Makaveli

The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

Recommended Posts

On 1/22/2018 at 2:17 PM, Boss_Hogg said:

If you want to feel 'better' about the Eagles future, http://NJ.com  did a breakdown in Nov. of future cap issues. ... "Eagles 2018 salary cap space: Messy situation increases pressure to win Super Bowl this year" http://s.nj.com/A6TrzqS

 

 

Wow, already in cap hell and it's doubtful they can go much more than 1 more year before giving Wentz his mega contract.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do they all make the decision?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2018/01/26/senior-bowl-offers-a-glimpse-into-the-redskins-nfl-draft-scouting-process/?utm_term=.6e5b365c08a5

“It’s a team selection,” he added. “Me, Kyle, Jay and Bruce [make the decision], with input from the guys. The decision, whether it’s good, bad or indifferent, we’ve got to live with it.”

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I wish someone would make an electronic dartboard with Bruce Allen's face on it. Every time you hit the bulls eye it would say 'I'm a dumb ****'.

 But knowing me, I'd end up breaking it by constantly stabbing a dart in the bulls eye til it stopped working.

6 hours ago, FrFan said:

I doubt he's going to be fired, he's Danny's boy. He is working on the new stadium deal to keep on winning off the field, what he does best I guess.

 

sure would be tragic if 'by accident' Bruce falls into the fresh cement being poured. :816::ph34r:

Share this post


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

How do they all make the decision?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2018/01/26/senior-bowl-offers-a-glimpse-into-the-redskins-nfl-draft-scouting-process/?utm_term=.6e5b365c08a5

“It’s a team selection,” he added. “Me, Kyle, Jay and Bruce [make the decision], with input from the guys. The decision, whether it’s good, bad or indifferent, we’ve got to live with it.”

The paragraph before that answers the question

 

The goal is to come to a consensus on where the team should put players on its draft board.

As is the case with any NFL team, tension can arise in a room filled with opinions.

“That’s why they call it the war room,” Williams says, smiling. “I stand up for my opinion, and I think every scout should stand up for their opinion. At the end of the day, when we walk out the room, it’s not personal. It’s personnel.

Share this post


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

The paragraph before that answers the question

 

The goal is to come to a consensus on where the team should put players on its draft board.

As is the case with any NFL team, tension can arise in a room filled with opinions.

“That’s why they call it the war room,” Williams says, smiling. “I stand up for my opinion, and I think every scout should stand up for their opinion. At the end of the day, when we walk out the room, it’s not personal. It’s personnel.

 

I read the whole thing but what if there isn't a consensus?

Share this post


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

 

I read the whole thing but what if there isn't a consensus?

 

I doubt there's ever a consensus. but when i debate strategy with anyone, we follow a similar procedure. But afterwards, even if I'm not in charge, and haven't convinced those in power, my point of view is stated. And when the results come out either I'm right or wrong. The more often I'm right, the more weight my voice holds next time. 

 

Honestly, i thought this report was refreshing. Hearing the procdure, that they have a plan, that they changed the plan, the way he didnt answer the question on areas to improve,etc. I thought it would calm some of the fans down thinking its utter chaos.i guess i was wrong.

 

And that's not just because of this interaction, but the segments on Grant and Danny and several local writers who honestly I'm starting to respect less. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I doubt there's ever a consensus. but when i debate strategy with anyone, we follow a similar procedure. But afterwards, even if I'm not in charge, and haven't convinced those in power, my point of view is stated. And when the results come out either I'm right or wrong. The more often I'm right, the more weight my voice holds next time. 

 

Your point is if Bruce doesn't heed someone's advice and is proven wrong, he'd heed it more next time.   That's probably correct.   I just wonder why they are so reluctant to say it.  I've seen Bruce on 980 once dance around that same question than he finally goes well yeah that would be me.

 

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Honestly, i thought this report was refreshing. Hearing the procdure, that they have a plan, that they changed the plan, the way he didnt answer the question on areas to improve,etc. I thought it would calm some of the fans down thinking its utter chaos.i guess i was wrong.

 

Calm us down that they have a process?  Previously, we didn't think they had one?  If that's the bar than we got really low standards.  The article was neither here nor there.  It wasn't a puff piece talking about how bright these guys are.  It just explained how they organized themselves.  Nothing reassuring or concerning. The article didn't delve into any of what's discussed here aside from laying out the parties that make the call.

