The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

[TD_washingtonredskins]

22 minutes ago, RWJ said:

IF Bruce is fired the person to hire would be Schaffer to replace Allen.  I think he's a good person and would allow Kyle Smith to do his job as GM, I don't know where this would leave Doug Williams though.  We have to hire Smith as GM because he's sure to be gone in another year or two.

 

I think Smith can play the role of the guy in charge of personnel without "replacing" Allen. In many ways, you need someone under Snyder who is in charge of all the day-to-day operations...be it football or non-football. Ideally, you'd still have someone as the President, Snyder checked out and signing checks, and then Smith reporting to that President.

[KillBill26]

19 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

3. Redskins need to pay in-house stars before outside talent

...The message to players within Redskins Park continues to be that free agents will be duly compensated, but drafted talent can walk. One agent relayed that he literally prays his clients aren’t drafted by Washington because of how dysfunctional the organization is.

Not a ringing endorsement for Snyder and Co.

https://fansided.com/2019/03/18/nfl-free-agency-grades-power-rankings-draft/

I think this take is ridiculous.

 

I understand the agent not wanting his client not wanting to be drafted by the Redskins bc of the dysfunction, I totally get it.  But if you are talking strictly from a dollars and cents angle, and trying to get top dollar from the team that drafted you, this take is very hypocritical.

 

It all comes down to winning.  On the field that is.

 

Look at the Patriots, they are notorious for assigning a player a value, and letting them walk if they want more money, and gladly accept the comp pick.  And look at the deals that come out the first week of free agency, they are insane, surely higher dollar amount than the average gm would assign them.  All it takes is one team to overspend and the player is able to cash in. 

 

But bc the Redskins are starting to do have the same approach, and avoiding overspending for players, whether it be in house or free agency, they are criticized bc they are easy targets.  How many free agents have cashed in under these regime: Collins, smith, who else?  And we know kerrigan and Williams got big money from extensions.  

 

Patriots are a model franchise, but the Redskins get slammed for the same strategy.  I think the front office deserves their criticism for how unethically they operate and how sleazy they come off as, but if they were winning they would be praised for this same cost conscious approach.  Is that same agent dreading when the Patriots draft the client bc the pats are cheap with their own players?  Of course not.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, KillBill26 said:

 

I understand the agent not wanting his client not wanting to be drafted by the Redskins bc of the dysfunction, I totally get it.  But if you are talking strictly from a dollars and cents angle, and trying to get top dollar from the team that drafted you, this take is very hypocritical.

 

It all comes down to winning.  On the field that is.

 

 

I don't think the agent was summarizing the Redskins FO dysfunction is all about letting their players go.  It was just another point in the mix.   As for letting players go in FO, I like the comp pick approach but it looks like this year we are offsetting some of the comp picks with other signings. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

2 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

...we've gotten our studs between 2010-2018 locked into second contracts (Williams, Kerrigan, Reed).

 

 

Williams, Kerrigan, Reed, Moses, Thompson, hopefully Scherff...

 

If you look back through the Skins' drafts you will see a bunch of guys who should never have been drafted, nonetheless extended.

[KillBill26]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I don't think the agent was summarizing the Redskins FO dysfunction is all about letting their players go.  It was just another point in the mix.   As for letting players go in FO, I like the comp pick approach but it looks like this year we are offsetting some of the comp picks with other signings. 

I like the comp pick approach, and letting guys walk can be very profitable, especially aging guys.  And I think there is big incentive to sit out free agency until the comp pick window closes.  See how the draft shakes out, then sign players on affordable contracts to fill short term holes.  When you consider the remaining free agents are nothing special (unless you sign a Houston, ansah etc for double digits aav which I don't anticipate the skins doing), but then add in you may lose on the 4th and 5th rounder coming our way via comp pick, it makes passing on signing those guys the more attractive avenue imo. Unfortunately it can slow the building process to a small degree, but at an improved long term value.  

