Makaveli

The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Your point though barks up a different trees.  You are suggesting since Kyle scouted them in college they must be using his college reports in the soup of their decision making.  Yeah of course they use reports of everyone as to going back to their college reports.  Jay talked about this specifically. I'd bet every team does that.    Still its been Santos-Doug-Bruce -- at least according to people who cover the team running pro scouting and not Kyle Smith or a heavy doses of Kyle.  As Russell said last season and if I recall someone else did too -- they were trying to incorporate Kyle some in their decision making during that season.  But that was depicted as a new development as opposed to something that's been going on for years.  As for what the reality is -- you got me.  But that narrative makes sense to me.  

 

Yeah but that's what I'm saying the first part. Say player x is coming out. We do an extensive draft analysis of him because we like him. Then we can't draft him for whatever reason. Then 4 years later he's available for free agency. If course of there's stuff like real game film on the guy or stuff like injuries that needs to be considered, but it seems like our low ball bottom of the rostet approach has depended on guys who don't have a lot of game film, thus we're depending on something like the scouting report more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Yeah but that's what I'm saying the first part. Say player x is coming out. We do an extensive draft analysis of him because we like him. Then we can't draft him for whatever reason. Then 4 years later he's available for free agency. If course of there's stuff like real game film on the guy or stuff like injuries that needs to be considered, but it seems like our low ball bottom of the rostet approach has depended on guys who don't have a lot of game film, thus we're depending on something like the scouting report more. 

 

Yeah as far as I know EVERY team uses their initial draft analysis on every player in FA.  I doubt though they live and die by it as for veterans who've played in the league where you have NFL game tape.  But yeah on the occasion when someone is a young FA or is released like Reuben Foster or Brantley it would fall under Kyle's scouting from the last 3 years or so.  But those aren't the typical FAs.  But I agree with your point from the perspective of young guys who unexpectedly become available without much NFL tape -- that would fall under Kyle's scouting since the college tape is more recent and relevant.

 

I doubt for example it was Kyle who said go get Alex Smith or Keenum or McClain or McGee on and on.  And by and large whether it was with Cerrato at the helm or with Bruce at the helm they've been mostly poor IMO at both FA and trades.  If anything oddly Vinny has had the higher highs and for that matter the lower lows as to both trades and FA.  The Santana Moss trade was arguably the best one in Dan's era.  The 2004 FA crop helped turned a bad defense into a good one.  London Fletcher is arguably the best FA signing in Dan's era.  Then we got the lows like the Lloyd and Duckett trades. 

 

Bruce as for as trades has arguably been at least as bad as Vinny's moves -- J. Brown, RG3, Alex, McNabb, etc.  It doesn't matter to me if there was logic behind the moves -- the results are what they are.   Bruce's FA signings have not been as bad as Vinny IMO because he doesn't have those colossal misses that also kill the cap.  I think if anything that summaries Bruce in FA well -- he doesn't score much and doesn't strike out much either at least in terms of players being combined busts (he has had plenty of those) AND cap killers (really no cap killers so that's been IMO his forte).  Both Vinny and Bruce stink at getting value for their own players in trades.  Belichick for example (ditto the eagles and some other teams but not as much) unloads players who want to leave or are almost past the prime for good value.  That's a game Vinny and Bruce don't play.  We give up draft capital in trades we rarely gain draft capital back.  We are typically buyers not sellers and when we sell we don't get much.  With the exception of trading in the draft itself.

 

But anyway my point at large is i am impressed with Kyle Smith and the developments I've been hearing for years as for college scouting.  I like it.  And I don't think per se I am stating the obvious because like I said not everyone on this board agrees with that.  So plant me in the homer category for the college scouting.  As for pro scouting, I've been most unimpressed with both Vinny and Bruce.  And heck even though I like Scot as for college scouting-- I didn't care for him in FA either.  the only plug I'd give Scot on pro scouting was I think he did a good job at getting in season replacements for injured players.   So I'd love to see what Kyle can do overseeing everything.  I've never been impressed with their pro scouting under any regime.  As Sheehan likes to joke, show me one trade where the Redskins won it versus being on the losing end.  I think there are a couple of stragglers in that mix but mostly he's right IMO.  

