The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

[Skinsinparadise]

6 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 

So you list off 4-5 criteria, I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said. But I do disagree with your weighting for each criteria, which you implied to be even. Say there is a 10 point scale, 1 being lowest importance 10 the highest. Your 1-3 above all kind of tie together with personality/perception around the league. I’d give it a generous 4. Free Ageny I’d give a 5. Contracts id give an 8. Draft a 10. The things we do better now are way more important to having success in this league. Hence the best 3 year stretch under Snyder. Bruce is meh in my opinion. Meh>>>>>>Vinny. I think the years has made some forget how truly terrible he was. 

 

Just zoning in on this point.  Correct me if I am wrong.

 

To you.

Maybe Bruce is a douche and have some of these personalities issues.  But just ignore him.  You like Jay?  You like Kyle?  You like the drafts?  These are the fundamental points.  Just ignore the noise -- and yeah maybe there is something to the noise but some if it is hyperbole.  

 

For me.

I hate the concept of a wily politician type being in charge of personnel than an actual scouting background personnel guy.  I start with that.  If you have that arrangement than that person really has to be special at what they do.  For me not only does Bruce not come off special but comes off like a douche and inept.  Even if people pushed me to a draw on him that he's just mediocre at his job -- it does nothing for me.  I don't want a "mediocre" non-scouting background guy running personnel.

 

And the more I digest the argument that's really on Dan not Bruce.  Dan sets up these losing structures over and over again. 

 

I understand your points.  But I am not as smitten as you seem to be about this roster.  To me the roster has too many open questions where I am just up in the air about too many things to think gosh maybe I don't love Bruce but look at what the underlings have done under him.    I don't think I've ever been so up in the air about this team for better or worse.  I really don't know.  I can see 11-5 and I can see 7-9 just as easily.  

 

  

[CTskin]

Both seem to be ****ty human beings and make this franchise a media punchline, so it's a wash there. I find no redeeming qualities in Cerrato when it comes to football knowledge, so to me he's the obvious loser of this debate. During his tenure, he drafted five starter-quality players; our 2014 draft alone matched that total. The horrific 2008 draft was the epitome of his overall football comprehension. 

 

When it comes to Bruce, he seems to either be wising up or listening more to the talented football minds around him. We had a consensus A-graded draft last year and this year looks to be very promising as well. His first couple of drafts were rocky as he got sure-fire studs with his 1st round picks, but not much after that; I have a feeling that Snyder still had his dictator hat on during that time. Regardless, since the 2012 draft, we've drafted three plus starters in each class. 

 

Sure I miss the big splash FA acquisitions, but under Allen we're building a team how I believe is "the right way." Draft well, re-sign the studs, and dip our toe into FA. He recently learned that DL deserves a legitimate investment and hopefully next year he realizes the same goes for LG... Now, let's just try to avoid being the most injured team in football for the 3rd year in a row and see what this team is actually capable of.

 

Draft History Cheat Sheet:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Redskins_draft_history

 

[TSO]

16 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

So the guy responsible for bringing in the longest tenured coach during Snyder’s ownership and who seems to be a pretty damn good talent evaluator, as well as a young up and coming talent evaluator who has overseen two very good drafts in a row, is somehow worse than the train wreck that was Vinny Ceratto? By your own account our FO is average. But Bruce Allen is terrible. So wouldn’t that make the guys (Kyle and Jay) who prop up Bruce Allen’s terribleness and make us into a mediocre FO pretty freakin good? Just trying to follow the logic here, because I struggle to see how someone who brought us Kyle and Jay, who by your admission are pretty good in their roles, is only slightly better than Ceratto. Bug eyes was an embarrassment. You want to talk about punchline around the league? People may dislike Bruce Allen the person, but I would bet my life savings they respect more about his ability to run a football operation than they did Vinny Ceratto. Also by your own admission, you give Bruce a large nod in the drafting department over Vinny. The draft is the lifeline or the pipeline of an NFL organization. And it’s never been more important than it is now due to rising % of the cap allocated to having a good QB.

