The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

[wit33]

@Skinsinparadise

 

The perspective of seeing your own kids not as excited for the season is one I haven’t given much thought to (my little man is just 5). Interesting.

 

Up to this point in my life, the Skins represents an interest that I’m in control of, but if I saw my son losing or not being interested at all in the team, because they’re not winning that has the potential to increase my angst with the franchise as a whole. 

 

Nahhh.... I’d probably turn it in to a life lesson of remaining patient and making the best of being an average or mediocre (because that sounds better for the upset fan lol) franchise and appreciating the journey to the eventual promise land. 

 

Either way, I appreciate the added perspective. 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, wit33 said:

@Skinsinparadise

 

The perspective of seeing your own kids not as excited for the season is one I haven’t given much thought to (my little man is just 5). Interesting.

 

 

It doesn't drive me crazy or anything.  My main point on that front is it's interesting to see what star power can do to offset mediocrity or losing as to generating excitement especially with kids.  I really battle hard with their other side of the family who are mostly Giant fans.  And for me its an interesting side by side comparison considering the Giants haven't been hot of late.

 

My kids know Beckham (part of the reason why I was thrilled to see him gone was personal for me -- it wasn't hard for me to see that they saw him as an exciting player and better than anyone on the Redskins).  The dude has commercials and is all over the news.  He puts the Giants in conversation regardless of their record.  And the fact that they had Barkley and Beckham on the same team last year wasn't easy for me to offset.  😀  I've pulled it off thus far by being much more stubborn and persistent as to selling them on the Redskins than my in-laws have been with the Giants.  Otherwise, I'd put money that they'd be Giant fans. 

 

3 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

Nahhh.... I’d probably turn it in to a life lesson of remaining patient and making the best of being an average or mediocre (because that sounds better for the upset fan lol) franchise and appreciating the journey to the eventual promise land. 

 

Not that easy I think to sell that narrative to kids as to just hang in there.  Though I admit its part of the narrative that I use.  This point I've also heard from other people who cover the team who grew up Redskins fans, I recall Finlay among others saying their friends' kids are fans of other teams in frequent numbers which they didn't see in their youth in the DMV.

 

Moving the point back to star power, part of that I think is fantasy football and the heavier stressing on stars on sports shows, social media, etc.    What's cooler wearing for example an Antonio Brown jersey or Jamison Crowder (back when he was here)?

 

Some on the draft thread think Kyle is overrated as for his drafts.  I get the point on one front.  We've had some good drafts but nothing earth shattering where the team's streak of failing to land elite type players (Trent notwithstanding) has been broken.  At least not yet.   I think this draft has the potential to do that.  I hope.  Guice if he can stay healthy might be that guy.  Will see.   I've liked the drafts.  But I am hoping one of these guys drafted really explode. 

 

I do think this team not having must see players is part of the issue here -- not for people like us who will watch anything but more casual fans and young ones.   When RG3 was killing it in 2012, the stadium was full and the TV ratings were high.  I don't think 8-8 seasons without an Antonio Brown, Beckham, Barkley, Drew Brees type is going to keep people in the seats.  My point is if they can land a real bonafide star then they can survive the 8-8 seasons I think a lot easier. 

 

You and I might be the most hardcore on this site (albeit we are coming at it from different angles) about the power of a franchise QB.  Forgetting all the water under the bridge with Dan-Bruce, etc -- I indeed think the odds are good that the team becomes consistently good if Haskins ends up the real deal regardless of what else they do.   It's really difficult to win in this league if you are mediocre or less than that at QB -- regardless of how many Daron Paynes you draft.   But if you don't have a franchise QB and in turn you are unlikely to be a perennial playoff team then i think you need some star power to offset that. 

 

[JoggingGod]

Haskins being a star or even a good QB is huge for the team. They need a face of the franchise for once (that’s not Snyder).

[bakedtater1]

4 hours ago, JoggingGod said:

Haskins being a star or even a good QB is huge for the team. They need a face of the franchise for once (that’s not Snyder).