 

I am going on a tangent now so this isn't directed at you but just explaining my mindset. As for Dan-Bruce's defenders.  You all don't came at it the same way.  I agree with points of some of the perspectives.  With you, I do agree that I like the emphasis on the draft.  There are a couple of people who defend them who say hey I'd be singing a different tune if they got the QB position right because that helps obfuscate a lot of things.  I actually am totally on board with that point.  That's from what I can tell Wit33's perspective.  I am somewhat on board with that point.  With the disclaimer that they themselves aren't absolved from their past QB miscues.  But if they finally get it right it would likely be a game changer.

 

I think the problem with being average to below average at the QB position is that it puts a lot of burden for the rest to go perfect.  Maybe it can come together that way for a season or two.  Like the year the Jags had a killer defense and rode to the championship.  Denver has done it, too etc.  But it's really hard to do let alone do it and sustain it.  The exception arguably being the Ravens though Flacco in his heyday was arguably better than just average.

 

So to me when I hear the tract of they are doing it right but they just need more time.  We just got to be patient and let it ride and it may take years but just patiently stick with it.  I get the spirit of the point which is patient pays.  But thinking about it purely from a football standpoint -- for me its absurd.    There are plenty of examples of teams going 2-3 years from bad to good including even SB victories.   But here's the key variable there was a QB in that mix.  I don't care how many Daron Payne's you draft IMO you will at best find fleeting success if you have guys like Keenum at QB or Campbell or Brunell or whomever.  You need a Brees, Ryan, Rodgers, Rivers, etc to be consistently good.  Even that is no guarantee because their teams have had hiccups but you always have a shot to go all the way or being in the playoffs back to back seasons.  Having two years in a row of winning records here would be the Holy Grail -- imagine playoffs back to back?    And yes that world is doable if Haskins ends up the right guy.  And IMO we wouldn't have to sweat all the FO moves the same way.   Your margin to make errors and recover from that gets ten times easier if you have a QB IMO.   

 

Without a QB, I'd put money that we will be having the same conversation 5 years from now.  Not saying they don't have their once every 4 years squeak into the playoffs and get bounced out season.  But we won't feel like the team has arrived as being one of the consistent success stories in the league like the Steelers, Ravens, Saints, etc.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

Redskins owner rolls up in $180M yacht to find title sponsor for new stadium

June 18, 2019 | 11:03am

 
Enlarge Image
Dany Snyder and his $180m yacht in Cannes.
Dany Snyder and his $180m yacht in Cannes.
 

Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder roared up to Cannes Lions in his $180 million yacht as ad sources speculated he’s in town to find a title sponsor for the team’s new stadium.

Snyder, worth an estimated $2.2 billion, hopes to build a new facility at the site of RFK Stadium — the team’s historic former home — in DC. He has reportedly been working with congressional Republicans and the Trump administration to include language in a new federal spending bill that would help pave the way for the new stadium.

The Redskins’ lease for their current stadium, FedEx Field in Landover, Maryland, expires in 2027, but Snyder has made it clear he’d like the team to leave the facility earlier if they can.

Snyder is at Cannes Lions on his dazzling, brand-new, 93-meter, 3,000-ton Feadship mega-yacht, called Lady S, which is so big — a football field in length — it couldn’t even fit in the Port du Cannes, and has instead been parked alongside the sea wall opposite the Palais, where the daily Cannes Lions speeches and presentations take place.

The Lady S is the only yacht in the world with an IMAX cinema inside. It also boasts a basketball court, a glass-bottomed pool on the deck and a huge helicopter pad.

On Monday night, Snyder hosted a dinner and party on board with guests including Julie Haddon, SVP global brand and consumer marketing for the NFL, and Andy Sriubas, chief commercial officer of Outfront Media.

 

One Cannes Lions source told Page Six, “Dan and his team are here to find a title sponsor for the new stadium for the Redskins, and they are taking meetings with brands and marketers.”

The source added that the controversy over the team’s name and logo could make the deal more difficult because some brands may shy away. But Snyder has insisted he would never change the team name, despite increasing pressure to do so from Native American groups.

However, the source added, “NFL franchises are so lucrative, they’ll surely be able to sign a new title sponsor for the stadium.”