 

The logic is actually very sound, and I addressed this recently in a post you said you agreed with. You were just being gentle to my fragile ego weren’t you?  

 

Joking aside, it was really the main theme of the post:

 

 

Pretty much the entire post addressed this issue, but it was (I know I know, lol) very long, so to avoid redundancy (which is your fault for bringing this up again ) here’s just a couple key excerpts: 

 

Quote

There should be an ability for us to look at the organization and its parts without an exclusively holistic approach. 

 

We should be able to look at a guy like Bruce Allen who has been here going on 9 years and wonder why it took this long to get the roster to where it’s at now. We can recognize who has the ability to override and undermine others by virtue of position/title. We can look at some of the absolutely mind boggling decisions made under him that in no way shape or form can be considered good resource management or based on healthy organizational principles. We can look at it with nuance and separate where the success is coming from and from whom (like a Jay Gruden) and where any obstacles to higher levels of success are coming from (Dan/Bruce). 

 

Quote

 

Some of us will attribute whatever success this team has to certain individuals whom, while hired by the top brass, have also had to overcome said top brass to (hopefully) achieve that success and have been hindered by them far more than anyone should have to be. 

 

We can actually look at an organization as to what it should be - a mutually beneficial support structure - and attempt to recognize which parts of it aren’t beneficial and which are. 

 

I hope this helps you understand more a bit of the rationale behind where we’re coming from. Hiring is one part of it, and so while Bruce should be commended for that, it’s far from the end of it. As an executive, how you enable, elevate, support, etc... your hires is much more important than the act of hiring itself. 

 

Btw, I wanted to say that I really appreciate your approach recently around the board (especially taking ownership for the “don’t talk about Kirk” stuff, but in general I get the sense that there’s more of an attempt to really understand where some of us are coming from on your end).  

[TK]

83 pages in & a bag of suck is still a bag of suck. Even when compared to the previous bag of suck. The only difference is the current one wears nicer suits.

[Conn]

Its crazy that we still think we can decipher anything meaningful about the power structure within this FO when they managed to hide from us Scot's reduction in power for, what, over a year? Or almost a year? There were rumblings toward the end before it all blew up, but we were all still saying "in Scot we trust" and giving him credit for everything months after he had been benched, so to speak. We had no idea. Then it all blew up and we got reports on how it really was, which we also can't confirm. Just like we really don't know how much of a say Doug has, or Kyle Smith, or Gruden or anyone else. We don't know and won't unless Bruce leaves and someone is actually promoted to GM with final say, with no one else above them on the organizational chart to potentially take it away. Until then, we don't know a damn thing. We can only hope that since they insist on an opaque group decision-making format that makes accountability tough outside the building, they find the right balance and keep improving the roster. Even if we hate the process, we have to root for the right outcome, and hope they see the benefits of a traditional structure post-Bruce, whenever that is. Like most of you, I hope that Kyle Smith is the real deal as a talent guy and becomes the GM-in-waiting until its time to stop waiting. 

 

I'm not trying to start another discussion about Scot vs anyone else in this current FO, or who is overrated or whatever, by the way. Merely pointing out that its really not possible for us to be sure what the balance of power is behind the scenes, no matter how much we try to parse radio interviews and beat reports. The Scot situation proves that we don't have a damn clue what really goes on in the room where it happens. 

[HardcoreZorn]

14 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

The logic is actually very sound, and I addressed this recently in a post you said you agreed with. You were just being gentle to my fragile ego weren’t you?  

 

Joking aside, it was really the main theme of the post:

 

 

Pretty much the entire post addressed this issue, but it was (I know I know, lol) very long, so to avoid redundancy (which is your fault for bringing this up again ) here’s just a couple key excerpts: 

 

 

 

I hope this helps you understand more a bit of the rationale behind where we’re coming from. Hiring is one part of it, and so while Bruce should be commended for that, it’s far from the end of it. As an executive, how you enable, elevate, support, etc... your hires is much more important than the act of hiring itself. 

