The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

[Andre The Giant]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I don't recall him making this point.  Is this you guessing what he really meant?  Otherwise sorry I'd have to go back and re-listen.  Don't recall him delving into the previous QB here at all and judging by just about everyone who covered that story -- we can kill Dan for many things but that negotiation was Bruce's baby.  Dan screwed things up at QB including with that specific QB but in a totally different way than Bruce did -- again if buying into different narratives. 

 

You’re correct in that he didn’t spell that part out. It’s more my opinion.

[Skinsinparadise]

This is more or less what most of us have been saying for years.  Bruce-Dan mastered the 8-8 stuff, its unlikely going to get much better than that until they get out of the way and put someone better in charge.    And at the moment I think they'd be lucky to go 8-8 next year unless they really shake up how they typically do business in the off season.  

 

I disagree with his point that they have to pay more for players but otherwise its spot on.  The relevance for me posting this is this is from a dude who someone who was pro FO previously (and doesn't seem to be now) cited this dude as someone who is relatively pro Bruce.  I didn't take Hoffman as pro Bruce then but he was a rare guy who covered the team who didn't hate the FO structure.   But he's turned the other way hard on this operation.

 

https://thefandc.radio.com/craig-hoffman-redskins-last-four-seasons-good-youre-gonna-get-under-dan-snyder-bruce-allen

Hoffman: Mediocrity best Redskins are 'gonna get' under current regime

 

Craig Hoffman says it's hard to imagine Washington doing better than it has under the "incompetent management" of Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen.

 

 

"When you have incompetent management at the top, there's a definitive ceiling, because you can't hire people that are as good," Hoffman told The Sports Junkies Wednesday. "You're never gonna get the elite guy, because they're not gonna want to come here."

 

"The last four years, where you've gone about .500, is really as good as you're gonna get. Because eventually, incompetence is going to make bad decisions."

 

Hoffman brought up the Alex Smith trade and contract as an example of the front office's incompetence, the four-year, $94 million deal limiting the Redskins financially even before Smith broke his leg. 

 

"I don't think Alex is bad, but they had to overpay for him, and even if he's not hurt, they're locked in to whatever Alex Smith can provide them over the next four years," Hoffman explained. "A different organization doesn't make that move and sign him to a four-year extension."

 

"But because they're the Redskins, they have to pay up, and getting elite players is gonna cost more. He's gonna have to take more risks, and the chances are it's probably not gonna pay off the reward, which means your ceiling comes down as a football team. And the 'But win, though' doesn't really work, because you're not gonna win very much."

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, Dissident2 said:

 

I'd personally like to see the "show of hands" question more often before posts. 

 

So you can't combine your other 13 points in simply ONE post with a bit of merciful brevity? Just point out the other 13. You don't have to elaborate much. Seemed like you spotted them quickly. Surely you can list them quickly. 

 

 

Copying and pasting from the article...and just a reminder, I said a lot of statements in her article were either disingenuous or lacked knowledge, so some stuff may technically be factual but the manner in which she chose to present those facts was less than accurate:

 

"The Washington Redskins owner has firmly established just what a bad investment risk he is."

 

"It is therefore the height of irresponsibility for any local government to even think of giving him a dime of public money, or a foot of free land, for a new stadium.*"

 

"For 19 years Snyder has run the team as a wild personal indulgence"

 

"it’s virtually impossible to lose money as an NFL owner"

 

"This is what happens to people who partner with him. Nobody emerges with their name or business better off."

 

"All Snyder has done as an NFL owner is freeload off massive revenue streams he didn’t help create"

 

"He…sat back and collected his built-in cut of the league’s massive TV contracts"

 

"He pressed long-suffering fans to pay $7 for short beers and $40 to park"

 

"gave them among the worst food for the highest prices in all of the NFL."

 

"In 2016, the Redskins offered the most expensive game day for a family of four in the entire league"

 

"None of it (“promises”) materialized."

 

"Richmond had to rob a school fund of more than $5 million to help pay for it"

 

"is facing $750,000 per year in ongoing debt payments."

 

"Now do the multiplication and think about the 10-figure damage Snyder could do to any city that takes on a billion-dollar stadium project for him."

 

"To give a single tax dollar to Snyder given his track record would be absolute madness*"

 

 

*Some are admittedly opinion, but it's an opinion you can't possibly reach from the rest of the statements unless you are being disingenuous or lack the necessary knowledge needed to form that opinion.