With all  due respect..and I mean all due...I wouldn't hold my hand over my ass...how many times have we been down that road since 99'?...I prey to the gods haskins is finally "that guy" more than anything buuuut I've learned to pump the brakes.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

11 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was on board with the mediocrity initially.   It felt better than stinking.  But now I am off of that, I'd rather go 4-12 than 8-8 especially with the next draft looming to be IMO epically exciting where we got the chance to get a potential star like J. Jeudy.  As for anger-sadness, a lot of it is about my kids, i can tell that they aren't hyped about this team and i've seen them hyped in the past.  I am headed to training camp for a few days starting next week and i can tell they can care less.   🙁

3

 

My post wasn't really about records, it was more about the approach. Their approach as of late pretty much eschewed searching for star power to add sizzle and relevance to the franchise, and I was saying while I'm not liking the drop in relevancy and importance I am liking the approach. If lower importance of the franchise is the trade-off for the approach then I'll be less bothered by our decline in relevancy and SNF appearances and the rest, mainly because I'm an absolute believer that this roster is becoming infused with real, bonafide, young talent that is only gonna grow and improve year after year after year. And I'd rather go 4-12 with less relevancy but better roster building than go 4-12 with more relevancy due to Dan and Bruce trying to grab some star power for another year or two. Put another way, I prefer getting Keenum for relative peanuts as a band-aid and drafting Haskins without having to move up, to trading multiple high draft picks to trade up and get Kyler Murray because he has guaranteed star power. And agree completely with the kids losing interest angle lol...seeing my daughter in a Bengals hoodie--geez. I mean, she does live in Ohio, but still lol...she used to text me about the Skins winning. She hasn't done that in years.

 

And yeah, I included Payne probably because I was wanting to say the DLine as a whole lol...and for some reason I don't see Ioannidis having star power no matter how good he gets--can't explain why, though. Maybe I would have been better off saying Landon Collins instead...Allen, Sweat, Collins, and Haskins each have potential star power, and we added all four without the need to improve relevancy really being a big part of it. As much as guys like Sheehan want to claim signing Collins was Dan's way of energizing the fan base more than anything, we had a HUGE gaping hole at safety and have for over a decade. We needed to stop recycling C-grade veteran safeties in that spot and find a genuine answer. And our QB unit was disastrous if from an injury standpoint if nothing else...drafting a QB like Haskins made all the sense in the world, even if Alex Smith were healthy enough to start the season.

 

I think Sweat has the making of a powerhouse with star potential, especially lining him up with Allen, Payne, Ioannidis, and Kerrigan. One nice thing I've seen visiting other teams' message boards is even though other teams' fans will still describe the Skins as a dumpster fire that doesn't scare them and how Dan has ruined the franchise, they almost always add in the caveat that "their defense is gonna be really good, though, especially that DLine. That alone might keep them in the playoff hunt." (or words very similar). It's like the Redskins are being undeniably linked by a lot of other fans around the league with having a good, strong, tough defense that'll be difficult to go up against.

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

My post wasn't really about records, it was more about the approach. Their approach as of late pretty much eschewed searching for star power to add sizzle and relevance to the franchise, and I was saying while I'm not liking the drop in relevancy and importance I am liking the approach. If lower importance of the franchise is the trade-off for the approach then I'll be less bothered by our decline in relevancy and SNF appearances and the rest, mainly because I'm an absolute believer that this roster is becoming infused with real, bonafide, young talent that is only gonna grow and improve year after year after year. And I'd rather go 4-12 with less relevancy but better roster building than go 4-12 with more relevancy due to Dan and Bruce trying to grab some star power for another year or two. Put another way, I prefer getting Keenum for relative peanuts as a band-aid and drafting Haskins without having to move up, to trading multiple high draft picks to trade up and get Kyler Murray because he has guaranteed star power

 

I'd agree with it if I thought they were building something really good but I don't.  I am not on the other extreme either, I don't think this roster stinks.  It's OK.  It's not on the verge IMO on being better than OK and its not on the verge of stinking.   I think they are building a team set for mediocrity UNLESS Haskins works out.  If Haskins works out then I think they are cooking with oil.  Will see.   I don't really think old school Dan was all about star power either.  I don't doubt he wanted it but he didn't pull it off.   People recall his first foray into FA as to getting some of the over hill the stars but otherwise this team hasn't really had elite players.  They did have some more interesting characters who were good like Cooley and Portis but they weren't among the best of the best in the NFL.   I think Dan generated excitement more via splashy coaching hires.  My point now isn't really about anything splashy aside from go get a spanking new stadium.  I think that would do it.  But based on what I've heard and read (yeah granted they might be wrong) it doesn't sound like they are doing a great job of securing said stadium.   And if they don't get a stadium that would energize the fan base some and instead stay on the track they are in (unless Haskins works out), I think they will stick to a downward trajectory as for attendance and TV ratings.  