I really do agree with much of it! And before anyone thinks I'm straddling both sides of the argument, I'm really not and maybe that's difficult to convey through writing or maybe it's because this is an issue that sticks with me and I post on it from an opposing viewpoint. But I DO recognize that Bruce has presented obstacles that make it more difficult for this organization to become a contender. I DO recognize the lack of power structure that can result in a lack of accountability and confusion throughout. And I DO recognize that nine years is a long time to get the roster right. But none of what I just said changes the fact that Vinny is even in the same ballpark for me.

 

And while it took Bruce 9 years to get the roster right, it took Vinny however many years to completely dismantle the talent base here. He, unfortunately, never learned the basics. And while Bruce has made a few costly trades himself, at least they were with the goal of obtaining a franchise QB. Some of the deals we used to make when Vinny was around are straight up cringe worthy. Duckett for a 3rd? 33 year old Jason Taylor for a 2nd? Lloyd for a 3rd and 4th? For the current regime, we just potentially traded away Morgan Moses, Preston Smith, Jordan Reed, and Montae Nicholson. Those were the picks those guys were drafted with. Vinny also dedicated almost zero draft resources to the lines, another basic. You win up front, so yeah, the fact we have drafted Scherff, Allen, and Payne with three of our last four first rounders is a welcome change, and easily slides Bruce in front of Cerratto for me. Is it sad the measuring stick is so low? Yes, it is. But I really do love how this team is finally being built and I could never say that about a Vinny run team. So I am operating from that vantage point. But that does not take away from the fact that Bruce has deficiencies himself. If Kyle Smith were officially given the role of GM and full control over personnel, I'd be right there celebrating with all of you guys. I certainly would not be crying if Bruce were gone, but I will always firmly believe he was better than the previous doofus by a wide margin.

14 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Btw, I wanted to say that I really appreciate your approach recently around the board (especially taking ownership for the “don’t talk about Kirk” stuff, but in general I get the sense that there’s more of an attempt to really understand where some of us are coming from on your end).  

I do appreciate it. I did realize my posts were coming off a bit strong and have tried to simmer down a little LOL. In the end, we are all fans of the B&G and that's freakin awesome! Cheers!

[HardcoreZorn]

On 6/28/2018 at 6:42 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Just zoning in on this point.  Correct me if I am wrong.

 

To you.

Maybe Bruce is a douche and have some of these personalities issues.  But just ignore him.  You like Jay?  You like Kyle?  You like the drafts?  These are the fundamental points.  Just ignore the noise -- and yeah maybe there is something to the noise but some if it is hyperbole.  

I do think some of the noise is hyperbole. And I guess I am able to look past a lot of it because I love how this roster is being constructed and I agree with their approach to building the team. See, I don't view Bruce Allen's free agency approach as a complete fail. In, fact I also agree with his approach to FA generally speaking. Which is, use it as a way to temporarily plug holes on cheap contracts, while we continue to draft and replace those guys with homegrown players. Every once in a while, dip your toe in the more expensive side of FA aka Djax, Norman, Richardson. And once you have proven capable of at least advancing in the playoffs, then go and sign one of the big dogs to help push you over. We haven't gotten to that point, but that's where I would envision signing a Calais Campbell type. And yeah, he brought us Jay, who has brought us excellent position coaches, and he has brought in what looks to be a very young and promising personnel guy who appears to be running the drafts with little to no interference from Bruce himself. And again, I'm measuring Bruce against Vinny right now. Not a very high standard to compete against.