A second Cannes source insisted that Snyder, who has owned the Redskins for 20 years, and his team are laid-back about the sponsor search, and are at Cannes Lions this year mostly to mingle.

The source said, “They say they have until 2028 to find a sponsor for the new stadium, so there’s no rush. They are here to meet people and be part of the conversation.”

 

https://pagesix.com/2019/06/18/redskins-owner-rolls-up-in-180m-yacht-to-find-title-sponsor-for-teams-new-stadium/?utm_source=P6Twitter&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=SocialFlow

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think if that happens below, Bruce might finally see the door?  But I doubt it ends that bad.  I am thinking 8-8.

 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trent n the skins will get things worked out he'll be back to pro form and in Callahan we trust...we actually finally hit the jack pot in the wr department and keenum suprises folks keeping the rookie on the bench the double headed monster in Guice and AP is released 86 and Davis have a good year and the d finishes top ten..15-1..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2-14 with Haskins flashing the last 6 games and Kyle Smith being elevated to GM and in charge of hiring the new HC is my dream. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

2-14 with Haskins flashing the last 6 games and Kyle Smith being elevated to GM and in charge of hiring the new HC is my dream. 

 

16-0 and winning the SB with Haskins starting every game and Kyle Smith being elevated to GM and not needing to hire a new HC right away while Bruce Allen retires having helped bring the team another Super Bowl trophy and returned the Skins back into DC is my dream...you gotta dream bigger, amigo lol....

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

16-0 and winning the SB with Haskins starting every game and Kyle Smith being elevated to GM and not needing to hire a new HC right away while Bruce Allen retires having helped bring the team another Super Bowl trophy and returned the Skins back into DC is my dream...you gotta dream bigger, amigo lol....

 

 

 

I don't find that to be realistic, whereas I consider mine a hopeful, but realistic dream. Maybe "dream" was the wrong word. But my scenario could actually happen in this timeline lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

16-0 and winning the SB with Haskins starting every game and Kyle Smith being elevated to GM and not needing to hire a new HC right away while Bruce Allen retires having helped bring the team another Super Bowl trophy and returned the Skins back into DC is my dream...you gotta dream bigger, amigo lol....

 

 

 

So, 19-0? :P

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

I don't find that to be realistic, whereas I consider mine a hopeful, but realistic dream. Maybe "dream" was the wrong word. But my scenario could actually happen in this timeline lol.

 

Totally honest question but do you really think 2-14 is realistic? I’m perplexed by that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

I don't find that to be realistic, whereas I consider mine a hopeful, but realistic dream. Maybe "dream" was the wrong word. But my scenario could actually happen in this timeline lol.

 

I think they have a better shot to go 2-14 than 14-2.  But I admit either one would shock me.

 

Statistically speaking right now they have the easiest schedule in the NFL.  The passing game might end up "meh" again albeit I like some of the young receivers but they might need time.  The running game though and defense I think are too good to let the team sink that far down. 

 

I think the one thing that can derail the season fast is the O line.  I've talked about it in another thread.  Arguably the last 2 seasons have been derailed by O line injuries. And this season to me looks nothing different as to falling to the same problem 3 seasons in a row unless they get some luck for a change.  They replaced one of the injury prone O lineman but IMO the depth has gotten worse not better unless Christian develops this year.  So if we lose Trent for the standard it seems 4 games and Moses gets banged up and we replace them with Catalina and Eric Flowers the season can go off the rails quick.  O line is arguably the position that hurts most when you lose guys.   And out super sub on the O line, Nsekhe is gone.  

 

The thing that befuddles me is most NFL media, odds makers, draft geeks, power rankers (albeit not all) think the Giants are better than the Redskins.  I don't get that.  I do get that no one puts them above Philly and Dallas but NY, too?

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man what a brutal schedule to open the season BUT we are not going to lose the first 5 games.  I think we split with the Girls and Midgets winning the first games coming out of the gate, along with the Bears. I have us going 3-2 over the first five games.   I do not see us beating the Patriots or Eagles but I could be wrong.  Depends upon how Wentz plays in that one.   We tend to fall apart as the season progresses as we accumulate injuries.  If we stay healthy we  have a chance to actually go 8-8 this year but I am thinking more 6-10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything is possible but 2-14 is highly unlikely and even he knows that.