[Skinsinparadise]

Some opinion?  It's an opinion column.   It's mostly opinion.  When you write an editorial and I've written some for some of my clients, its not your job to counter your own points.  Sometimes you do so if you know that the reader has an obvious predisposed counter point to it -- so you counter your own point and then shoot that counter down in order to make your point stronger but otherwise you come on heavy handed with an angle.

 

And the impact of an editorial like that plays out typically just like it has here.  The people that are inclined to believe the points are swayed.  The people who are on the other side are put off by it.    The audience in the middle is the target.  And you don't play your point in the middle -- you go after it hard and some hyperbole comes with the turf typically but if you write it well the hyperbole doesn't detract from the point.  The person on the other side of the point will live and die with the hyperbole and try to discount the whole thing on that count.  But the author doesn't care about them.  It's about the people who don't really have a side that's dug in, yet.

 

19 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

"The Washington Redskins owner has firmly established just what a bad investment risk he is."  (opinion)

 

"It is therefore the height of irresponsibility for any local government to even think of giving him a dime of public money, or a foot of free land, for a new stadium.*" (opinion)

 

"For 19 years Snyder has run the team as a wild personal indulgence" (opinion)

 

"it’s virtually impossible to lose money as an NFL owner"  (opinion -- she's repeating what many say which is shared revenue is a primary vehicle for owners making money)

 

"This is what happens to people who partner with him. Nobody emerges with their name or business better off." (opinion -- some hyperbole in it but that's what you typically do in an opinion column)

 

"All Snyder has done as an NFL owner is freeload off massive revenue streams he didn’t help create"(opinion -- she's repeating what many say which is shared revenue is a primary vehicle for owners making money)

 

"He…sat back and collected his built-in cut of the league’s massive TV contracts"(opinion -- she's repeating what many say which is shared revenue is a primary vehicle for owners making money)

 

"He pressed long-suffering fans to pay $7 for short beers and $40 to park" (presume fact?  I didn't cross check)

 

"gave them among the worst food for the highest prices in all of the NFL." (opinion)

 

"In 2016, the Redskins offered the most expensive game day for a family of four in the entire league"(presume fact?  I didn't cross check)

 

"None of it (“promises”) materialized." (opinion -- some hyperbole in it but that's what you typically do in an opinion column)

 

"Richmond had to rob a school fund of more than $5 million to help pay for it" (there were articles written about a shortfall in schools but agree this is crossing a line because you can't blame budget shortfalls on them but in the context of hey DC do you really want to take chances on budget shortfalls and the stadium could be part of it, that seems to be where she wants to go and I'd have made the point more broadly like that than the way she did it))

 

"is facing $750,000 per year in ongoing debt payments." (ditto from my point above)

 

"Now do the multiplication and think about the 10-figure damage Snyder could do to any city that takes on a billion-dollar stadium project for him." (opinion -- Richmond shortfalls -- imagine a much bigger money drill and its consequences if it goes wrong)

 

"To give a single tax dollar to Snyder given his track record would be absolute madness*" (opinion -- he hasn't exactly distinguished himself of late in his business endeavors by the way)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Riggo#44]

 

This won't pierce the dense fog of our FO's arrogance.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Some opinion?  It's an opinion column.   It's mostly opinion. 

 

 

 

Read Burgold's excellent post about being an opinion column not an excuse to blow off being accurate when presenting things as facts.

 

But to address just a few of your comments to my comments:

 

- Snyder hasn't "firmly established" he's a bad investment. He has established that he makes bad investments though. And no, they're not the same.

- Opinion delivered as a logical conclusion based on "facts" she tries presenting in her article.

- Snyder has owned the team for 20 years, not 19...unless she's saying there was one year where he ran the Redskins well lol...

- Whether or not she's repeating what others have said is irrelevant...franchises can and do lose money. It's possible. It's one reason new stadiums get built and franchises relocate.

- "Nobody emerges with their name or business better off" is in no way merely an opinion, and is conveyed by Jenkins as fact.

- Again, "She's just repeating what others have said" in no way excuses her saying it or presenting it as fact. She doesn't even hedge her phrasing and say "he hasn't done much except blah blah blah"...and there is a lot Snyder has done other than sit around and let the NFL pay him.