On 6/28/2018 at 6:42 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

I understand your points.  But I am not as smitten as you seem to be about this roster.  To me the roster has too many open questions where I am just up in the air about too many things to think gosh maybe I don't love Bruce but look at what the underlings have done under him.    I don't think I've ever been so up in the air about this team for better or worse.  I really don't know.  I can see 11-5 and I can see 7-9 just as easily.  

 

  

Yeah, every team has question marks and this years Redskins are no different. But unless we get absolutely ravaged (injuries are of course going to occur) like last year, I would be surprised at another 7-9. I see this as the most talented Redskins roster since probably 2005. It's been a very very long time since I've been this bullish on the roster, but I really do believe the talent is there to win 10+ games and go to the playoffs this year. Jay knows it and expects it. They have to win this year. And I think they get it done. But we'll see.

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

I do think some of the noise is hyperbole. And I guess I am able to look past a lot of it because I love how this roster is being constructed and I agree with their approach to building the team. See, I don't view Bruce Allen's free agency approach as a complete fail. In, fact I also agree with his approach to FA generally speaking. Which is, use it as a way to temporarily plug holes on cheap contracts, while we continue to draft and replace those guys with homegrown players.

 

Yeah I am almost an all or nothing guy with FA.  Buy a really good player or don't bother.  I was going through the Giants FA in recent years for a different debate so I looked at what they did -- bargain bin, bargain big bargain bin -- mostly come up with crap results.  Then in 2016, they turned around a horrible defense into an almost monster defense just like that by signing 3 marquee guys on that side of the ball.  They slid last year with their injuries but many think they will rebound because of all the talent they have -- some of that talent is FA driven.  Ditto Jax, Denver and some other teams.

 

It pains me every time I hear about L. Joseph being a monster in Minny.  I wanted him back then (among others here bad).  Now the Vikings sign the guy i wanted in the FA crop, Sheldon Richardson.  I wanted Calais last year.  Teams are signing these guys without crippling their cap going forward like Vinny did because most of the guaranteed money is for 2 years.

 

I'd rather not have the bargain bin FAs period.  I don't buy the lets get three bargan basement guys for the price of 1 pro bowler.  Yeah Hayensworth stunk but in retrospect was that really that much of a surprise?   You can swing for the fences some and it can work.  Vinny's strike outs in FA IMO wasn't about him swinging for the fences but about who he swung for. 

 

And I think I am fair to Bruce in this regard where I lay out before FA what I want.  Zach Brown for example was one of my targets in last FA so when he goes out and gets him -- I give him kudos.  

 

To me Chris Russell has been hot of late as to being accurate as to behind the scenes goings on.  And I've elaborated multiple times as to examples of it.  And I don't cherry pick his reports to fit my preconceptions.  So for example when he said he heard Scot has had some real behind the scenes antics and needed to go -- I backed that thought and defended Bruce on it back then.

 

So likewise when Russell said this off season Jay isn't happy with Bruce's approach to FA this off season.  I think there is likely something to it.  When multiple reporters said Jay wanted to keep D. Jax and the FO overruled him.  I think there is something to that, too.  I don't get the vibe that Jay loves the FO approach to FA all the time where they are all on the same page.

 

7 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 

Yeah, every team has question marks and this years Redskins are no different. But unless we get absolutely ravaged (injuries are of course going to occur) like last year, I would be surprised at another 7-9. I see this as the most talented Redskins roster since probably 2005. It's been a very very long time since I've been this bullish on the roster, but I really do believe the talent is there to win 10+ games and go to the playoffs this year. Jay knows it and expects it. They have to win this year. And I think they get it done. But we'll see.

 

Agree about question marks.  I think the issue with the Redskins specifically is some key players have injury concerns -- or to be more specific, this team has their own Odell Beckham and that's Jordan Reed.  The Giants are worthless without Beckham typically.  The Redskins aren't as dependent on Reed but I think this offense is night and day different with him in versus out of the lineup. 

