Makaveli

The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

Like I said....

 

His board wasn't exactly his. It was a combination of the whole FO. Cooley came out today and said Ionnadis was Grudens pick. 

 

Believe what you want. You're saying it's his board, but then say...."He didn't have full control according to reports". Basically you're contradicting yourself to make Scot look like a saint and the rest of the FO look like garbage to fit your agenda. 

 

 

It appears the fact that when Scot was brought in Bruce told us he had full control of personnel escapes you...

 

As if that's not a big deal that it wasn't the case.  

 

As if that's not the crux of the argument that Bruce likes to create a situation where the blame can't be pinpointed...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

It appears the fact that when Scot was brought in Bruce told us he had full control of personnel escapes you...

 

As if that's not a big deal that it wasn't the case.  

 

As if that's not the crux of the argument that Bruce likes to create a situation where the blame can't be pinpointed...

I believe it was Scot who said they do everything together. 

 

Just saying... Go back to his first Press Conference

Share this post


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

I believe it was Scot who said they do everything together. 

 

Just saying... Go back to his first Press Conference

I did.

 

Direct quote from Bruce Allen:

 

"He's going to be in charge of all the personnel department and the personnel on this team."

 

Of course Scot isn't going to jump right in and act like he's taking over the joint on his own. I'd expect any hire to say they plan to work as a team.  I don't think anyone was under the impression that Scot would literally do everything on his own.  But he should be able to make every final decision and he wasn't.

Edited by BatteredFanSyndrome
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Like I said....

 

His board wasn't exactly his. It was a combination of the whole FO. Cooley came out today and said Ionnadis was Grudens pick. 

 

Believe what you want. You're saying it's his board, but then say...."He didn't have full control according to reports". Basically you're contradicting yourself to make Scot look like a saint and the rest of the FO look like garbage to fit your agenda. 

 

 

 

I have heard the same thing about the Ionnadis pick and so far that looks like a great pick. I think someone else on this board has mentioned McCloughan said Gruden has an eye for talent. In my opinion if that is true, then our best hope for acquiring talent is via Gruden because I have little faith in Williams and the rest of our front office and it doesn't appear that structure is going to change anytime soon.

 

But that is one pick. Everyone hits and misses. It's about hitting more than you miss. McCloughan had to allegedly fight to draft Crowder. He's having an off year, but for a fourth rounder that is a good pick. Fuller is having a great year. Scherff is an elite guard, yet Gruden makes an off the cuff remark at his end of year press conference about needing to do better than "drafting a guard and a wide receiver"? Really?

 

He's not a saint and he didn't hit on every pick. See Matt Jones, Cravens, and Doctson (although I think it still too early to write him off).

 

And as far as final say, he says as much in his introductory presser. It's a direct link to the question:

 

Yet we hear this:

 

A Redskins-Scot McCloughan separation seems to be a question of when, not if

Quote

It turned out McCloughan, who signed a four-year contract, didn’t actually have full control of the roster either. He at times had his personnel decisions overruled by Allen, who sometimes pursued his own preferences and other times sided with Gruden.

When it came time to form the initial 53-man roster for the 2016 season, people familiar with the deliberations said some of the decisions McCloughan lost out on included the calls to keep center Kory Lichtensteiger and linebacker Trent Murphy on the roster, as well as aging nose tackle Kedric Golston over free agent signing Cullen Jenkins. Golston wound up missing the season because of injury, and the Redskins promptly re-signed Jenkins.

 

Who knows how those two years would have went if he DID actually have full control? It could have been better. It could have been worse. But with the track record of this organization, Allen, and McCloughan, I'm inclined to believe Allen's interference was a hindrance.

 

Also I don't need to skew anything to make this front office look a certain way:

 

Year - GM - Record

2010 / Allen / 6 -10

2011 / Allen / 5 - 11

2012 / Allen / 10 - 6

2013 / Allen / 3 - 13

2014 / Allen / 4 - 12

2015 / McCloughan / 9 - 7

2016 / McCloughan / 8 - 7 -1

2017 / ??? / 5 - 7

 

Edited by Makaveli
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Hey WB.

 

Bruce has a worse record than Vinny and he's been at it longer.