 

 I've said this on this and on other threads that some of Bruce/FO's defenders mischaracterize the global take of the critics views.  Most of us aren't saying Bruce and the FO are a bunch of dolts who can barely get out of bed.  So now we are excited to learn they go into their office and actually do some evaluations.   

 

Most of us have said they have done things that we think are dumb.  But overall, many of us (including me) characterize this group-operation as "meh".   Not great.  Not awful.  So so.  And that so so unfortunately has been impinged to being below average via Dan's interference and epic dumb transactions and bad culture that has set this franchise back.  If you are what your record is as Parcells likes to say then Dan-Bruce over the years are distinctly below average and with a big sample size to judge.

 

The main beef is set the standards high like winning organizations versus winging it with people that aren't considered at the top of the game.  You don't dump John Schneider for Vinny Cerrato.  You don't put a head coach in charge of personnel -- same head coach that their local media said they got fired because of their personnel decisions not coaching.  You don't put a business guy in charge of personnel -- unless they are really special.  The owner doesn't interfere.   Stuff like that. :)

 

That doesn't mean that we think Vinny Cerrato or Bruce or whomever didn't have a process to how they go about things.    I am sure everyone in that building does.

 

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

And that's not just because of this interaction, but the segments on Grant and Danny and several local writers who honestly I'm starting to respect less. 

 

You mean the one where Grant said that talking to people close to the action he heard there aren't many smart guys in that building?   He did complement Schaffer.  He said Kyle Smith is considered smart but some wonder if he's ready for this type of role.  Campbell and Santos are smart.  But there are questions about the others.  

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's whatever. 

 

You're still bringing up stuff from 2001 - 17 years ago. I'm talking about since 2014. There's been 2 hiccups there, the firing of Scot and Kirk's contract. Maybe smaller things like Orakpo or Jackson or Garcon or not addressing certain positions, but they've invested in the draft, they've promoted scouts, Scot spoke positively about the talent. Smith is leading the draft board and he's a personnel guy. He's talking to Doug and Bruce, making recommendations and they're being adopted. He has say. 

 

But the was the front office is talked about yeah, the fact that we have a plan should mean something. Eric Bickel thinks Bruce Allen is the dumbest guy on earth. Danny makes an insulting comment any time a move is made or not made. Like, we haven't signed a lot of our own free agents, neither have most teams, but that doesn't matter. It means that our front office is full of baffoons. Last year the front office decided to move on from Baker, and got called clowns for it all off-season, with little respect given to our additions or the guys on the roster ( including Matt and Lanier). There was said to be no strategy behind letting our WRs go, but Philly ( whose front office the media often fantasizes about) had a history of letting guys go after they were too old or overvalued.

 

Before 2014 we were criticized for spending too much money ( probably before 2010), after its for being too cheap. We're investing in the draft and having good drafts, but still we need a personnel guy in charge. I get that people are going to complain, but be consistent. Don't say we don't change when the article shows just that. Don't say we don't draft well when most of our draft picks have made the roster and played well, and we've done a good job picking up UDFAs like Dunbar and Harris and Lanier and Vigil and Kalis. 

 

I'm in my whole shut down mode because people are crazy. I'd rather listen to a podcast about bird calls than the illogical fandom inspired rants about how bad this team is and how we need to fire everybody. If this was a random fan it'd be one thing but it's shows doing it to feed the flock, and not giving respect where it's due. 

 

There's always Madden. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

it's whatever. 

 

 

I'm in my whole shut down mode because people are crazy. I'd rather listen to a podcast about bird calls than the illogical fandom inspired rants about how bad this team is and how we need to fire everybody. If this was a random fan it'd be one thing but it's shows doing it to feed the flock, and not giving respect where it's due. 

 

There's always Madden. 

If I could respond to this, I would just bring up a couple points regarding this front office... primarily Bruce Allen.

 

First off I'll put my opinion out there that I don't like the way he runs the team.  I still think he's been a comfort piece for Snyder, and his existence in the franchise is not based on football.  That irritates me a little bit when I believe winning should be the focus.  How you get there... that's anyone's opinion, some things work for some franchises, some things don't, but winning football games trumps all opinion. 

