The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

[KDawg]

26 minutes ago, TK said:

But you weren’t at every game.    

 

Never claimed I was.

 

Scott went where he wanted to. Sometimes he’d start in the Press Box & end up in a private box (if the wife was with him) or on the field. Even the he’d end up on the field. I’d usually end up having some sort of conversation with him on the field.

 

Yeah. He got up a lot, too. Was always some shade of red, though. He seemed like a nice dude. Got excited every time the Skins did something well. Got... not so excited... every time they didn't. He legit looked like a fan.

[TK]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

Scot was pretty much next to me in the booth at least twice.

But you weren’t at every game.    

 

Scott went where he wanted to. Sometimes he’d start in the Press Box & end up in a private box (if the wife was with him) or on the field. Even the he’d end up on the field. I’d usually end up having some sort of conversation with him on the field. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

12 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Finlay also went back to the Alex Smith trade and said coaches weren't aware the deal was being done but were cool with it once they heard about it.   Finlay suggested a similar dynamic with Clinton-Dix and he more or less implied in a podcast that Clinton-Dix is likely getting lots of playing time in spite of his struggles so the decision makers who made the trade can ultimately be vindicated.

 

 

 

I never understood this logic.

 

If a player you traded for is playing poorly, seeing him play poorly for a longer period of time doesn't vindicate anything lol...in fact, it just underscores how bad the trade was.  I've never, with any team in the NFL, heard media pundits and fans say "look at how much playing time that guy is getting...must have been a good trade, then." If the thought process is supposed to be that he will eventually start playing well, that can happen whether they play him or not. They can always put him back in the lineup once he's proving his worth in practice. The more logical explanation is that the Skins only have him for this year and need to make a decision on him, which is difficult to do when he's not playing...that, coupled with we don't exactly have stud safeties sitting on the sideline. Not to mention, everyone praised the Skins for the trade at the time...it would be different if they were roundly criticized for the trade and Allen and Snyder wanted to prove everyone wrong.

 

It reminds me a bit of how some fans and media members would say the reason Snyder and Allen didn't want to trade Cousins is that they didn't want Shanahan to be proven right about how good Kirk could be. The fact that the Skins made him starter over RG3, franchise tagged him twice, and saw him set franchise passing records already proved Shanahan was right lol...I didn't understand the logic of that thinking, either. Or the belief that, if you want to garner trade offers, you need to act like a certain player is on your radar so that other teams who also want that player will offer to trade into your spot. Um, no lol...if the Skins act like they want a certain player in the draft, other teams will make trade offers to the team picking before the Redskins. Never understood that logic, either.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, Califan007 said:

 

I never understood this logic.

 

If a player you traded for is playing poorly, seeing him play poorly for a longer period of time doesn't vindicate anything lol...in fact, it just underscores how bad the trade was.  I've never, with any team in the NFL, heard media pundits and fans say "look at how much playing time that guy is getting...must have been a good trade, then." If the thought process is supposed to be that he will eventually start playing well, that can happen whether they play him or not. They can always put him back in the lineup once he's proving his worth in practice. The more logical explanation is that the Skins only have him for this year and need to make a decision on him, which is difficult to do when he's not playing...that, coupled with we don't exactly have stud safeties sitting on the sideline. Not to mention, everyone praised the Skins for the trade at the time...it would be different if they were roundly criticized for the trade and Allen and Snyder wanted to prove everyone wrong.