 

7 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

And yeah, I included Payne probably because I was wanting to say the DLine as a whole lol...and for some reason I don't see Ioannidis having star power no matter how good he gets--can't explain why, though. Maybe I would have been better off saying Landon Collins instead...Allen, Sweat, Collins, and Haskins each have potential star power, and we added all four without the need to improve relevancy really being a big part of it. As much as guys like Sheehan want to claim signing Collins was Dan's way of energizing the fan base more than anything, we had a HUGE gaping hole at safety and have for over a decade. We needed to stop recycling C-grade veteran safeties in that spot and find a genuine answer. And our QB unit was disastrous if from an injury standpoint if nothing else...drafting a QB like Haskins made all the sense in the world, even if Alex Smith were healthy enough to start the season.

 

I've seen you tout the Collins signing from time to time.  And I am one of the people who like it too.  But I wouldn't count that one in the win column yet albeit I personally think it will pan out well.  That move has been criticized by plenty in the national media -- even typically pollyanna Peter Schrager goes man talking to people around the league that's the move he heard panned the most.   We got some smart people on this board who didn't like the move.  It's a lot of money for essentially a strong safety who is also coming back from shoulder surgery.   So while i am with you myself on it.  I've always liked Collins.  I do have some caution on it.  At the very least it's not a slam dunk universally embraced move. 

 

I disagree with Sheehan in that the signing energized the fan base.  Maybe a little but to me Collins is really good but not a superstar.  And I don't think he will bring fans to the stadium.   In his defense though a strong safety really even if elite (which I don't think Collins is) isn't the type to bring in fans aside from ironically Sean Taylor who ended up playing more free at the end than strong.   Sheehan's larger point is he's heard over the years that Dan has been hands off as for personnel and defended him on that point (as I have here) but he heard that changed this off season and Collins and Haskins were primarily his doing and his push - along with the defensive coordinator search earlier in the off season.    As for whether he's right?  I don't know.  There are multiple reporters who agree with him on one of those moves but as for the other I haven't heard.  Though i don't want to re-litigate that point here since I don't really care about it at the moment. 

 

Jonathan Allen to me isn't a star but he has the potential to be one, hopefully this is that season.  He I think on defense has the best shot at it.  Sweat should be interesting, love the dude as a prospect, some say he's immature and might not live up to his potential.  Will see.  I am jazzed about him.  Haskins I am back and forth on.  But Qbs are such wildcards so what do I know -- so I'll let it play out and see.  As i've beaten the dead horse -- Haskins making or not making it to me is everything.  IMO it doesn't matter typically how loaded your roster is if you don't have a QB.  And I don't think the Redskins roster is loaded so they in particular need a QB. 

 

As for Kyle Murray, I love him as a prospect.  I worry about his durability though.  Guys that have star power -- I don't mean that personality has to come hand in hand with it.  Julio Jones is superstar but he's a boring personality.  Barkley, too.  Plenty of stars are boring but they are elite-great players.  Under Dan's reign (aside from Trent) we don't do great-elite whether its old school or new school Dan.  IMO if they want to be relevant during mediocre stretches they need a player or two who people will come to watch just to see them play.  Now if they finally find that elusive franchise QB my point is irrelevant -- because that means you are going to be a perennial winner.    But without a QB IMO I don't care how many good drafts you have -- you are likely going to be treading water.  Every now and then you got an exception where the defense carries the day but its typically short lived.   And frankly I don't think they have it in them to build an elite roster that you can win with in spite of a QB.  In their defense, few teams could.  It's rare.  You can argue Ozzie Newsome sort of did that in Baltimore.  But still their best years was when Flacco was at least good. 