 

In fact he didn't last this long with the Bucs and they had just won a SB when he got there.

 

Whatever it is that he does has been proven to not work for over a decade now.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is where you want Dan to call Bruce into his office to tell him that if Kirk is not signed LTD he's fired.

Or call Kirk's agent to not sign a LTD so he have a legit reason to fire Bruce. Then name Doug Williams the President and sign Scott again or Nick Caserio from the Pats as GM.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2017 at 8:37 AM, Rocky21 said:

Read this from Florio.  **** is about to get real folks.

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2017/12/01/florio-redskins-scot-mccloughan-problem-not-going-away/

 

 

Wow, if Florio's right, maybe SM will get a bit of revenge in the end and do us all a final service by bringing about the removal of Allen. 

 

And look, we're back to offseason debacles and shenanigans!! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping Scott wins the grievance hearing. 

 

What Bruce and his goons did was despicable. 

 

There's no need to leak negative stuff to the media about Scot being a raging alcoholic. Just say he was let go for cause then shut the hell up.  

 

So say Scot wins and Bruce is finally removed (not likely) whats to say Dan won;t hire another Bruce Allen or Vinny Cerrato?

 

Starts at the top

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

So say Scot wins and Bruce is finally removed (not likely) whats to say Dan won;t hire another Bruce Allen or Vinny Cerrato?

 

Starts at the top

 

No doubt that's true, but since there's virtually nothing that can be done about Snyder, gotta take your opportunities where you can get 'em. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2017 at 8:37 AM, Rocky21 said:

Read this from Florio.  **** is about to get real folks.

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2017/12/01/florio-redskins-scot-mccloughan-problem-not-going-away/

 

That article didn't reveal a damn thing.  It was actually worthless; just Florio guessing what could happen and even admitting that he doesn't "know much about the evidence that is going to be introduced."  But, he goes on to predict, even though he doesn't know much about the evidence, that Gruden and Allen won't be here next year? That's pathetic.

 

Besides the offhand comment during the end of the season presser, Gruden has never said or done anything to imply he didn't like Scot or working with him.  I'm not sure where the idea that he had some sinister scheme in the firing comes from.  Just Florio doing what he has done his whole career, make **** up and throw it out there to see what sticks???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Makaveli said:

And as far as final say, he says as much in his introductory presser. It's a direct link to the question:

 

"comments are disabled for this video"
 

GEE I WONDER WHY

 

 

PS: Look how red his face is.  I don't understand how the Redskins hope to win this lawsuit.  You hire a known alcoholic who is still drinking, everyone including you knows he's still drinking, how can you turn around and fire him for drinking?  Drinking is what he does.  Find me the part in the press conference where Scott says he's going to stop drinking.  You can't, because he never said it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was good to hear Dan Graziano call out Kevin on 980 and say what I've been saying for years. Then he hung up. 

 

Media and fans are corrupted with source guessing. So badly that they would blame the FO for everything to get a "source"

 

Just like Kevin did, when he asked if it was the Redskins who leaked info about Kirk to show power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

Was good to hear Dan Graziano call out Kevin on 980 and say what I've been saying for years. Then he hung up. 

 

Media and fans are corrupted with source guessing. So badly that they would blame the FO for everything to get a "source"

 

Just like Kevin did, when he asked if it was the Redskins who leaked info about Kirk to show power.

You mean he's an idiot. Dan was a fool.  Kevin was totally right to do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2017 at 8:37 AM, Rocky21 said:

Read this from Florio.  **** is about to get real folks.

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2017/12/01/florio-redskins-scot-mccloughan-problem-not-going-away/

 

 

I get the implications this has on bruce. We can only hope this brings his demise as the Redskins defacto GM. And I am glad it's being reported. 

 

But where is the Jay connection? Scot and Jay have always had good things to say about each other.  And unless I missed something, Jay had nothing to say about Scot being gone other than it was unfortunate. Florio should stick to reporting what he knows, not making dumb **** up as he goes along. 

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been impressed with Gruden's ability to keep this team together and competitive with all the injuries. On that same note though, I've been impressed with the front office's ability to find players to compete at those spots. And what we've noticed about the players brought in - almost without exception - they've been young guys who have a chance to build a career here instead of older guys looking for their last hoo-rah. This goes in line with something I've liked about Bruce Allen since we signed him - he values the draft (picks) and values youth. Our team has consistently been one of the younger teams out there and we're still competitive. 