 

I think you are losing the forest for the trees with this point.  But to indulge if the theory is a new player is going to take time to find their groove -- there is logic to that thought.  If you a bench a dude it sort of admits defeat.  Football is much more amorphous than baseball where you don't have obvious stats to indicate good or poor play for some positions safety being one of them.  But lets run with everything you are saying is bullseye on the mark -- its not really the point, regardless.  Finlay was using that as just one example but saying he hears that Bruce meddles heavily with the roster on issues including playing time.  He wasn't just using one example and extrapolating that maybe this means a whole lot more and reading into it.  He was flat out saying Bruce does it a lot.   Now maybe Finlay is wrong -- who knows but Finlay for what its worth laid the point down thick. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think you are losing the forest for the trees with this point.  But to indulge if the theory is a new player is going to take time to find their groove -- there is logic to that thought.  If you a bench a dude it sort of admits defeat.  Football is much more amorphous than baseball where you don't have obvious stats to indicate good or poor play for some positions safety being one of them.  But lets run with everything you are saying is bullseye on the mark -- its not really the point, regardless.  Finlay was using that as just one example but saying he hears that Bruce meddles heavily with the roster on issues including playing time.  He wasn't just using one example and extrapolating that maybe this means a whole lot more and reading into it.  He was flat out saying Bruce does it a lot.   Now maybe Finlay is wrong -- who knows but Finlay for what its worth laid the point down thick. 

 

But here's the problem with saying it's not the point...if we run with everything I said being "bullseye on the mark", that means Finley is using flawed logic to make a point that people are now taking as fact. If the logic is flawed, I don't take what the flawed logic is supporting as fact.

[Skinsinparadise]

23 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

But here's the problem with saying it's not the point...if we run with everything I said being "bullseye on the mark", that means Finley is using flawed logic to make a point that people are now taking as fact. If the logic is flawed, I don't take what the flawed logic is supporting as fact.

 

Finlay isn't making a theory based on Clinton-Dix's playing time and that wasn't even his lead example by the way but I don't feel like repeating the original post on it.  You have another explanation for it that makes logical sense to you -- not so much to me but for argument's sake you picking apart an example based on your own logic is meaningless to the point Finlay was making.  Finlay said Bruce HEAVILY involves himself with Jay's roster-playing time.  Sheehan said he heard the same.    They were making a global point saying he does it a lot. 

 

It's like my kid coming back with a D grade in a class and he has an explanation for one of the quizzes where he scored a D and I don't quite buy it but for devil's advocate reasons I'll go on that ride but then I'd ask him what's the explanation for all the other quizzes he got a D in too -- am i just supposed to assume there was extenuating circumstances every time that I should support? 

 

But if you want to be skeptical and not buy into Finlay-Sheehan's sources on it -- its cool.  😉  No biggie.  I among others just repeated Finlay's thoughts and Finlay's comments took off on twitter.  I am not Finlay's agent so believe or don't believe all the same to me.  

[SkinsFTW]

Lets all  keep pretending that Bruce doesn't meddle on Dan's behalf. It's always proven to be the correct view around here, until the actual truth is revealed. Then all the naysayers have no comment. Doug is the GM yet the Team President makes all of the decisions on everything anyway.

 

Bringing in a guy who you have no control over after this year and expecting him to play, when the HC and DC didn't even ask for him in the first place, then he proceeds to suck bad. It's 100% typical Dan Snyder Redskins Fantasy Football team BS. Hilariously vintage Dan Snyder Redskins buffoonery.

 

And that's why we are hearing about it. The coaches are obviously pissed.

 

It wasn't just a random throw away when Doug spoke out that he was being questioned by Dan and Bruce for signing AP before the season started. He was telling us that nothing at all has changed. Every move must be signed off on by the teams top 2 buffoons.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Finlay isn't making a theory based on Clinton-Dix's playing time and that wasn't even his lead example by the way but I don't feel like repeating the original post on it.  You have another explanation for it that makes logical sense to you -- not so much to me but for argument's sake you picking apart an example based on your own logic is meaningless to the point Finlay was making.  Finlay said Bruce HEAVILY involves himself with Jay's roster-playing time.  Sheehan said he heard the same.    They were making a global point saying he does it a lot. 