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I'd agree with it if I thought they were building something really good but I don't.  I am not on the other extreme either, I don't think this roster stinks.  It's OK.  It's not on the verge IMO on being better than OK and its not on the verge of stinking.   I think they are building a team set for mediocrity UNLESS Haskins works out.  If Haskins works out then I think they are cooking with oil.  Will see.   I don't really think old school Dan was all about star power either.  I don't doubt he wanted it but he didn't pull it off.   People recall his first foray into FA as to getting some of the over hill the stars but otherwise this team hasn't really had elite players.  They did have some more interesting characters who were good like Cooley and Portis but they weren't among the best of the best in the NFL.   I think Dan generated excitement more via splashy coaching hires. 

 

 

I've seen you tout the Collins signing from time to time.  And I am one of the people who like it too.  But I wouldn't count that one in the win column yet albeit I personally think it will pan out well.  That move has been criticized by plenty in the national media -- even typically pollyanna Peter Schrager goes man talking to people around the league that's the move he heard panned the most.   We got some smart people on this board who didn't like the move.  It's a lot of money for essentially a strong safety who is also coming back from shoulder surgery.   So while i am with you myself on it.  I've always liked Collins.  I do have some caution on it.  At the very least it's not a slam dunk universally embraced move.

24

 

- I think the defense being built will be far more than "OK". Too much proven talent that is still extremely young on that side of the ball. The offense is filled with question marks and health issues to make any kind of knowledgeable, informed guesses as to whether or not it's on the right path...and any team without a legit QB is built for mediocrity, at least in terms of record. But I also believe that any team with either a very strong offense or very strong defense can overcome a lot in any given year  (other than injuries). Obviously, I do believe the Skins have been building a defense set for far more than just mediocrity over the next few years.

 

- I've found that the majority of the criticism of the Collins signing centers around the amount paid for a "box safety", not because they believe Collins' value to the Skins defense won't be significant in a multitude of ways. It kind of reminded me of the criticism aimed at drafting Scherff because 'you don't draft a guard at #5". "you don't pay a box safety that much money"..."you don't draft a guard at #5"...when both guys are studs those are irrelevant criticisms imo.

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

- I think the defense being built will be far more than "OK". Too much proven talent that is still extremely young on that side of the ball. The offense is filled with question marks and health issues to make any kind of knowledgeable, informed guesses as to whether or not it's on the right path...and any team without a legit QB is built for mediocrity, at least in terms of record. But I also believe that any team with either a very strong offense or very strong defense can overcome a lot in any given year  (other than injuries). Obviously, I do believe the Skins have been building a defense set for far more than just mediocrity over the next few years.

 

 OK but I didn't say their defense is built to be OK.  I don't piecemeal units when I generalize a team on the aggregate .   Their D line has moved from being one of the weakest in the league to one of the best.  At the same time their passing unit has IMO degraded from one of the best into one of the worst.   The D line depth is better than ever.  IMO their O line depth is bad.   I can go on and on.  This is good.  This is bad.  This is so so. 

 

Like I said they make progress somewhere, get worse other places.  On the aggregate they don't put it together great IMO.  They don't put it together poorly either.  So so IMO.  The 8-8 runs fit to a tee IMO.  They won't be a threat to the power house teams in the league but also won't be at the bottom of the league. 

 

We can just focus on the best part of the roster.  We can also just focus on the worst.  But plenty of us zone in on the ups and downs and are somewhere in the middle.  That's where i am at.  

 

3 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

- I've found that the majority of the criticism of the Collins signing centers around the amount paid for a "box safety", not because they believe Collins' value to the Skins defense won't be significant in a multitude of ways. It kind of reminded me of the criticism aimed at drafting Scherff because 'you don't draft a guard at #5". "you don't pay a box safety that much money"..."you don't draft a guard at #5"...when both guys are studs those are irrelevant criticisms imo.

 

Again let me preface things with I am among the pro Collins people.  But to summarize the criticism its more or less this -- it doesn't take a rocket scientist to throw lot of money at a FA, the question is value and value does matter in the salary cap age.  Going hard on some position means you got to go softer on another, etc.  There are some who think the Redskins overpaid for Collins.  I am not among them.  But I do get why plenty don't see this as slam dunk home run signing.  I just think those people will be pleasantly surprised.  He's a good player and a good leader.   Will see.   