 

You got a healthy Jordan Reed among other things its a 10-6-11-5 type team.  Without him, I don't think so.  Using the Giants as an example, Engram is borderline Jordan Reed like.  Even Cooley who loves Reed admits that.  I think most would take Engram over Reed for durability reasons.    My point is the Giants have 2 guys who can kill you.  I touted P. Richardson as one of the FAs I like and I like Doctson more than most but neither are game breakers, yet.

 

I think Jordan has a lot of sway on our offense and until we find another player of his caliber or develop one -- he makes a big difference.  Jay himself said Nicholson is the defense's version of Reed -- ironically that dude was banged up in college and in year 1.

 

My point is they need to stay healthy.  And 2 key players are arguably injury prone.  And arguably the next two most important players or even equal or more important, Thompson and Trent are both coming off of serious injury.

 

Hence question marks to me with luck being a factor positive or negative.

 

 

[TSO]

9 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 

And while it took Bruce 9 years to get the roster right, it took Vinny however many years to completely dismantle the talent base here. He, unfortunately, never learned the basics. And while Bruce has made a few costly trades himself, at least they were with the goal of obtaining a franchise QB. Some of the deals we used to make when Vinny was around are straight up cringe worthy. Duckett for a 3rd? 33 year old Jason Taylor for a 2nd? Lloyd for a 3rd and 4th? For the current regime, we just potentially traded away Morgan Moses, Preston Smith, Jordan Reed, and Montae Nicholson. Those were the picks those guys were drafted with. Vinny also dedicated almost zero draft resources to the lines, another basic. You win up front, so yeah, the fact we have drafted Scherff, Allen, and Payne with three of our last four first rounders is a welcome change, and easily slides Bruce in front of Cerratto for me. Is it sad the measuring stick is so low? Yes, it is. But I really do love how this team is finally being built and I could never say that about a Vinny run team. So I am operating from that vantage point. But that does not take away from the fact that Bruce has deficiencies himself. If Kyle Smith were officially given the role of GM and full control over personnel, I'd be right there celebrating with all of you guys. I certainly would not be crying if Bruce were gone, but I will always firmly believe he was better than the previous doofus by a wide margin.

 

Well, and this is probably my fault for inserting myself into this discussion now, but I wasn't really talking about comparing Bruce to Vinny as much as I was just addressing the idea of how much credit Bruce should get for hiring some of the quality guys within the FO versus everything else. 

 

But, yeah, like @Skinsinparadise has mentioned numerous times and I agree with, I'd put Bruce slightly above Vinny. But I do think it's arguable, which is an absolute travesty to me in and of itself. I mean, any idiot should be able to out-produce Vinny. It's embarrassing that it's even a thing we're discussing here almost ten years after Vinny. :/ 

 

But is that on Dan more than anyone else? I lean towards that, personally. 

 

In terms of the arguments you present here regarding the Bruce vs. Vinny discussion... I don't necessarily have a real contention with any of it, but I'd say one very significant aspect of all this that you're missing here is that Bruce has been Team President his entire tenure, second only to Dan in the organizational hierarchy. Vinny, on the other hand, had Gibbs as Team President for 4 years of his tenure. Furthermore, at least on the surface, Dan was much more involved during much of that time. 

 

So it's tough to make a good comparison, really. I do question just how much involvement Dan still has, and I am open to the idea that Bruce is just another victim of his to some degree. That there is a legit possibility that Dan has just done a better job of hiding it, especially within the building, and only shows his true face to Bruce alone. Basically, he's wised up into playing the "good cop" when he's around anyone at Redskins Park, but behind the scenes he's telling Bruce a completely different thing and Bruce executes it. But it's more speculation, or a gut feeling if you will on my end than anything concrete (well, other than the ugly way things end up being handled which has a Snyder-esque feel to it).   

[goskins10]

30 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Well, and this is probably my fault for inserting myself into this discussion now, but I wasn't really talking about comparing Bruce to Vinny as much as I was just addressing the idea of how much credit Bruce should get for hiring some of the quality guys within the FO versus everything else. 