 

I've been arguing (amongst friends; haven't been here too often) that our team is really good but we've just played a hard schedule. And while I still believe that I also believe that we've played somewhat like a young team at come critical times (like the penalties on end of half/game kicks, not going out of bounds, not getting the first down before going out of bounds on 2 minute drives), and those things have cost us. But the same way we were giving Scot credit for finding some good players in 2015 (Mason Foster and ?Will Blackmon?) mid season, I give credit to Bruce / Williams / Kyle Smith, etc for their work this season. 

 

I'd also keep a look out for Kyle Smith. I don't know much about him, had never heard his name before 2017, but the fact that he got a promotion last year and seems to be well connected in the NFL circles, being the son AJ Smith and a former regional scout for the SEC. Part of me wondered through all of this whether he was in line as the successor of Scot but they didn't feel comfortable just yet. Here's a story on him. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2017/06/22/meet-kyle-smith-the-new-and-boring-redskins-director-of-college-scouting/?utm_term=.15dbff84c988

 

I know some people are going to say that we used Scot's board in the 2017 offseason, and many of the players we brought in during this season have been players from that offseason, but some weren't (Nick Rose, who I think is a real good find & Byron Marshall come to mind). But that doesn't resist that both other teams and this team in previous years (especially when the coach hasn't been stable) has simply looked for aging vets to come in and compete for 3 seasons at most and then we start the roster shuffle all over again. I was impressed that we (again) went to Harris when Pryor went down instead of trading for an aging vet as Vinny was known to do. I was impressed that we went to Compton, Spaight, and now Vigil when Foster went down. I wish we had better depth along our DL after Allen. We did go to Lanier, but I think we're seeing that he's more of a pass guy. 

 

Its weird because this is such a pessimistic thread and it seems like it should be titled the rallying cry to get Allen fired from GM, but I've been saying for a long time that I like him as GM and that hasn't changed this season. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When their is dysfunction, in any aspect, I tend to look for a common denominator.  Here is looking at you D. Snyder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, skinfan2k said:

You mean he's an idiot. Dan was a fool.  Kevin was totally right to do that. 

Kevin was right to source guess and immediately blame the Redskins? Basically insulting Dan and his profession on air. 

 

What really burned him was he was my warned about a question like that before they went live. Kevin took a total 180 in an attempt to get something from Dan to paint the Redskins a villian and Kirk a hero. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Basically insulting Dan and his profession on air. 

 

Oh no, the credibility of the sports journalism profession has been undermined.  My world view is in shambles.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scot McCloughan's arbitration hearing against Redskins set for this month

McCloughan is looking to recoup the $2.8 million remaining on his contract when terminated

...the hearing process will include several of the individuals involved taking the stand for examination, with McCloughan contending that he should receive the entire remainder of the money owed him on his contract.

Evidence about the availability and consumption of alcohol by other Redskin team personnel on club property is likely to come out at the hearing. The NFL has leaguewide policies against the consumption of alcohol at team headquarters. McCloughan's case includes evidence and testimony from the highest reaches of the club, including owner Dan Snyder and team president Bruce Allen. McCloughan contends that he did not drink on the job and very rarely drank at all, and that the team was well aware of his well-documented issues with alcohol at the time he was hired. It's possible Allen, coach Jay Gruden, and other team officials could be asked to testify during the hearing, which is being decided by arbitrator Peter Harvey....

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/scot-mccloughans-arbitration-hearing-against-redskins-set-for-this-month/

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JLC is implying that team officials may be asked to testify, what about the players who already testified in the media that they never saw him intoxicated ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the drinking issue referred to in the article two stories lead me to believe maybe ironically Bruce/alcohol stories might be in play?  How ironic if so.

 

One was a source in an article that said Bruce brushes his teeth with Coors Light.  The other was a story that Cooley told on air about meeting with Bruce when he was released, Bruce goes to his fridge and if I recall gave Cooley a Coors Light -- don't recall if Cooley said Bruce opened one, too but I thought he said he did.

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.