 

But back to the overall point.  This is a FO IMO that is up and down.  Makes me think of the Seinfeld episode where Jerry talks up losing on one front but gaining it back on another.  It evens out.  To me the Redskins version of that is a FO that makes good decisions, bad decisions, so so ones -- and on the aggregate its so so.   That makes me sound negative to the homers but in the context of national opinion, i am actually closer to being a homer considering much of the national observers see this FO as really bad and thereby much worse than so so. 

 

But anyway I hope Haskins breaks that logjam because if he is the goods like i said that's the game changer.   If he isn't, we IMO are going to stick to the same treadmill we've been on with Dan for the last 20 years.  

 

 

 

 

[bakedtater1]

The above clip is so spot on redskins!!..thanks sip..that was hilarious!..

[Wildbunny]

23 hours ago, Califan007 said:

- I've found that the majority of the criticism of the Collins signing centers around the amount paid for a "box safety", not because they believe Collins' value to the Skins defense won't be significant in a multitude of ways. It kind of reminded me of the criticism aimed at drafting Scherff because 'you don't draft a guard at #5". "you don't pay a box safety that much money"..."you don't draft a guard at #5"...when both guys are studs those are irrelevant criticisms imo.

 

Since I was one of the critics, albeit not so loud as of lately, of the Collins signing, and a big fan of Scherff's pick, I'd say this.

 

If you take the Collins signing out of a vacuum, it's a good signing, a bit overpaid probably, but that's also how it works in the age of FA.

Now, I never take stuff out of vacuum, because it's never like this.

 

I could go back to KC with this, but it's not that relevant, though AS's story is part of it.

To summarize last season we started 6-3, then we lose Scherff/Lauvao, then Smith, McCoy, and we know the rest of the history, 7-9...

Then to close the season you do have (in no specific order):

- The DJ Swearinger's cut.

- The Reuben Foster's claim.

- Trent Williams' tumor.

- The search for a new DC but finally we eep Manusky because everybody turned us down.

- The freaking long list of guys injured for the second or third year in a row...

- The LaFemina's firing.

 

And then, at the beginning of the FA, we sign Landon Collins for a high price! Woot! Guy is a great player, and a Redskins fan. Then who do we sign after that?

 

Ereck Flowers... That one is less sexy. I'm not even sure he's gonna make a 53.

Jon Bostic. But that one happened after Reuben Foster blew his knee on the second or third play of OTA... Woot!

 

Collins, was just a signing to get fans excited. Because days before the Collins' signing, everything was doom and doom. OL was in shambles, we had no QB there were talks about resigning Josh Johnson at the time being, and signed Case Keenum for cheap but not exactly sexy and exciting (Rexy was sexier). We lost Crowder, P. Smith... Our O was a magnificent question mark. (And still is to me).

 

And somehow it worked. With him word out there is that we have the best D in the NFL. We still have Scared Manusky calling plays, with Ray Horton and Fat Rob Ryan waiting to rip his head ASAP.

 

Then you draft Haskins in the draft, to create even more hype. Now our O is one of the most exciting in the NFL. Our OL is still in shambles and now we even have our best OL Trent that is disgruntled, but everything's fine, we got Haskins a guy that only played what? 1 year as a QB? I really hope he's good at escaping defenders and changing direction, he'll need it, because our OL ain't gonna cut it this year (especially the left side when Trent won't be playing (because well, he'll miss some games)... Which will leads us to being another national clown in 2020 with the most expensive backup of the NFL with Alex Smith...

 

That can be seen as good business if the business is to get fans excited. But if business is to be relevant and gain titles, sell more and so on, then it's bad decision over each other. We're just trying to hide mistakes behind others. Or wait for all of our rookies to play at ProBowl level which would go for the best draft in the NFL history ever. Which will never happen...

 

Our FO really thought that our team was a SS away from being a contender?

 

[Skinsinparadise]

19 hours ago, Wildbunny said:

 

That can be seen as good business if the business is to get fans excited. But if business is to be relevant and gain titles, sell more and so on, then it's bad decision over each other. We're just trying to hide mistakes behind others. Or wait for all of our rookies to play at ProBowl level which would go for the best draft in the NFL history ever. Which will never happen...

 

 

I don't agree with every example in that post but its a good post IMO because it spells out the issues with the FO very well.  We all have our different opinions of who is a good signing or not or who is a good draft pick or not.  But in the scheme of things it's all about the aggregate scorecard.    How does it all come together. 