 

 

That said I do agree that there have been some good moves, and what would appear to be paradigm shifts within the organization.  Since Robert, we haven't seen the player over team mentality anywhere.  That is a big time positive.  In recent years we've appeared to be focused on the trenches as well.  Multiple options along the Oline that we've looked at, unlike years past where it seems we trot the same guys out year in and year out regardless of production.  In theory we are a LG away from having our O-line set for the next 4 years.  It's been a LOONNGG time since we could say that.  We've added some good pieces on defense as well, part of that was luck, as Allen fell to us and he was considered a possible to 5 pick... Again, a positive.  I'm in the camp that Garcon and Jackson were done here at the cost they were, and it looks like the front office was right.   Jax apparently having QB issues (go figure) and Garcon dealing with an injury that some have wondered if his career is in jeopardy.

 

That kind of stuff aside, there have also been some very glaring shortcomings.  The biggest one that I can see is the inability to understand, focus, and appreciate the QB position.  I know we gave up what we did to go get RG3, but i think that was less about getting stability there, and more about making a splash.  Since Allen has been here, we've drafted 3 QBs.  2 in the same draft, and the 3rd is Nate Sudfeld in the 6th round.  Cousins has been playing on the tag for 2 seasons here, yet we've failed to address the position in the event he walks.  Maybe it was calculated on their part knowing that this is a deep QB draft, but I'm not ready to give them that much credit yet.  I know you mentioned the handling of Kirk being an issue, but I'm looking bigger picture, beyond Kirk about how the position has just seemed to become a 2nd thought to this front office.  Another major concern I still have with Allen is the seeming inability to allow his ego to let someone smarter than him into the building.   Having a conversation off this board with someone i mentioned the fact that a good manager is constantly looking to hire his or her replacement.  That's how you put good people in position to succeed... The minute that mentality is lost, the focus then becomes self preservation and the entire process is hindered because the best person for the job is no longer pursued.  

 

Many people (myself included) can see some issues with this team, regarding how they handle pressure situations as well as allowing Gruden to do everything he does.  I feel like this team is lacking a major piece when it comes to crunch time.  We don't have that guy that walks in the locker room and immediately has everyones ear.  Some teams, that person is the coach... some it's a vet player.  Whatever that piece is, I feel it's missing.  London Fletcher, Ray Lewis, the kind of guy who can teammates almost fear letting down.  Gruden doesn't appear to be the coach to do that.  Manusky maybe, but It's gonna be hard to have that bond with a coach on the opposite side of the ball.  A player can have that effect on both sides of the ball, but it wouldn't be easy to get a WR to have that mentality with a defensive coach.  This is a piece I feel the GM needs to be a part of.  Get that coach, player, team leader type.  The other thing Allen needs to do is walk into Gruden's office and tell him to hire a real OC that has a similar offensive scheme, and give up the play calling and installation.  I personally feel a lot of the frustrations I have with Gruden, have nothing to do with Gruden's ability, and more to do with his inability to be able to cover everything on gameday.  He's a very smart football guy, with a very effective scheme.  The problem is the frustrations of the play call timing, as well as clock management seem to escape him.  Bruce needs to address this.  

 

 

I hope I don't appear to be a convenient voice, as I think it is easy to point at Snyder and say 'he's the reason.'  On the surface from the outside looking it, it appears he's maturing as an owner.  He's putting pieces in place and appears to be taking a step back.  Bruce has also taken a dysfunction of a franchise and looked to have stop the embarrassment of day to day operations.  We're in a much better place now, then we have been for a while.  All of that aside, I want the mentality to shift away from 'being better than before' and now shift to 'how do we be one of the best.'  A lot of people could have 'fixed' the nonsense of a franchise we once were, given enough time... now it's time to want to be excellent again.  Don't accept sirloin steak at prime rib prices, just because you're that hungry.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

i

You're still bringing up stuff from 2001 - 17 years ago. I'm talking about since 2014. There's been 2 hiccups there, the firing of Scot and Kirk's contract.

 

Since 2014, they main thing that has been above average about the team has been the passing game-Kirk. The defense has been "meh".  Special teams "meh".  Running game "meh".  And "meh" is generous for most of those units.  

 

Kirk and the passing game has been the main reason for the limited success they had.  And they look poised to throw that out the window with perhaps the most mismanaged QB contract of all time.  So I am supposed to think -- way to go?

 

Saying Scot and Kirk are two hiccups (the QB and FO structure) to me is like saying hey the pizza is good, maybe not the cheese and the tomato sauce part of it but everything else about the pizzeria is good -- don't you like the garlic rolls?  The GM and QB are the heart beat of a team -- not just two items in the soup.  And its not as if everything else has been great.  Like I said they haven't really built up any unit to be even average level.  We got teams going from bad to good overnight around the league.  And here we are on year #9 under Bruce.