 

Anyway, I prefer going into detail to 'splain my reasoning, but it would take up a lot of the thread lol...

[Springfield]

Attacking an anti-Snyder article’s writer as if Snyder isn’t a bad owner.

[Dissident2]

48 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

*Some are admittedly opinion, but it's an opinion you can't possibly reach from the rest of the statements unless you are being disingenuous or lack the necessary knowledge needed to form that opinion.

 

Lol, "SOME" are admittedly opinion? I see just a few that aren't. The rest are opinions from an OPINION PIECE, lol, so ... I'm not really sure what you're getting at with the above list. 

 

Either way, just some quick googling on some of the above that aren't opinions (not going to do all of them):

 

1. The $750,000 debt payment detail is corroborated in the link below, and apparently comes from an official audit of the deal:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/31/redskins-richmond-projections-were-millions/

 

2. School fund detail corroborated in link below from Roanoke Times:

https://www.roanoke.com/sports/redskins/richmond-demands-redskins-pay-up-to-maintain-camp-deal/article_26f905bd-bf43-53f9-afd8-10c3aadbb697.html

 

3. 2016 comment about team having the most expensive gameday experience corroborated at CBSnews website. Winning off the field!
https://www.cbsnews.com/media/5-least-and-most-expensive-stadiums-to-watch-an-nfl-game/

 

I'm totally for calling out quotes that are purposefully taken out of context to promote an agenda, even when you might AGREE with that agenda, or for calling people out for looking the other way when facts are bent/twisted to promote their own world view. Everyone should always be doing that with everything they read. But there's very little of that in this Jenkins piece. I find it to fit just about perfectly with what I've observed with my wide-open eyes for the last 20-plus years of this God-forsaken regime. 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

14 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Attacking an anti-Snyder article’s writer as if Snyder isn’t a bad owner.

 

Attacking an anti-Snyder article's writer as if she wrote an extremely flawed piece, yep...

 

"Not attacking an anti-Snyder article for no other reason than he's a bad owner so it doesn't matter how many logic flaws or disingenuous statements it contains" works as well.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

So, let’s just pretend, that one day Snyder finally gets it, has a winning team, and fluff pieces are becoming regular.

 

“It’s no wonder sponsors are waiting in line, as if they are behind the velvet ropes hoping to enter one of Washington’s trendiest nightclubs. Everyone that enters business with Mr. Snyder walks away a winner.”

 

Something tells me, those wouldnt be met with any type of attack or desire to prove it wrong, even though it’s hyperbolic and not entirely true.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

8 minutes ago, Dissident2 said:

 

Lol, "SOME" are admittedly opinion? I see just a few that aren't. The rest are opinions from an OPINION PIECE, lol, so ... I'm not really sure what you're getting at with the above list. 

 

Either way, just some quick googling on some of the above that aren't opinions (not going to do all of them):

 

1. The $750,000 debt payment detail is corroborated in the link below, and apparently comes from an official audit of the deal:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/31/redskins-richmond-projections-were-millions/

 

2. School fund detail corroborated in link below from Roanoke Times:

https://www.roanoke.com/sports/redskins/richmond-demands-redskins-pay-up-to-maintain-camp-deal/article_26f905bd-bf43-53f9-afd8-10c3aadbb697.html

 

3. 2016 comment about team having the most expensive gameday experience corroborated at CBSnews website. Winning off the field!
https://www.cbsnews.com/media/5-least-and-most-expensive-stadiums-to-watch-an-nfl-game/

 

I'm totally for calling out quotes that are purposefully taken out of context to promote an agenda, even when you might AGREE with that agenda, or for calling people out for looking the other way when facts are bent/twisted to promote their own world view. Everyone should always be doing that with everything they read. But there's very little of that in this Jenkins piece. I find it to fit just about perfectly with what I've observed with my wide-open eyes for the last 20-plus years of this God-forsaken regime. 

 

5

 

1. She mentions the "ongoing debt" as if it's a result of Snyder's failure. It's not. it's a restructuring of the loan the city took out so that they can have a more favorable repayment plan that doesn't interfere with their regular fiscal operations. The "ongoing debt" was a result of their own mistakes and inability to get projects started in a timely manner. It was due...you know what, screw this lol. I originally said I'd write lengthy posts for each of the things I had issues with from Jenkins' article but you said to just bullet point them for the sake of brevity, so I did. Had I addressed each issue in my regular manner not only would it be far more obvious why each one was faulty (most purposefully so), it would also be damn difficult to dispute with a link to an article.