 

I've used this analogy before which is its like my kid coming home with a C report card and with bad marks for behavior.  There is so much I could celebrate it -- where I go yeah its not hot but I've seen worse remember when he/she was a D student?  But yeah a C grade with bad marks for behavior is more or less how I see this operation.    There are plenty of people who see it way worse than that and see this as a D-F operation along with the bad behavior.  Personally, I don't think it's that bad.  If I am grading just Bruce or just Dan then a D seems about right.   They IMO are the weak links in the operation.  But I think Jay, Schaffer, Kyle prop up the overall grade.  And Doug adds some class and props up the bad behavior score.

 

But talking purely about the roster.  We had years with good D lines for example and bad receiving corps.  Then we've had good receiving corps and bad D lines.  Now we are back to a good D line and a bad receiving corp.   We've had good O lines, then bad, then good -- now i think it's somewhere in between.   Good running games.  Bad running games.  Back to good.  It's all back and forth and cyclical.  But I can't recall us ever having just a stacked roster almost everywhere like arguably the Eagles and some other teams have now.   

 

It's sort of a rob Peter to pay Paul operation.  And in their defense most teams operate like that.  It's not that hard to be mediocre.  And most teams are just that -- somewhere in the middle.  We can feel good or bad if we just focus on the good units or bad units but IMO its about everything.  It would be like watching a movie you think is mediocre, so so, nothing great, nothing awful.  It's "meh".  Now if someone says well wasn't one of the scenes awesome, why not focus on that?  My point is yeah it was awesome but there was plenty of non-awesome parts too and it didn't add up to a good movie.  But it wasn't a stinker either. 

 

The point that a person or two make at times is that it takes a longish time to build a winner the right away.  They are building it the right way -- so we just need to stay patient and give them another 2-3 years or however long they think is needed to complete the deal.   IMO that's ridiculous unless again you got a QB as part of that equation.  It's almost a cliche about the worst to first dynamic in the NFL.  Plenty of examples (and I've made them) of teams building a winner fast.  Among them was Chip Kelly gutting the Eagles roster, they fire him and win a SB two years later.  But like I've said you got to have a QB to do it typically. 

 

We have the most expensive offense in the league yet we had one of the worst offenses last year.  Even with a healthy Alex it wasn't much of an offense.    Our defense ironically is better and its cheap.  Eventually those young defensive players are going to need to get paid -- and I bet the pendulum shifts where we get weaker there or somewhere else.  It's back and forth like a yo yo.   The only thing that i think gets them off of this up-down-mediocre to less than that streak -- is about getting the QB position right finally.   

 

If they don't get the QB position right, we eventually might be blogging like this Tampa Bay fan below.  I think the Redskins drafts have been better than the Tampa drafts, thanks to Scot in 2015 (not so much 2016) and Kyle since.  But there are still too many bad decisions being made IMO from the FO every year to ever be anything different than a team that's somewhere in the 6-10 to 10-6 range.  Occasionally bottoming out.  Occasionally squeezing into the playoffs but then knocked out immediately and pose no threat.  Unless, they get the QB right I think we are stuck in perpetuity in football purgatory. 

 

https://www.bucsnation.com/2012/3/10/2859849/bruce-allen-worst-gm-in-football

Bruce Allen - Worst GM In Football?

By DraftPhantom on Mar 10, 2012, 11:31am EST 

But Lets not forget what he did here; more than any SINGLE man Bruce Allen took us from Super Bowl Champs to a team with a derth of talent. I'm basing this solely on his draft performance (though signing guys like Charlie Garner and others cost us some cap cuts that hurt too). He took over as draft day manager from Rich McKay in 2004 and Tampa fans here are the results (I've included only names for the first three rounds since you should be able to find starters / Pro Bowlers easier here)

[Malapropismic Depository]

 

[Kurd Cudins]

[FrFan]

[Wildbunny]

[ExoDus84]

[bakedtater1]

Awesome I'm still alive!!

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

58 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Awesome I'm still alive!!

Not in that scenario.

[Malapropismic Depository]

Safe to say, this lady has endured more than any of us fans.