 

Edit Basically, he's wised up into playing the "good cop" when he's around anyone at Redskins Park, but behind the scenes he's telling Bruce a completely different thing and Bruce executes it. But it's more speculation, or a gut feeling if you will on my end than anything concrete (well, other than the ugly way things end up being handled which has a Snyder-esque feel to it).   

 

@HardcoreZorn

 

I am not a big fan of Bruce but it's pretty clear he did better than vinnie. For me that's like saying dog **** is better than horse **** because it's a smaller pile. But they are still both ****.

 

In fairness I have said the team is being built in a better way than before. I loved this latest draft. And I am not as down on the FA path as some. It took 9 yrs but late is better than never. I do wonder how much of it Doug, but to be fair in that case either Dan had to tell Bruce to give Doug the authority or Bruce did it on his own. Either way, a good move if that's what has happened.

 

And I do agree Vinnie/Dan sucked every bit of life out of the team and cash strapped them in the process. If nothing else, like the roster or not (and I do), he has done a great job of keeping them from being cash strapped when you consider the garbage he inherited. They tried to get rid of it quickly and got caught but I don't blame him really for that one. It was worth a shot, They were losing the CAP space anyway. 

 

But the part that's bolded really bothers me, a lot. And it keeps me from giving dan or bruce a lot of credit for much of anything because the way they do things keeps me from being proud of the organization. Is that all Bruce? Unlikely. Like TSO and SIP, I would not be at all surprised if in the end it was dan pulling the strings behind the scenes and letting bruce take the fall publicly instead of being more out in front like he was with Vinnie so he did not take direct blame as much. But much the same when shanny used that excuse, you can only be used if you allow it. So whether it's dan on Bruce or both, Bruce owns at least part of it. 

 

Before Dan was the owner I was proud to be a Redskins fan. Even if we lost - or had a losing season I felt a sense of pride, especially during the Gibbs yrs. He brought some of that back in Gibbs part 2, but even that had a snyderesque feel to it. Especially when Gibbs left and they did the whole Zorn experiment (nice guy in way over his head!). 

 

My first feeling of embarrassment was when he went out and got Jeff George. Since then even when they do the right thing they can't do it with class. The latest two examples are Scot and Kirk. I had no problem with them firing Scot. But why the trashy leaks and the horrendous timing? Same with Kirk. Ok, you are not sold on him as a franchise QB. They have much smarter football minds in the room than me. But why all the drama? Why not separate like Reid did with Alex Smith?  

 

I love it when the Redskins win. And yes winning will take some of the sting off. But I want to also be proud of the team I support. As long as Dan is here, unless he has a long streak of showing a different side, I will always be waiting for the classless shoe to drop. Like deciding that the parade is pay-per-view. Or like J Jones did to Jimmy Johnson, fire Jay because he got too much credit for the wins. It is always something with him. 

 

I think someone said it best - this team can't stand prosperity. May have even been that idiot Steven A Smith - but even a blind squirrel finds a nut -so even a pompous mouthy giants fan accidentally says the right thing once in a while. 

[Burgold]

We've potentially had two good drafts in a row. However, the team is probably not where we need it to be. The QB fiasco was a horribly bungled affair. I don't know when the bridge with Kirk was burnt. Was it after we drafted him? After we optioned RGIII? After Bruce wrote that G-d awful press release blaming Kirk for not signing... but that was gross incompetence. Overall, Bruce has likely done more to be run out of town than he has done which makes him a valuable commodity to keep. Still, this year probably tells the tale. I think that Jay was right, it's year five of his coaching regime and year 9 of Allen's tenure... there are no excuses. The team should be built.

 

Normally, you'd say a new QB deserves at least a year to acclimate, but I think this is a prove it year for everyone. Even it it's not they better treat it like it is.

[theTruthTeller]

On 6/29/2018 at 8:22 PM, Burgold said:

... there are no excuses. The team should be built...