 

I have dozens of articles written back when this whole shebang was first underway quoting the details behind the $500,000 subsidies, the restructuring of the $11M loan, why it needed to be restructured, whose fault it was, how many of the things Richmon is experiencing financially was said to have been expected by city council members at the time, numerous delays on revenue-generating projects that were in no way, shape or form due to anything the Redskins were or were not doing, how council members who are now saying "This is the worst vote of my career" were the ones championing the vote back in 2012 and declaring victory, how these same members were saying they were "disappointed" in not being able to pay the Skins the full $500K the first year but said the Skins were accommodating in not pushing for the payment immediately and understood it would take them time, how the city leaders' decisions were also based on trying to show Richmond could handle larger sports arenas and events to lure in bigger fish than the Skins' training camp for a month...etc, etc...the entire story is a case study on how council members were incompetent, ineffective and shortsighted and how it cost their city and constituents dearly when they couldn't afford it (Richond has a huge percentage living under the poverty level), yet it's being played as if it's Snyder's fault because he's a terrible bidniz man who caused all this to happen. And some here gobble it down like Tic Tacs under the ridiculous logic of "Well, she's right, Snyder IS a terrible owner!"

[FrFan]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As for the team promising more revenue via tourism, etc.  The fact that a city does its own research too -- that goes without saying.  It's how government works most of the time.  So the idea that Richmond is complicit in the training camp underperforming -- of course they are.  But is it on point?   The point is the Redskins are pushing for something -- her angle is don't buy into what they are selling.

Thanks a lot for providing us so many valuable infos, that's really outstanding 👍🤟

[RVAskins]

Just checking in to see if Bruce is still around.....yep...damn it.

[FrFan]

46 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

This won't pierce the dense fog of our FO's arrogance.

Eventhough I'm skeptical, I hope Maradell and the others will put real pressure on him

[CousinsCowgirl84]

I disagree that not many organizations would trade for Alex Smith, overpay home, and give him a contract guaranteed for 4 years.

 

 

Hello. Vikings? Lions? Raiders? Broncos? Dolphins? Every team that doesnt have a franchise qb who finds a guy that sorta smells like one overpays. 

 

The only only difference isn’t that our overpaid qb had a potentially career ending injury.

 

its a series of bad decisions though. Looking at luck only, had there been a franchise with more bad luck over the past 20 years.

[FrFan]

19 minutes ago, RVAskins said:

Just checking in to see if Bruce is still around.....yep...damn it.

Sorry

 

[Riggo#44]

2 minutes ago, FrFan said:

Sorry

 

 

Next year will be a **** show in the stands. It will be a ghost town at best, road game at worst.

[NoCalMike]

Is it true Cooley was at Redskins Park meeting with Snyder before Dan jetted off to the Bahamas?  Is this a normal thing for Cooley to be doing since retiring or is Mr. Cooley trying to seel Snyder on something?

[The Sisko]

2 hours ago, Springfield said:

Anyone fired yet?

 

29 minutes ago, RVAskins said:

Just checking in to see if Bruce is still around.....yep...damn it.

Sorry guys. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting.😞

19 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

...its a series of bad decisions though. Looking at luck only, had there been a franchise with more bad luck over the past 20 years.

Yes, we’ve had some bad luck over the years. However, I’m reminded of the old saying “The harder I work, the luckier I get.” In this case, it’s not hard work but working smarter. Aside from the stupidity of the trade, Allen could have insulated himself from the injury risk with a sensible contract for a player of Smith’s caliber. Likewise, he could have listened to Scot and locked Cousins up at a reasonable cost early on.

 

Aside from the Smith/Colt injuries which were mostly due to bad luck, the trendline with us always being in injury trouble is as clear as it is troubling. Whether it’s an issue of practice regimen, training, picking injury-prone players, or something else, someone needed to detect there was an issue and proactively deal with the stuff they can fix. From what we can tell, that’s not happening. It’s the same with most if not all the other problems the team has. 

[purbeast]

53 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Is it true Cooley was at Redskins Park meeting with Snyder before Dan jetted off to the Bahamas?  Is this a normal thing for Cooley to be doing since retiring or is Mr. Cooley trying to seel Snyder on something?