 

I know you like the fact that he doesn't pay big money to big players in FA save Norman and he stopped trading away draft picks.  But IMO that's a low bar to lionize Bruce for. 

 

2 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

But the was the front office is talked about yeah, the fact that we have a plan should mean something. Eric Bickel thinks Bruce Allen is the dumbest guy on earth. Danny makes an insulting comment any time a move is made or not made. Like, we haven't signed a lot of our own free agents, neither have most teams, but that doesn't matter. It means that our front office is full of baffoons

 

That's fine.  But why is everyone here lumped into it?  I like 106.7 but they aren't speaking for me. :)  That's their opinion.  My thought isn't Bruce is a buffoon.  I actually didn't think Vinny is a buffoon either.  He had a scouting background, he can talk football. I don't think Dan is a buffoon -- he's a successful business guy.   It's just that Dan has not set a culture in that building where establishing a top flight FO that fosters success is the Redskins way -- it doesn't seem important to him.  It's not that he goes the opposite extreme and hires people with IQs of 100 or less.   

 

He's like the guy who has a restaurant on the block but never cares to compete with the Michelin Star ones on the same block.  The food is OK maybe a little below average but he has enough customers come in to be satisfied so I gather he doesn't feel compelled to go the extra mile.  He'd rather be comfortable with the chef and the people who work there where he can set the culture -- versus rock the boat and hire a top chef who is strong willed and wants to set the culture their way. 

 

So yeah Bruce isn't a dummy.  He's just another "meh" hire.  Just like Vinny when Bruce was canned by Tampa no one pounced on him.  He's not Dorsey who was picked less than a year later and was mentioned for several jobs almost right away. 

 

 As I've said before if Bruce stayed in his lane, I wouldn't mind him at all.  But yeah we've been down this block.  You've explained why you really dig Bruce a lot.  And I've told you why I don't.  And its not really so much about Bruce but its more about Dan and who he likes to hire for these positions.  He has a reckless disregard for caring about the top chef in the kitchen (who I think is the GM) and then wonders why the team isn't a winner.  The answer is obvious.  That's why you get guys on 106.7 or whereever who are willing to use strong language on this -- driven by the definition of insanity is to continue to use the same approach and fail.  That's been the Dan way.   Yeah it goes back 17 years and it lands to today, too.  That's what makes it so sad.  And that's why these guys can be so easily mocked.  They've walked right into this. 

 

2 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Before 2014 we were criticized for spending too much money ( probably before 2010), after its for being too cheap. We're investing in the draft and having good drafts, but still we need a personnel guy in charge. I get that people are going to complain, but be consistent. Don't say we don't change when the article shows just that. Don't say we don't draft well when most of our draft picks have made the roster and played well, and we've done a good job picking up UDFAs like Dunbar and Harris and Lanier and Vigil and Kalis. 

 

You say its all about 2014.  We've not had a Scot-free draft, yet in all that time.  So this point is valid in 2018 if the draft turns out well.  Running an organization though isn't just about the draft.   I'd like to see Bruce run a draft without Scot's notes and ratings on players.

 

And I am not in love with Bruce or Scot for that matter on FA.  I think Galdi said it well the other day -- they overcorrected on Vinny's approach to FA.   A lot of FA misses -- I actually would like a more ballsy approach to FA.  I am meh on Bruce in FA -- don't hate it, don't love it.  I was on the record BEFORE FA last year that I'd rather have myself Calais Campbell then collecting bodies at DT.   It doesn't have to be Campbell but go after the bigger fish more.  Bruce's successes in FA have ironically been when he fishes in the deeper part of the pool: Norman, D, Jax, Garcon.   The medium level FAs have mostly been disappointing.

 

 

2 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

I'm in my whole shut down mode because people are crazy. I'd rather listen to a podcast about bird calls than the illogical fandom inspired rants about how bad this team is and how we need to fire everybody. If this was a random fan it'd be one thing but it's shows doing it to feed the flock, and not giving respect where it's due. 

 

Some of the bigger critics of this FO (myself included) are among the biggest homers of the team.   I haven't advised to fire a single soul.   I didn't become a Redskins fan because of Dan and Bruce.  I don't have their jerseys.  I thought it was ironic that some of the bigger Bruce-FO (I'll grant you there aren't that many of them) people pounded Kirk for every bad game last year and if anything seemed to bask in slamming him.  That didn't feel like a pro-Redskins homer vibe to me.  It made me think since when is the pro-Redskins stance to be against the starting QB that is fighting for us out on the field -- because we felt compelled to have the back of some suit in the FO?  Does that seem a bit backward?