 

They do these things for ratings and they gotta throw some teams under the bus with their guesses otherwise the whole thing would be even more dull and pointless than it already is..

I'll bet if you put a gun to his head and asked him to set the over under on skins wins this year with the threat of pulling the trigger if he was off by more than two games, you'd see him singing a whole new tune about how he thinks our season will play out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 

Totally honest question but do you really think 2-14 is realistic? I’m perplexed by that.

 

...more realistic than 16-0 with a SB? lol. Yes. It's well within the range of possible outcomes, and I prefer it, long term, to the other end of the range that could reasonably happen and that's a 9-7/10-6 Wildcard type season where we end up with more Gruden and Allen. Is it likely to happen? No. But I'd prefer my scenario to what we're likely to get. 

Edited by ConnSKINS26
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm largely inclined (as usual) to agree with @Skinsinparadise.  Our offensive line has really prevented us from getting a feel for what this offense can actually do, including the offensive line.  Our injuries are just crazy.  By the end of last year, two positions were at their third depth (no offseason with the team), two others were at their second, and the only starter was basically new because he hadn't worked with any of these guys.

 

The only analog I can think of is the scabs team.  Yeah, they had the uniform, but they weren't actually the team that was meant to play.  Also our then-fourth-string quarterback.  The offensive line isn't just preventing us from winning, it's preventing us from seeing if any of this would work if they weren't hurt.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

...more realistic than 16-0 with a SB? lol. Yes. It's well within the range of possible outcomes, and I prefer it, long term, to the other end of the range that could reasonably happen and that's a 9-7/10-6 Wildcard type season where we end up with more Gruden and Allen. Is it likely to happen? No. But I'd prefer my scenario to what we're likely to get. 

 

Let’s start with yes, I do agree it’s more likely than a SB and undefeated season.

 

But this feels like the same old song and dance as last year when I heard all about Vegas odds and being last in the division and the Giants are a better team, etc.

 

The harsh reality is that this won’t be a SB team till we get the horses at QB and WR to truly threaten teams vertically. We are hoping we have the future at QB but realistically he needs at least a year. And next off season will be all about OL more passing weapons for Dwayne and perhaps FS/CB.

 

All that being said, this team boasts a potentially scary front 7 and the horses at RB that I just can’t at all see 2-14 being a remote possibility. I understand you prefer it but the team is too talented to bottom out like that. I think a 7-9 8-8 type season where O’Connell gets the reigns and Kyle Smith gets the keys to the kingdom is a much more preferable outcome than totally stinking and getting the number one pick. 7-9 or 8-8 will not keep Bruce and Jay in place. It’s playoffs or bust.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post. Although I think 8-8 could absolutely delay Bruce Allen's firing even if Gruden can't survive it. That terrifies me. 

 

I find it interesting that so many people are so high on O'Connell...not just as an OC (who himself confirmed he won't call plays unless Gruden asks for one) but even as a potential successor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Good post. Although I think 8-8 could absolutely delay Bruce Allen's firing even if Gruden can't survive it. That terrifies me. 

So much this.  Bruce is Teflon at Redskins Park.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 

Let’s start with yes, I do agree it’s more likely than a SB and undefeated season.

 

But this feels like the same old song and dance as last year when I heard all about Vegas odds and being last in the division and the Giants are a better team, etc.

 

The harsh reality is that this won’t be a SB team till we get the horses at QB and WR to truly threaten teams vertically. We are hoping we have the future at QB but realistically he needs at least a year. And next off season will be all about OL more passing weapons for Dwayne and perhaps FS/CB.

 

All that being said, this team boasts a potentially scary front 7 and the horses at RB that I just can’t at all see 2-14 being a remote possibility. I understand you prefer it but the team is too talented to bottom out like that. I think a 7-9 8-8 type season where O’Connell gets the reigns and Kyle Smith gets the keys to the kingdom is a much more preferable outcome than totally stinking and getting the number one pick. 7-9 or 8-8 will not keep Bruce and Jay in place. It’s playoffs or bust.