[Skinsinparadise]

7 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

I like the comp pick approach, and letting guys walk can be very profitable, especially aging guys.  And I think there is big incentive to sit out free agency until the comp pick window closes.  See how the draft shakes out, then sign players on affordable contracts to fill short term holes.  When you consider the remaining free agents are nothing special (unless you sign a Houston, ansah etc for double digits aav which I don't anticipate the skins doing), but then add in you may lose on the 4th and 5th rounder coming our way via comp pick, it makes passing on signing those guys the more attractive avenue imo. Unfortunately it can slow the building process to a small degree, but at an improved long term value.  

 

According to one site, we have one comp pick right now, with 3 of the signings were offset by other signings.  Don't know if that's true, they are factoring the DRC signing but haven't even seen that contract.     I am with you that comp picks are good but it looks like for sure 2 comp picks were offset by other signings.  Preston for Landon.  Haha for Flowers.  One site suggested DRC offsets the loss of Ty but I think they are wrong. 

[KillBill26]

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

According to one site, we have one comp pick right now, with 3 of the signings were offset by other signings.  Don't know if that's true, they are factoring the DRC signing but haven't even seen that contract.     I am with you that comp picks are good but it looks like for sure 2 comp picks were offset by other signings.  Preston for Landon.  Haha for Flowers.  One site suggested DRC offsets the loss of Ty but I think they are wrong. 

Yup, I forgot about DRC.  I can live with the guys we brought in side of the cancellation chart.  I'd rather see what they can do instead of 6th/7th round picks in 2020.  I'm ok with that.  And losing out on the 3rd rounder isn't a big deal when you look at instead we are bringing in a 25 year old, in his prime, one of the best at his position, at a position of need, with leadership skills. I'm not losing any sleep over that.  But losing a decent pick on some of these guys who have been signed around the league in free agency this offseason isn't worth it imo.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

53 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

Yup, I forgot about DRC.  I can live with the guys we brought in side of the cancellation chart.  I'd rather see what they can do instead of 6th/7th round picks in 2020.  I'm ok with that.  And losing out on the 3rd rounder isn't a big deal when you look at instead we are bringing in a 25 year old, in his prime, one of the best at his position, at a position of need, with leadership skills. I'm not losing any sleep over that.  But losing a decent pick on some of these guys who have been signed around the league in free agency this offseason isn't worth it imo.

 

 

I am ok with their off season.    Just saying accruing comp picks doesn't seem to be their thing this off season or if so at least its not in a big way.   If it were, they'd be pursuing guys who were cut versus FAs who offset their comps.

 

I like albeit don't love their off season.  I still don't think they've moved the needle one whit as to being improved from 2018 thus far.  But that's more than fine for me because to stay on theme for this thread, if its true that Dan has Bruce on a one year prove it deal -- then I am ok with Bruce not proving it if it leads to his ouster.  Vegas and most power rank NFL types think this is one of the worst teams in the NFL headed to 2019 (some saying it is the worst).   I don't agree with them.  I don't see this team as a 3-13 type.  It feels more like a 6--10 maybe 7-9 season.  

 

Do I think this FO is dysfunctional?  Heck yeah IMO and big time.  When CNBC talks down a stock and actually uses the Redskins of all teams as an example of a poorly run company as an apples to apples reference for their audience to follow -- you know that the reputation of this organization isn't hot.  

 

Do I think they produce the worst product in the NFL.  Nope. Will they ever win a SB with this set up?  I greatly doubt it.  Will they become a perennial contender?  I greatly doubt that, too.   Could they stick to that middle range 6-10 to 10-6 and appear in the playoffs one every four years or so.  Sure, why not?  I think they got that formula down.  Only thing that changes this trajectory IMO is either lucking into a franchise QB or Dan finds his own Dorsey type.   