 

It's like my kid coming back with a D grade in a class and he has an explanation for one of the quizzes where he scored a D and I don't quite buy it but for devil's advocate reasons I'll go on that ride but then I'd ask him what's the explanation for all the other quizzes he got a D in too -- am i just supposed to assume there was extenuating circumstances every time? 

 

But if you want to be skeptical and not buy into Finlay-Sheehan's sources on it -- its cool. 😉

2

 

 

 

I'm gonna say this not just for you, but for everyone.

 

I'm not "picking apart" an argument, I'm showing an argument's flaw as I see it. I do that a lot, mainly because I am in no way the type of person to simply buy into something when it supports my beliefs. I also find importance in details and assume others do as well, or else why even mention it to begin with. An incredibly disingenuous way to discuss things, imo. 

 

"Here's another reason why you can't trust Bob...."

 

"But that reason doesn't make any sense."

 

"That reason isn't the point, the point is that Bob has proven himself time and again as untrustworthy."

 

"Then why did you bring it up?"

 

That's pretty much me in a nutshell lol...

 

As well as, if I isolate a comment from a longer post, it's because I'm talking only about that comment, not the post as a whole. I'm also never one to think the validity of an overall point of a post means everything said within it is, by default, either rendered valid because of it or rendered irrelevant of it. I never even made a comment about your overall point (or Finlay's overall point, whichever).  I made a comment about the line of thinking that coaches/GMs/owners/whoever keep players on the field who are playing poorly because they want to vindicate their acquiring the player. This is an argument that has been given since long before I even knew extremeskins even existed lol...so my post was not about Bruce Allen or Snyder or even the Redskins. It was about that line of thinking being flawed.

 

 

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

 

Here's another example:

 

"Doug is the GM yet the Team President makes all of the decisions on everything anyway. "

 

Doug is not the GM. He even said he didn't want to be the GM. Bruce even said that Doug's plan specifically said the Skins didn't need a GM. It's even been argued as to why the Skins current setup is flawed, because we (fans) don't know who is responsible for what. Because there's no GM.

 

But I will bet a year's paycheck that "Doug is the GM" will be said at least 5 times over the next 2 months on this board lol...the fact that the criticisms of the FO seem to contradict and collide against each other is apparently irrelevant to everyone but me.

 

 

 

 

[Est.1974]

On 12/20/2018 at 1:44 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Finlay also went back to the Alex Smith trade and said coaches weren't aware the deal was being done but were cool with it once they heard about it.   Finlay suggested a similar dynamic with Clinton-Dix and he more or less implied in a podcast that Clinton-Dix is likely getting lots of playing time in spite of his struggles so the decision makers who made the trade can ultimately be vindicated.

 

If he sticks around, just wait for him to bring in Flacco.

 

As for Clinton Dix, the chatter was that he was getting full playing time to allow a proper assessment of what kind of money should be offered him at the end of the season. But yes, that's not how the decision making process should strictly be working.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

12 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

Here's another example:

 

"Doug is the GM yet the Team President makes all of the decisions on everything anyway. "

 

Doug is not the GM. He even said he didn't want to be the GM. Bruce even said that Doug's plan specifically said the Skins didn't need a GM. It's even been argued as to why the Skins current setup is flawed, because we (fans) don't know who is responsible for what. Because there's no GM.

 

But I will bet a year's paycheck that "Doug is the GM" will be said at least 5 times over the next 2 months on this board lol...the fact that the criticisms of the FO seem to contradict and collide against each other is apparently irrelevant to everyone but me.

 

 

 

 

 

How can we read this post and not all collectively agree not to write the bolded thing above for 2 months and then split the money? 

 

Also, I agree with everything you said in your previous two posts...I hate the strawman narratives that are generated (not only here, but by everyone in town). My favorite for a long time was criticism of Snyder and lumping in the stadium: "Also, not only does Schneider meddle and fire coaches, but he built the worst stadium in the league in a dumb location."

[Skinsinparadise]

14 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

 

I'm gonna say this not just for you, but for everyone.