 

I mostly agree wit what you stated. The problem is that another middle of the road performance leaves ambiguity. It will depend how they got there. for example if another season like last one happens - a hot start but then injuries at least are blamed for a collapse there could be an argument made to dan that they have the team they just need a few pieces. Or, if they start slow but finish strong say because they put in Haskins and maybe a few other rookies. They have a case they are close and again may get another year as is - meaning bruce keeps his job. The wild card here is fans in the seats. That could trump it all but I will leave that out of this discussion other than saying it is a lurking variable. 

 

I think the reason people want one extreme or the other is that it takes out the gray area. If they have a really successful season (make the POs and get at least 1 win) then no one could argue letting them continue. If they fall flat - say 5-11 or worse, then it's clear changes have to be made. 

 

I agree the most likely outcome is that 7-9 to 9-7 area which leaves it too much gray area - at least for me. It should be **** or get off the pot time for bruce. If jay is a casualty so be it but I would be Ok with seeing how he does with a competent GM. At least one that does not rely on getting FA bargains that are injured and keeping oft injured players, and then bemoaning injuries as why they fall apart. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Judging by what beat guys have said Jay unlikely survives a mediocre season unless there is a surge at the end especially with Haskins being a good part of that plot.

 

With Bruce, the message seems more mixed.  From what I can gather from those narratives what makes its complicated with Bruce is this

 

A.  The stadium, the stadium, the stadium.  This is one subject I know a little about granted from a totally different context.  And i'll just say this from that perspective, it was a master stroke from Bruce not to hire lobbyists to push this.  From what I observed many teams not only hire well-connected lobbyists but hire multiple ones.  It's one heck of a difficult undertaking.   So Bruce putting it on his own shoulders makes him mega invaluable to Dan.  Granted it likely makes it more difficult to land the actual stadium.  But if its all about Bruce and I would guess his brother connections -- Dan would likely feel apprehensive to dislodge all of that work in mid play for the stadium to start over again.

 

B.  Bruce from what I hear has good social skills and is comfortable in his own skin.  Dan on the other hand (multiple have said) can be socially awkward.  Bruce from what's being said has turned into Dan's social crutch.  Heck Bruce represents Dan at some owner meetings when Dan isn't even present.  And Bruce has become the do everything dude at Redskins Park.  He represents Dan at owners meetings.  Lately, he has become the team's spokesperson (while Dan has gone Greta Garbo).  He is head of personnel.  He is head of business.  He is head of the pursuing of the stadium.    I am not a big fan of Bruce to say the least.  But I can't say the dude doesn't work hard or doesn't have much on his plate.  As Jerry Brewer likes to say if Dan fired Bruce who does he replace him with that he can trust let alone cover all those duties.

 

C.  Some say Dan has a pretty close circle of people around him and doesn't trust too many.  Bruce is the top dog in his circle of trust.  And supposedly Bruce just like Vinny has become a close pal who he socializes with a lot including being a fun drinking buddy.   

 

My take is for Bruce to go, the season needs to go south with another round of poor ticket sales and declining TV ratings coupled with another Fire Bruce campaign. At least according to some beat-radio guys like Paulsen, Bruce has convinced people (presuming Dan, too) that the fire Bruce movement wasn't personal but he was just the natural target since he has the highest position and people had to take it out on someone based on how the season ended.   More or less, Alex got hurt.  Fans loved us and the season until that point then it went south and they were frustrated and they had to blame someone.  Next year it all will be fine.  I get the impression it might be something like that.

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic, what's below.  I presume that has much to do with factoring in Alex Smith.  Wonder if Sharp stops pounding the Redskins -- now that they actually hired an analytics guy.  I get the whole the Redskins are ranked 120th out of 122 teams years back on analytics.   And I bet Howie Roseman among others (who has lectured on analytics) can run rings around Bruce in that department.  But I wonder if they finally get a little love for working to catch up on that front.  

 

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/18/2019 at 12:33 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

nlarge Image

Dany Snyder and his $180m yacht in Cannes.
Dany Snyder and his $180m yacht in Cannes.

 

Does anybody know where I can get a sub with torpedoes?   Asking for a friend...

 

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.