From "winning off the field" to "Scot's 120 year old grandmother died" to "Cousins never sent us a counteroffer", If there is one aspect of Bruce's performance which is without peer, it's his ability to make ridiculous excuses for failure with a straight face.

 

I'm sure it hasn't escaped Bruce's notice that the Skins will likely be significant underdogs in 3 of the first five games, and a pick in another.  He'll be ready.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

On 6/29/2018 at 9:11 PM, goskins10 said:

 

@HardcoreZorn

 

I am not a big fan of Bruce but it's pretty clear he did better than vinnie. For me that's like saying dog **** is better than horse **** because it's a smaller pile. But they are still both ****.

 

 

Oh man, I like that a lot. hahaha

On 6/28/2018 at 10:33 AM, CTskin said:

Both seem to be ****ty human beings and make this franchise a media punchline, so it's a wash there.

 

 

I actually don't think this is true at all. 

 

Bruce seems shady and everything that's bad about a politician (in fairness, he has some of the benefits of being a politician too). So, I can see why we'd say that he seems to be a ****ty human being. 

 

Vinny seemed incompetent, goofy, and in way over his head, but I don't recall anything he did that ever seemed conniving or malicious. 

[Riggo#44]

16 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Vinny seemed incompetent, goofy, and in way over his head, but I don't recall anything he did that ever seemed conniving or malicious. 

 

He was very conniving. After Schottenheimer fired him, he was constantly in Snyder's ear, undermining Schotty. He rolled Zorn under the bus, saying he gave him a playoff roster. What like the sacks n' stuff?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

49 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

He was very conniving. After Schottenheimer fired him, he was constantly in Snyder's ear, undermining Schotty. He rolled Zorn under the bus, saying he gave him a playoff roster. What like the sacks n' stuff?

 

I suppose those are good examples...I just don't think he's clever enough to be overly conniving. I guess it's a low bar to convince Snyder, but I still think Allen is slightly more scheming than Cerrato ever was. At the same time, I think Allen is also slightly more competent running the organization, even though Cerrato has some sort of background with personnel. 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

On ‎7‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 2:14 PM, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

 

 

Vinny seemed incompetent, goofy, and in way over his head, but I don't recall anything he did that ever seemed conniving or malicious. 

 

Vinny just seemed weird. I will never get over that interview where he explained why he had a picture of Snyder's father in his office and started crying.

 

But I don't recall anything overly malicious that he did. And anything that did happen definitely had the "following orders" vibe.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

“I mean, I thought we had a pretty good plan in place. I’m not sure that we had everybody’s support, but that’s ok as long as you communicate those things. The absence of that communication was as big a problem as any.”
 
Were the communication problems with ownership?
 
“No, actually, Dan and I, we interacted on a regular basis,” Marty said. “And I like Dan. You know, I just always felt that there may have been some other people in the building..."
 
[...]Pollin: Well there was one person that you got out of the building very early. (he means Vinny here)
Marty: “That’s right!”
Pollin: Are you indicating that he may have still been in the building when you no longer had him in the building?
Marty: “Well, I’ll say this to you, the irony of it was that he left the building, and I had not been gone very long, and within a period of a couple of weeks he was back in the building.”
Pollin: And you didn’t have the ability to kick this person out of the building?
Marty: “Well actually, no, they did kick him out of the building. He didn’t come back until after I was gone....Dan was not the problem. Ultimately it falls on ownership, but Dan was not the problem.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/post/marty-schottenheimer-on-cerrato-snyder-and-shanahan/2011/03/24/AB0EmeOB_blog.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f0968b26391e

[Dissident2]

16 hours ago, Califan007 said:

Marty: “Well actually, no, they did kick him out of the building. He didn’t come back until after I was gone....Dan was not the problem. Ultimately it falls on ownership, but Dan was not the problem.”