 

I'm not "picking apart" an argument, I'm showing an argument's flaw as I see it. I do that a lot, mainly because I am in no way the type of person to simply buy into something when it supports my beliefs. I also find importance in details and assume others do as well, or else why even mention it to begin with. An incredibly disingenuous way to discuss things, imo. 

 

 

 

You didn't show Finlay's argument's flaw you just brought up what you thought was a good rationale for Bruce's intervention -- hey he probably did it because he wanted to see if he's worth bringing back so what's wrong with that?  That's you imposing your own rationale for why Bruce's involvement might actually be good in that case.  So that doesn't defeat Finlay's argument that's you just saying he might have had good reason for it. 

 

If anything to help your argument along -- I was trying to help find a global rationale to your point since my point was Finlay's point was that is was a global issue.  The one thing that came to mind was you suggesting that since he has a good rationale for involving himself in Clinton-Dix's playing time then it implies that we can explain away that as an isolated incident -- hence my response back was Finlay wasn't saying that was an isolated incident and heck the Clinton-Dix example wasn't even his lead example on the point. 

 

2 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

As for Clinton Dix, the chatter was that he was getting full playing time to allow a proper assessment of what kind of money should be offered him at the end of the season. But yes, that's not how the decision making process should strictly be working.

 

I've been listening to the comments directly I don't recall Finlay explaining that he even knew the rationale let alone land on that one.  He had three theories on it. One involving what they thought of Nicolson.  2nd about justifying the trade in the building.  3.  wondering about the future.    Regardless, Finlay's point wasn't about Clinton-Dix and lets extrapolate everything from that.   His point was Bruce is heavily involved in roster decisions and playing time in general. 

 

14 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

Here's another example:

 

"Doug is the GM yet the Team President makes all of the decisions on everything anyway. "

 

Doug is not the GM. He even said he didn't want to be the GM. Bruce even said that Doug's plan specifically said the Skins didn't need a GM. It's even been argued as to why the Skins current setup is flawed, because we (fans) don't know who is responsible for what. Because there's no GM.

 

But I will bet a year's paycheck that "Doug is the GM" will be said at least 5 times over the next 2 months on this board lol...the fact that the criticisms of the FO seem to contradict and collide against each other is apparently irrelevant to everyone but me.

 

 

I know this comment isn't directed at me -- so not sure where is the GM argument coming from.   But to take this on, the Redskin fans aren't in court.  This isn't about lawyers being able to cross every T and dot every I.  

 

Whoever said Doug is the GM.  So what?  They got that wrong but the point holds which is the bottom line -- Doug was billed as the guy in charge of personnel with or without the title.  Doug himself talked about liking the personnel side of the business but not all the other responsibilities related to the GM position.  Can you find Doug's comments all over on that front -- sure.

 

If the point of the person is Doug was overbilled and Bruce is the defacto guy calling the shots on personnel -- that is what I presume the point they are trying to make.  You showing that said person misspoke and gave Doug the title GM does nothing to defeat that point.

 

Poking holes like that on nuanced language that has nothing to do with the overriding point -- often in your case coincidentally to poke holes at arguments directed at Dan or Bruce  -- your posts come off like you claiming you defeated the other person's argument whether that's the intention or not or otherwise what's the point? 

 

[DJHJR86]

I keep checking this thread to see if he's been fired yet and continue to be disappointed.  Even more so when people continue to defend the FO.

[SkinsGuy]

15 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

I keep checking this thread to see if he's been fired yet and continue to be disappointed.  Even more so when people continue to defend the FO.

 

If something as big as Allen or Gruden getting fired happened, it would be plastered all over the front page of ES.

 

You wouldn't have to come looking for it here

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

This is more of a Dan comment than a Bruce one.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

This is more of a Dan comment than a Bruce one.  

And one of those winning seasons was freaking 8-7-1.

 

FML

[dyst]

I wish guys like this would just quit. 

