous two years -- some injury prone players at key spots or in Scherff's case a player coming off a major injury -- backed up by very little.    I love the front 4 and love the depth of it, too.  The strength of the team.  I like the secondary better than most do.  I love the running backs.   My issue is the passing game is the main feature of the movie in today's NFL.  And Keenum or Colt IMO are just guys.  Haskins I think can be a 2020 factor not this year.  We don't have a true #1 receiver.  And our O line can just as easily fall apart this year as it did the previous 2.    I suspect this season goes like the last two.  We have some moments.  We have some fun.  But they hit a tough patch.  And the O line falls apart and we talk about how can this happen 3 years in a row.   So I'll go 8-8.  

 

To me the upside of the season unraveling again is this:  I'd like Kyle elevated.  I want them to attack O line depth.  I don't think they take the position as seriously as they should.  It almost feels to me a little like the patchwork on D line for years until they finally said enough is enough and went nuts to fix it.  It's not quite that bad.  But I don't like the depth at the position and Moses and Trent's propensity for injury make the combination of that dangerous IMO.  This coming draft is looking to be magical for receiver.  So a high draft pick would enable them to get a receiver like Jeudy, Lamb, C. Johnson, etc who can be a true #1. 

 

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

48 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The Eagles are loaded.  I see them 11-5.  Good offense.  Good defense.  Good special teams.  Their achilles heel is clearly can Wentz stay healthy?  We can tout for example our D line but it was the Eagles D line that had the monster PFF numbers last year not ours.  They are so balanced.  And they are good at using EVERY resource available to upgrade their roster.  They felt the running game and passing game needed more weapons.  So they made good trades and drafted IMO good players and now both positions look like a strength.  Part of the reason why I'd love Kyle to be elevated is I'd like to see the Redskins drafting prowess extended to pro personnel -- that is, FA and trades.  When it comes to pro personnel IMO the Eagles kick our butts.   I think we can compete with the Eagles in the draft but not pro personnel IMO.   I think Alex Santos gets a pass typically because he's so low profile so know one talks about him.  But to me as good as Kyle has been at drafting -- the pro personnel department led by Santos is one of the weakest in the NFL. 

 

1

 

Even with Wentz and the Dline with monster PFF numbers last year, the Eagles were 4-6 after 10 games. They had to pull a Redskins-like 5-1 run at the end of the season to make it to 9-7. Assuming Wentz stays healthy all year and has improved--which could be a coin toss at this point--there are too many really good teams on their schedule for me to have much faith in them having 10+ wins. Their last 5 games, though, do have the potential to be rather winnable imo. So they could pull 10 wins out of their ass lol...