According to Al Ghaldi, Cooley meeting with Snyder after a game is common place and is normal.  

[FrFan]

Allen is going to fire the janitor

[justice98]

5 hours ago, Gibbs828791 said:

There is so much mis-information. Adam Schefter was on with Kevin Sheehan last week and he said that around the league Bruce Allen is thought of as very smart. Thom Loverro

who who cant stand Bruce couldnt believe what he was hearing and it was a little awkward, then Adam double downed on it.

 

So I think when you hear things I wouldnt take them as fact. Somebody likes him, says he is thought of as around the league as smart, somebody hates him and calls him an idiot, he is hard to negotiate with agents so they rate him untrustworth.

 

Now the record is the record
 

 

 

I can believe it.  I dont think you run front offices for 3 different teams and people in the industry think you're stupid. He clearly knew how to play the game.

 

But I think "smart" is a general term, and doesnt really speak to his specific handling of the team during his tenure in Washington.  And Schefter really didnt have a comeback for.  He couldnt really explain where the regard for Bruce Allen around the league was coming from.

[RonArtest15]

17 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Having Gibbs on the sideline appeased 0 people.

 

Hiring Cooley would bring a very talented evaluator into the building, and one who has a good relationship with Jay, Bruce and Dan.

 

He could actually be helpful in building a winning team. 

 

Gibbs being there was basically pointless.  Unless he was there to advise Dan on anything, in which case I hope Dan was taking copious notes.

 

There's a lot to unpack here...let's start

 

1.  Skins are coming off a crazy season and yet another tumultuous week.  Having Gibbs out there pregame was MOMENTARY goodwill.  In Dan/Bruce's brains, what's the explanation behind having him there in the first place?  Like you said, it was pointless.

 

2.  Cooley...how is he a very talented evaluator?  Is it because he breaks down film on 980?  What teams have been inquiring about his services over the years?  It would be nothing more of hiring another "yes" man and keeping things pretty much status-quo.  Not sure how you have seen anything from Cooley or in the decision making process from Dan/Bruce that suggests that this is the trio that will finally get the org over the hump and build a winning team.  It's laughable. 

 

This team can't get out of the way of itself.  They are amazing at rearranging chairs on a sinking ship and shooting themselves in the foot. 

 

Reassigning Bruce so he has nothing to do with the day-to-day operations of the actual team would be the best step to take.  That's not happening, so anyone that's hired while that clown is still in his president role is nothing more than putting a band-aid on a gash that requires staples. 

[RandyHolt]

Any opinions/inconsistencies in the Jenkins hit piece kinda pail in comparison to the decades(?) long blatant lies ticket holders and fans have had to deal with when trying to understand our faux wait list. Including lies implying not being able to purchase new season tickets, when deciding not to renew, or when trying to relocate seats. 

 

Incredibly and unfortunately, the more you repeat the same lies the more people believe them.

[skinzplay]

Losing cornerback Quinton Dunbar for nine games hurt without a doubt, but they also lacked any veteran depth behind their top three corners, and that stems from faulty planning, not injuries.

 

Their demise began before Smith was injured. In the two games before he got hurt, against Atlanta and Tampa Bay, the defense allowed a combined 992 yards. From Week 9 on, the Redskins allowed a staggering and NFL-worst 49.1 percent of third downs to be converted.

 

Those are two quotes from Keim's latest piece.

 

Injuries happen to every team, even unthinkably high numbers of injuries. Though I'm sure Gruden and the team president will point to injuries as the reason for the losing record, it just seems to me that, with Gruden, this team will always hover around the 7-9/6-10/8-8 mark. That means that the NFC East will have to completely STINK (like the 2015 season) in order for the Skins to ever make the playoffs under this guy's leadership. I'm indifferent when it comes to Gruden. I don't think he's a bad guy, just an unprepared coach who can design plays, but never knows quite how and when to use those nifty plays to attack the opposing teams' weaknesses. Opening games of the season are dreadful indictments of his preparation, as are games coming off a bye week. We've heard enough about the Club Med practice environment to know that this is not how you get a team ready for the intense, physical demands of an NFL game. I've seen enough. This was the team president's hire, and a slew of subsequent decisions (terrible ones, without even consulting Gruden) should mean that the team president gets a pink slip, too. Or as my Uncle Clarence likes to quote Jerry Glanville: Does he know what NFL stands for --- notcheeya for long!