[skins island connection]

People like Bruce Allen will never admit fault, only deflect it.

Oh, sure, from time to time he may say he didn't make the best choice in something, but it won't be of anything important to the team.

 

There's really nothing anyone can do regarding Dan Snyder, he's the frickin' owner; BUT, a GM who has been successful and is a determined man will tell Dan to just sit back and stay outta the way. I don't know the extent of Dan's involvement in the team, but any GM with a backbone would tell him like it is; Bruce Allen is the polar opposite.  He will say and do anything to keep himself in control no matter WHO suffers. People like him are out of touch with reality, and unfortunately Bruce has Dan's ear.

 

So if you want Bruce Allen gone, you have to get to Danny somehow.

[wunderhill]

Hell with the actual stadium being half empty, look at this place, few hours after a game there's currently 8 members on this site. I usually could read for hours and hours on everyone's thoughts, This franchise really is in dire circumstances. I hate its come to this.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Burgold]

7 hours ago, skins island connection said:

People like Bruce Allen will never admit fault, only deflect it.

There's someone who likes Bruce Allen? I mean maybe his kids on Xmas morning, but outside that... There's someone who likes Bruce Allen?

 

Bruce Allen pros

ended perennial cap hell

post Shanahan drafts have been decent to good.

 

Bruce Allen negatives

loses too many home grown players due to cheapness and antagonism

is disliked by agents, fellow GMs and others he needs to work with

PR debacle after PR debacle

a history of really bad signings

a nearly ten year long record of losing teams

no long term vision or continuity (feels more a lurch from one idea to another)

hires bad to mediocre head coaches

may step on the toes and intrude into other people's sphere of influence (if Bruce is telling Jay who to play, who to keep active, and anything else when it comes to game day decisions that's really bad.)

Cheapness extends to building poor training staffs and facilities where there is no cap.

He's cheap. There's a difference between frugal and cheap.

I believe he is a backstabber and creates negativity in the locker room and among fans by planting, whispering negative stories.

[SkinsGuy]

7 hours ago, wunderhill said:

Hell with the actual stadium being half empty, look at this place, few hours after a game there's currently 8 members on this site. I usually could read for hours and hours on everyone's thoughts, This franchise really is in dire circumstances. I hate its come to this.

 

Well, in fairness to ES, this was a Saturday evening/night game.

 

Most folks probably went out after the game. Unlike a Sunday night, where they would stay home.

 

Not to mention this is the last weekend before Christmas. Many probably have a lot to get done.

 

There would've been more reaction here if this game was on a Sunday afternoon. You'll probably see more reaction as Christmas Eve Eve rolls on.

[Skinsinparadise]

10 minutes ago, Burgold said:

There's someone who likes Bruce Allen? I mean maybe his kids on Xmas morning, but outside that... There's someone who likes Bruce Allen?

 

 

There are about 5 people give or take on the board who depending on the day like him to various degrees, I know because I've argued a ton with them over the years, some for longer than others.

 

I noticed on twitter Bruce's support has disappeared.   There was about the same number of people -- maybe a bit higher 10 people or so who would defend the dude vociferously.   But I noticed they've disappeared and the most vocal defender from the past now has a firebruce hashtag.  So progress. 😎

 

 

[Wildbunny]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

Bruce Allen pros

ended perennial cap hell

post Shanahan drafts have been decent to good.

 

To be true, he ended the perennial cap hell through a 36M penalty...

 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

Manusky out seems obvious with DJ's incident.

Callahan and Cavanaugh? OK, those are two voices in our offensive gameplan that are two many.

I can get rid of both if we name O'Connell OC and let him do his stuff.

 

Now Bruce Allen should already been out of it... He's been on this team for 9 years, that's 10 too much.

[Isifhan]

I don't think it will really matter what coaches leave. If it's Gruden that's picking their replacements it will be more of the same.  Does he really need a 4th chance to pick a D coordinator?