 

But I think the challenge they face is the more casual fan has gone beyond being turned off.  Too many of them look to be apathetic and or bored with this set up so I don't know how long they can last on this mediocre treadmill without the TV ratings continuing to slide and ditto the stadium attendance.   Like I've said on this thread, I was floored when GMF joked on one of their shows about how some complain that they talk too much about the bigger-better NFL franchises and in response they goofed on the idea of hey we can try next time to talk about teams people typically don't care about and actually said the Titans and the Redskins. 

 

They actually referred to the Redskins as one of the two teams that national fans would have no interest in -- wow.  Finlay actually talked about the same subject on air today saying when he talks to the national reporters the vibe he gets is they don't see the Redskins as relevant as to national football conversation.  They don't move the needle.  Finlay saying that is quite a change from how things once were when the Redskins were much more relevant nationally. 

 

My point is as much as I don't think highly of Dan, I can sympathize with his predicament.   He made that bed with a nice helping from Bruce IMO.   With all the craziness of Dan's tenure, the team has mostly been relevant even if its just about their off season or having nationally recognized players or coaches or something.    The old school Dan Redskins were known as mostly losers but they did it with some pizzaz and attention.  The new school Dan Redskins are mediocre but with the same dose of dysfunction-soap opera of the old school version -- but the kicker is now its with no pizzaz.    Heck zero Sunday Night football games last year.  

 

So if I am in Dan's shoes, I am not quite sure what I'd do.  Because heck if they go 7-9 with Case Keenum leading the way, I think the TV ratings and attendance issues only get worse.  And all of this is going down when they are trying to secure a stadium.    I still think though Dan's best shot at hitting the lottery remains the draft so maybe they get lucky on that front (that's the strength of this organization IMO). Will see.

[TK]

On 3/18/2019 at 4:19 PM, markmills67 said:

Don't know how to mate. 

 

HTTR 

 

[TK]

9 hours ago, JoeJacobyHOForRIOT said:

People that are screaming to fire Bruce allen on here and the Jagoffs on ****ter with the #firebruceallen baffle me. They are either very young or very dumb, possibly a combination of Both. Im going to keep this short and sweet but we haven't had a successful GM around these parts since Charley Casserly in 1989, THATS RIGHT 1989! That also happens to be during a era when Dan Snyder did NOT own the team.

And Free Agency was introduced March 1, 1993.

 

Just sayin'.  

[Renegade7]

17 minutes ago, TK said:

And Free Agency was introduced March 1, 1993.

 

Just sayin'.  

 

Is there any truth to Gibbs wanting nothing to do with modern salary cap and free agency and that was just as big a reason him leaving as his health?

[skins island connection]

7 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Is there any truth to Gibbs wanting nothing to do with modern salary cap and free agency and that was just as big a reason him leaving as his health?

 

 Big time !!

 One of Gibbs' strengths was finding the right type of talent and storing them away, protected from other teams, and keeping current starters happy.

The starters knew Gibbs was a great coach with a solid proven history also.

 

So when Plan B came about, Gibbs most likely said to himself " why groom future great players only for them to chase money by signing with other teams"?  If I were in his shoes, I doubt I'd want any part of it.

Regardless, 13 years isn't THAT long of a time to be a HC, comparatively speaking, and he was still relatively young and could have gone another 10-20 years if he wanted.

I don't believe Gibbs ever acknowledged this being the reason, because that would draw a lot of criticism, but not-so-deep down we all know this was the driving reason.

[KillBill26]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 With all the craziness of Dan's tenure, the team has mostly been relevant even if its just about their off season or having nationally recognized players or coaches or something.    The old school Dan Redskins were known as mostly losers but they did it with some pizzaz and attention.  The new school Dan Redskins are mediocre but with the same dose of dysfunction-soap opera of the old school version -- but the kicker is now its with no pizzaz.    Heck zero Sunday Night football games last year.  