 

 

[RandyHolt]

[Skinsinparadise]

The point below is one of the ones I've been making.  That is its tough for me to miss why the Giants have stayed somewhat relevant of late in spite of losing while the Redskins not so much nationally.  Star power to me is a big part of it.  If this team doesn't win or wants the casual fans to hang in there with 7-9 seasons, etc, they IMO need a star to bring fans to the seats.  Arguably the Giants could get away with trading Beckham because of Barkley on that front. 

 

But I do agree with Beckham's point below which is he kept their brand alive.  Redskins don't have a dude like that.  Arguably they never had that at all under Dan with the exception of a quick flash in 2012 and Taylor was likely emerging into that.   Now I don't think it matters star power or not if they finally really win but if they don't then Dan-Bruce IMO need a star for a change to draw people.  If I had to pick the most likely one on this roster, I'd say maybe Guice or Haskins if he emerges.  But it's been a long draught as to star power under Dan's reign -- albeit I'll give him that he's tried to fix that.  But I don't count Deon and Bruce Smith at the end of their careers as that.  I am talking a bonafide and emerging elite player who brings fans to the seats and are in national conversation a lot.  Sadly Taylor was likely their best chance and he was getting there. 

 

 

 

[RandyHolt]

Bruce said he expects Trent to report

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

I don't much have faith with Dan-Bruce in charge they'd ever build a consistent winner or SB team.  But when I saw Jerry World, I figured back then that Dan-Bruce could compete with that and get their own impressive stadium.  Getting a stadium is much about politics and networking -- and they have a unique situation compared to most teams with three different locations possibly vying against each other.  Based on what's been reported they are off to a rocky start though.  But Ill give Bruce this if he indeed is still working this single handily with basically the help of his brother and they pull off a prime local, then I'll give him props on that front.  I never thought I'd care about the brand.  In the past I cared purely about winning.  But I don't love the brand sliding.  And short of winning, I think the most important thing is a spanking new stadium in a prime local. 

 

 

 

[Malapropismic Depository]

On 7/23/2019 at 8:13 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

The point below is one of the ones I've been making.  That is its tough for me to miss why the Giants have stayed somewhat relevant of late in spite of losing while the Redskins not so much nationally.  Star power to me is a big part of it.  If this team doesn't win or wants the casual fans to hang in there with 7-9 seasons, etc, they IMO need a star to bring fans to the seats.  Arguably the Giants could get away with trading Beckham because of Barkley on that front. 

 

But I do agree with Beckham's point below which is he kept their brand alive.  Redskins don't have a dude like that.  Arguably they never had that at all under Dan with the exception of a quick flash in 2012 and Taylor was likely emerging into that.   Now I don't think it matters star power or not if they finally really win but if they don't then Dan-Bruce IMO need a star for a change to draw people.  If I had to pick the most likely one on this roster, I'd say maybe Guice or Haskins if he emerges.  But it's been a long draught as to star power under Dan's reign -- albeit I'll give him that he's tried to fix that.  But I don't count Deon and Bruce Smith at the end of their careers as that.  I am talking a bonafide and emerging elite player who brings fans to the seats and are in national conversation a lot.  Sadly Taylor was likely their best chance and he was getting there

 

 

Does that also explain why the media predicts the Skins to go 3-13 year after year, despite us always being at least average, plus making improvements in the offseason, and getting healthier ?

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Does that also explain why the media predicts the Skins to go 3-13 year after year, despite us always being at least average, plus making improvements in the offseason, and getting healthier ?

 

Maybe but its a different point.  My point is to get national media attention and national fan attention if you aren't a hot team --then you typically star power.  For example I turn on the NFL Network today, what do I see, and I see their key reporters in Giants camp, and watch them do an interview with Barkley.  If they didn't have Barkley I doubt the Giants would get the same type of attention considering their recent run.  And I agree with Beckham's point that he helped keep their brand going in recent years while the team was struggling.  Heck I just came from NY (I am in Richmond now, and watching camp tomorrow) where I was for a few days and still saw some people wearing Beckham jerseys.  

 

In South Florida where I live, I see a lot of Beckham jerseys, Brady, Elliot, etc -- rare for me to see anyone wearing a Redskins jersey. If its a Redskins fan I run into, they are usually wearing a Redskins shirt not a jersey.   I don't think we've had a must see star in Dan's era aside from flashes in 2012 and maybe Sean's last year.   I think Guice is the best shot to turn that tide, maybe Haskins.