 

And you of course have a right to see Bruce in the most glowing way you'd like.   If you believe in it so deeply why be bothered by those who disagree?  I think some of the Kirk critics in my book present the most crazy arguments.  But I just keep plowing with my take.  :)

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


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

it's whatever. 

I'm in my whole shut down mode because people are crazy. I'd rather listen to a podcast about bird calls than the illogical fandom inspired rants about how bad this team is and how we need to fire everybody. If this was a random fan it'd be one thing but it's shows doing it to feed the flock, and not giving respect where it's due. 

 

There's always Madden. 

Yeah, I've started my yearly pilgrimage over to the Tailgate. It's crazy over there too... and oddly equally one note in its own way, but I think that a team has to be about more than one player and it seems that practically every thread seems to become about only one player. Granted, he's an important player and he may very well be our best player, but I find it to be overkill.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kirk is only a drop in the bucket of the critiques of this front office structure and ownership.

 

I wish it was hey Bruce and Dan have been rock star level brilliant in all this time, if only those sharp dudes got the Kirk contract right, then this thread would instead be a love fest about them :ols:

 

It's not the case.  And if its all about the Kirk contract and that somehow is the takeaway from all these posts -- then people aren't reading them that closely or they are cherry picking select ones.    The one thing about Kirk in the context of specially being negative is I can't see how people that pound our starting QB can at the same time pontificate about other people being negative -- just because they have Bruce's back.  Why does having Bruce's back yield more brownie points in the who is positive-negative conversation?

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Kirk is only a drop in the bucket of the critiques of this front office structure and ownership.

It could be bad luck, but every time I stop into this thread the conversation is about Cousins.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Burgold said:

It could be bad luck, but every time I stop into this thread the conversation is about Cousins.

It's a very large example of how we've struggled on making the right moves.... for a long time we've knocked the team for not paying our home grown talent.  We've resigned some (Moses, Kerrigan) but have failed to take advantage of one of the best opportunities we've had in 30 years.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Snyder bought the Redskins, only the Giants and Eagles in our division have made it to the SB... twice. What do they have in common as opposed to the Cowboys and Redskins? A General Manager. 

 

Figure it out Dan.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most important job of the GM is to secure a quarterback by any means necessary.  The way he's handled ours is unprecedented and undoubtedly will impact the rest of the team should it end unresolved.  Even if we resolve it and bring him back it will be for much more money than it ever had to be.  So yeah, there is a reason it dominates the conversation.

 

If Bruce and the gang were otherwise elite or had a history of being successful, I could wrap my head around fans being willing to extend him more rope.  Simply running a different shop than Vinny with marginally better results doesn't buy a lot of love from me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

It could be bad luck, but every time I stop into this thread the conversation is about Cousins.

 

The gist of the points here is jealously about other teams who value who picks the groceries and setting a winning culture.  It's not been Dan's thing.   As for Kirk, I'd let him go and you name the player here to in order to have a real GM and a winning culture set from the top.  It's more important than any player IMO or coach.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, I think this is an absolutely critical year for Allen and the Front Office (Gruden too).

 

Allen can pin his hat to the idea that the Redskins two best drafts of the Snyder era were the year after Shanny was fired (pre-Scottie) and last year (post Scottie). At the same time, Allen can't say that because many believe (including me) that those successes were tied to using McCloughan's scouting service in year one and draft set up last year. That said, he ought to be on a very hot seat. He needs to nail this draft.

 

The second issue is free agency. Free agency is going to be a **** because of the money uncertainty. We are really weak at running back, wide receiver, and inside linebacker. We can't address those all in the draft. Additionally, we may have a lot of money or practically no money to work with and so the Front Office has to prove nimble.

 

Finally, they do have to resolve the quarterback issue. I put this last because it may be out of their hands. They may have screwed up so much that there's no way to come back. If Cousins is determined to bail I think we let him. Don't fall for the franchise trap. That means they have to again demonstrate both nimbleness and longsightedness. In reality, I think that means going with Colt and building the best team you can around him unless you think that one of the Minnesota guys is a home run. We've tried way too many band aid QBs and that's just treading water.  The QB decision has to be one designed to see the man they want to steer the Redskins for the next five years if we sign someone new. It needs to be someone we think is playoff and Super Bowl capable. Now, if they pull off a Cousins long term re-signing that'd be great and almost everyone's first choice, but they need to show as well in the draft and free agency as with Kirk.