 

So if I am in Dan's shoes, I am not quite sure what I'd do.  Because heck if they go 7-9 with Case Keenum leading the way, I think the TV ratings and attendance issues only get worse.  And all of this is going down when they are trying to secure a stadium.    I still think though Dan's best shot at hitting the lottery remains the draft so maybe they get lucky on that front (that's the strength of this organization IMO). Will see.

Agree with first part, from being ok with off-season moves, and not buying we are one of the worst teams, but more low average range.

 

I understand if you are Dan or if you are on the redskins marketing team you'd want more pizazz, but as a fan, I'd much rather have the last few offseasons than the free spending and draft pick trading years of the past.  I could care less about flashy offseasons and exciting headlines in March. 

 

I know we have a very long way to go, but we have some good young talent.  The Alex smith debacle has definitely handcuffed us some, but I am happy we are not going all in for 2019.  Although it seems obvious that jobs are on the line, it seems they are still building for the long term, and not hurting long term growth to win now for self preservation purposes. 

 

And if we have another poor record, and fan apathy continues and there are a lot of empty seats, and it leads to big changes, even better.  I know the browns situation was discussed, and just a couple seasons ago they were viewed as a disaster while they accumulated good young talent.  Then their was a house cleaning, and dorsey inherited good young players and draft capital.  Now they have one of the best long term outlooks in the league.  I'm hoping our pizazz-less approach of adding young talent in the draft and not overpaying mediocre talent leads us down the same path for our next gm.  

[BurgundyBooger]

The pizzazz drew attention and excitement initially because to most it meant we were another step closer to going to the Super Bowl. Now? The big splashes feel like desperation on the part of the organization to remain relevant and an opportunity for the signed superstar to cash out into the sunset. It sucks to feel this way but whenever someone signs to come here, I'm skeptical that it's with the intention of winning ball games.

[Skinsinparadise]

8 hours ago, KillBill26 said:

 

I understand if you are Dan or if you are on the redskins marketing team you'd want more pizazz, but as a fan, I'd much rather have the last few offseasons than the free spending and draft pick trading years of the past.  I could care less about flashy offseasons and exciting headlines in March. 

 

 

I don't care if they have pizazz either but my point is hardcore fans like us aren't their only audience target.  We'd dissect every play of Josh Johnson.  I go to 2-3 games a year regardless of the makeup of the team.  But for the more casual fan I think it takes its toll.  As Keim joked about last year when they were struggling to pull in fans even when they were winning -- he goes what are you selling -- come see Alex not throw an interception?  And by that again I don't mean us but the more casual fan.

 

Guice might be able to change this.  Will see.  It's hard I think to sell mediocrity with a doze of sleaze and lack of star power.  And that's I believe Dan's dilemma.  The FA off seasons IMO have alternated from good to stinking.  But I like their draft approach.    I think this coming draft is their most important one as to keeping fans in the fold.  Hopefully they strike gold on some players that get some casual fans excited or leapfrog from mediocrity to being a playoff team.  IMO it has to be one or the other otherwise what they saw last year likely gets worse. 

 

8 hours ago, KillBill26 said:

 

I know we have a very long way to go, but we have some good young talent.  The Alex smith debacle has definitely handcuffed us some, but I am happy we are not going all in for 2019.  Although it seems obvious that jobs are on the line, it seems they are still building for the long term, and not hurting long term growth to win now for self preservation purposes. 

 

I am not so sure they aren't all in for 2019.  They keep saying they are close.  We keep hearing its a one or done season for Jay and maybe Bruce, too.  They made a rare big signing in FA.  And it doesn't seem like its a big deal to them to wipe out 2019 comp picks.  A bunch of national reporters said we were all in on Antonio Brown.  Sheehan said the other day they wanted Golden Tate but lost out to the Giants.   Finlay says don't be shocked if a major trade is on the way and would consider trading up for Murray if they could.  And Hoffman said that the draft this year is about a win now move for a player who can help them immediately.  Maybe they are all wrong.  But it smells like an all in for 2019 season.  Will see though.