 

What a weird comment. "Ultimately it falls on ownership" in no way exonerates "Dan" from being part of "the problem" in this scenario. As the guy who made the final decision and then brought that buffoon back into the building, seems like he was a MAJOR part of the problem. 

 

It's like a drunk saying, "ultimately it's my responsibility for taking a dump on the stage at my kid's graduation while singing 'If You Wanna Be My Lover,' but the problem was the alcohol content in the 10 shots I knowingly guzzled in the car before going in."

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 hours ago, Dissident2 said:

 

What a weird comment. "Ultimately it falls on ownership" in no way exonerates "Dan" from being part of "the problem" in this scenario. As the guy who made the final decision and then brought that buffoon back into the building, seems like he was a MAJOR part of the problem. 

 

It's like a drunk saying, "ultimately it's my responsibility for taking a dump on the stage at my kid's graduation while singing 'If You Wanna Be My Lover,' but the problem was the alcohol content in the 10 shots I knowingly guzzled in the car before going in."

 

I agree, though my post was more about Vinny. Through the haze of passing time (and the desire to view Allen as arguably worse), Vinny was being portrayed on the thread as a goofy incompetent but not much else. Marty was clearly saying that even though he was no longer physically in the building, Vinny still had the ear of the owner and was undermining what he wanted to accomplish with Snyder and was even affecting the communication between the two men. Basically backing up @Riggo#44's post above about Vinny being far more than merely incompetent.

[carex]

On 6/29/2018 at 9:22 PM, Burgold said:

We've potentially had two good drafts in a row. However, the team is probably not where we need it to be. The QB fiasco was a horribly bungled affair. I don't know when the bridge with Kirk was burnt. Was it after we drafted him? After we optioned RGIII? After Bruce wrote that G-d awful press release blaming Kirk for not signing... but that was gross incompetence. Overall, Bruce has likely done more to be run out of town than he has done which makes him a valuable commodity to keep. Still, this year probably tells the tale. I think that Jay was right, it's year five of his coaching regime and year 9 of Allen's tenure... there are no excuses. The team should be built.

 

Normally, you'd say a new QB deserves at least a year to acclimate, but I think this is a prove it year for everyone. Even it it's not they better treat it like it is.

 

I think it was when we drafted him.  Looking back at Kirk's history, no one had ever really WANTED him as the man, and then when he gets selected in the NFL draft, when he's supposed to have a sign that a team really wants him, he's picked by a team who spent three firsts and a second on a QB in the same draft.  Suddenly he's neither the QB of the present or the future, he's the emergency fallback option.

 

[HardcoreZorn]

Direct quote from AJ Francis, currently of the Giants, who is good friends with my roommate and staying with me for a couple of days. “Bruce Allen is an asshole”

[Spearfeather]

34 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

Direct quote from AJ Francis, currently of the Giants, who is good friends with my roommate and staying with me for a couple of days. “Bruce Allen is an asshole” 

 

 ... and after leaving the Redskins for the last time, declared their logo to be racist.

 

 

Any way your roommate could ask him why he signed with us four times ?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

10 hours ago, Spearfeather said:

 

 ... and after leaving the Redskins for the last time, declared their logo to be racist.

 

 

Any way your roommate could ask him why he signed with us four times ?

The easy answer here is that beggars can’t be choosers.

 

That said, it doesn’t make him wrong in his assessment.

[Spearfeather]

2 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The easy answer here is that beggars can’t be choosers.

 

That said, it doesn’t make him wrong in his assessment.

 

We'll have to disagree on his status as a beggar and he has numerous choices.

 

As for one of his assessments ....

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

18 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

We'll have to disagree on his status as a beggar and he has numerous choices.

 

As for one of his assessments ....

 

 

 

My point was that Francis isn't a high level player with the ability to just sign wherever he pleases.  So I'm not following you on how he has so many choices or what the picture of him signing autographs as a Skin has to do with his assessment of Bruce.