 

It may be that if Kirk goes they are sunk no matter what else they do and I'm okay with that, but I think the draft and free agency in some ways are even more key. They need to prove that they can build a team. Re-signing Kirk would be great, but is not a sign of front office competency or prowess... just that they did what every front office would do or that they finally opened the checkbook all the way up. It'll be a relief if Kirk gets re-signed, but it won't ease any of my worries when it comes to Allen and this Front Office.

 

Now, if they hit two home run drafts in a row... that'll catch my attention. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like AJ Smiths son has taken over Scott's position and he is the one setting our draft board. 

 

I will say its hard to understand who's doing what in our FO but this guy is the Director of College Scouting for us so I'm guessing he has quite an influence on who we draft.

 

"Smith is entering his seventh season with the organization and previously served as an area scout in the Southeast region. He played a role in the draft selections of Alabama defensive lineman Jonathan Allen, Alabama linebacker Ryan Anderson, Georgia State wide receiver Robert Davis and Auburn defensive back Joshua Holsey."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan needs to give Bruce some other title and work in some other capacity(Legends Luncheons, Harvest fest, Homecomings, etc.) and get a Real GM. or fire him.  Sure the front office is more fiscally responsible and doesn't overpay etc.  but obviously that's only part of the puzzle....we need a bonafide talent evaluator.  I like Doug and all(but we know it's still Bruce)...the whole ex Redskins and family connections is all fuzzy and feel good but I want results.  Was really a total drag that we finally had a top half of the league talent evaluator in here as a Real GM and they figured out how to screw that up too and gone after two seasons. H..T..T..blahhh. lol httr. 

Share this post


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

It sounds like AJ Smiths son has taken over Scott's position and he is the one setting our draft board. 

 

 

 

Piecing everything that's been said that I've picked up on.

 

Dan Snyder:  Wild card.  First time that I can think of since Zorn where he has a power structure where it sets him up on a clear path to make a personnel decision without impinging on anyone's power.  Shanny tells the story of Dan wanting him to get Randy Moss, Shanny said no.  Now, no one has the power to say no.   Unless, we are to believe that Bruce stands up to him.

 

Bruce Allen:  Final say guy. Buck stops with him. Heavily involved in cap decisions. Reports to Dan.

 

Doug Williams:  free for all guy with more emphasis on pro personnel.  Reports to Bruce.  

 

Eric Schaffer:  money-contract negotiator.  Cap guru. 

 

Kyle Smith = the old Scott Campbell.  He makes the draft recommendations.

 

Alex Santos = Pro personnel - free agency

 

Scott Campbell?  You got me.  He has a senior position and from the names I heard mentioned at the senior bowl, he wasn't one of them.

 

Do I think these guys and this operation is the most incompetent on the planet.  Not at all. To me its "meh".  I didn't really think the prior regime was the most incompetent on earth either.  They had moments.  The 2004 FA haul was really good -- Springs, M. Washington, C. Griffin.  they picked Sean Taylor over Winslow.  Cooley was a great pick in the third round. 

 

If the conversation is hey give them credit for getting somethings right as if its a big smoking gun to me seems silly.  Just about every regime and organization gets things right in the soup.  The good organizations get a lot of things right.  That's the difference.

 

Bruce versus Cerrato?  I'd take Bruce but not by a mile.  Cerrato was overly aggressive in FA.  Bruce to me undershoots.   Both approaches haven't led to hot records.  Both had large sample sizes to vindicate themselves.

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/9/bruce-allen-was-supposed-be-better-vinny-cerrato/

During his stint from 2002 to 2009, Cerrato’s record was 52-65.

Bruce Allen’s reign at Redskins Park? A record of 45-66-1.

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/9/bruce-allen-was-supposed-be-better-vinny-cerrato/

During his stint from 2002 to 2009, Cerrato’s record was 52-65.

Bruce Allen’s reign at Redskins Park? A record of 45-66-1.

 

From 2002 - 2009 the Redskins were 54 - 74.

From 2010 - 2017 the Redskins were  52 - 75 - 1.

And that's right where I put them. A " C - ", with the possibility of moving up to a C+ with a LTD for Cousins.

Edited by Spearfeather
  • 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.