 

8 hours ago, KillBill26 said:

 

And if we have another poor record, and fan apathy continues and there are a lot of empty seats, and it leads to big changes, even better.  I know the browns situation was discussed, and just a couple seasons ago they were viewed as a disaster while they accumulated good young talent.  Then their was a house cleaning, and dorsey inherited good young players and draft capital.  Now they have one of the best long term outlooks in the league.  I'm hoping our pizazz-less approach of adding young talent in the draft and not overpaying mediocre talent leads us down the same path for our next gm.  

 

I am obviously ok with a reboot if they have a subpar season.  As for the pizzazz-less approach -- I don't think that has anything to do with their focus on the draft.  Having lots of picks = plenty of pizzaz.  The draft is the part of what they do that fans like.  It's the lets get Stacy McGee and McClain not Calais Campbell approach to FA.  Or Bruce going yeah we lost D. Jackson and Garcon but we replaced them with almost equal production from Quick and Pryor.   It's not having a Scot type at the helm that people were jazzed about.  It's not having an offensive or defensive playmaker that is elite that national football shows care to talk about. 

 

I think Guice has the potential to change that.  And will see what they do in the draft.  Marquise Brown isn't my top choice at 15.  But I've heard from Hoffman that they really like him -- he is the type of player that IMO brings a little pizzaz and national conversation.  Again I personally can care less about it.  But I am sympathetic on this point to Dan if he feels nervous about factoring that this time.  You got Peter King saying previously that he expected the Redskins to get into the Antonio Brown sweepstakes because its a team that's "bleeding fans".  And according to 3 different national reporters, King was right.  Redskins went for him.

 

I think Dan has a dilemma.  And the worst time to struggle to get fans to the stadium and have declining TV ratings is the year where they arguably have to convince a government entity that a stadium in their neck of the woods would be a boon for their local economy.   

 

[Dissident2]

19 hours ago, JoeJacobyHOForRIOT said:

People that are screaming to fire Bruce allen on here and the Jagoffs on ****ter with the #firebruceallen baffle me. They are either very young or very dumb, possibly a combination of Both. Im going to keep this short and sweet but we haven't had a successful GM around these parts since Charley Casserly in 1989, THATS RIGHT 1989! That also happens to be during a era when Dan Snyder did NOT own the team

 

 

I'm neither of those things, and I've never seen a more incompetent, morally bankrupt, mentally challenged turd associated with this organization as I've seen with Allen. It goes well beyond simply being "a bad GM." That should be utterly obvious to anyone paying any attention at all. He's an embarrassment on every level. Yes, of course, Snyder is the main problem. Sauron was the "main problem" in Lord of the Rings, but Worm Tongue was still a piece of **** who needed a monster beatdown. Ya follow me? 

 

Labeling passionate fans who want him gone as "jagoffs" is exactly the mentality that warrants the animated .gif you posted. 

 

 

 

 

[KDawg]

What injury prone players/position have we replaced at this point?

 

Quarterback - Alex Smith (wouldn't say injury prone... but likely not to play again so I suppose that qualifies) to Keenum.

 

LG - Maybe? Lauvao to Flowers. Flowers is healthy... but...

 

And that's pretty much it.

 

The biggest problem with this roster is relying on injury prone players.

 

Williams and Moses are both starters still at the tackles - okay, you could argue (at least with Williams) that talent levels are high enough to roll with them. But here's the problem: We lost the swing guy that fills in for them when one or both are inevitably out.

 

Reed and Davis are still the tight ends.

 

We lost Crowder, but his replacement is Trey Quinn who played in a game... so we actually got worse. Couple other guys who flashed last year in pre-season but remains to be seen because... they were injured. 

 

Inside Linebacker we actually got more injury prone (but also more talented). Brown to Reuben (if not suspended) is a talent upgrade, but also a higher injury/suspension risk.

 

Landon Collins is healthy, but so was Swearinger. Talent upgrade, though. 

 

Chris Thompson is always an injury risk, we let Bibbs (the guy who was a slightly lesser talent but more sturdy). Adrian Peterson probably isn't a huge injury risk, but he's older so he could be... Guice is coming off of a torn ACL.

 

Paul Richardson is injury prone. Doctson has been.

 

Still don't really have a free safety, but our current one is an arrest risk (to be fair, a lot of players around the league are, though). 

 

Seems anyone who played corner last year was injured at some point.

 

In a vacuum, Keenum makes sense. Better/healthier than McCoy. Ideally we get a younger guy, but we don't have to reach and Keenum is a good bridge. In a vacuum, Landon Collins was a good get in a division with Zeke and Saquon despite some coverage concerns (especially because he wants to be a Redskin).

 

DRC and Flowers are basically JAGs at the moment.

 

I'm not totally down on the moves. Still a lot of time. But I'm waiting to see some of these thing addressed before I start to feel that we're on the road to something better than 7-9 or 8-8. Right now I think we're closer to 4-12 than 12-4.

 

 

[JoeJacobyHOForRIOT]

11 hours ago, TK said:

And Free Agency was introduced March 1, 1993.

 

Just sayin'.  

Good point and although back then they didn't deal with the Free agency carousel they still had to draft and players were signed from other teams as well as trades were made. Bobby Bethard/Casserly-Joe Gibbs and Jack Kent Cooke were all on the same page....

 

the 80's were filled with great moves despite no free agency. The draft saw hall of fame  Legends like Darrell Green, Art Monk , Dexter Manley, Charles Mann , Russ Grim . Undrafted talent like Joe Jacoby . Key role players were either traded for or signed from other teams guys like Doug Williams, Gerald Riggs, Jim Lachey, Earnest Byner, Wilbur Marshall, Gary Clark and Ricky Sanders signed form the USFL . Cancerous players like Jay Schroeder were sent packing .

 

You really think in the Snyder era a strong armed gun slinger like Jay Schroeder would be traded for a Left Tackle (Jim Lachey) ? 😆

 

 

[JoeJacobyHOForRIOT]

1 hour ago, Dissident2 said:

 

I'm neither of those things, and I've never seen a more incompetent, morally bankrupt, mentally challenged turd associated with this organization as I've seen with Allen. It goes well beyond simply being "a bad GM." That should be utterly obvious to anyone paying any attention at all. He's an embarrassment on every level. Yes, of course, Snyder is the main problem. Sauron was the "main problem" in Lord of the Rings, but Worm Tongue was still a piece of **** who needed a monster beatdown. Ya follow me? 

 

Labeling passionate fans who want him gone as "jagoffs" is exactly the mentality that warrants the animated .gif you posted. 

 

 

 

 

I apologize if you feel offended by my "jagoff" comment it was more directed at the toxic platform (twitter) then yourself or anyone using it, A Better choice of words could have been used, but sometimes talking about the Redskins you get caught up in the heat of the moment and madness over comes you like Gene wilder in willy wonka 😄  I guess it was short sighted on my part to overlook the fact the same people posting on twitter about the Redskins are probably alot of the same people here all of which i enjoy and value their thoughts and opinions.

[Skinsinparadise]

40 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

 

I'm not totally down on the moves. Still a lot of time. But I'm waiting to see some of these thing addressed before I start to feel that we're on the road to something better than 7-9 or 8-8. Right now I think we're closer to 4-12 than 12-4.

 

 

 

Yeah agree.  Feels to me 6-10.  The off season is still young so will see though if they have something else up their sleeve.  I often don't agree with Casserly but it was interesting to hear it from him since he typically takes homer positions and I recall reading he's gotten tight now with Dan-Bruce...he said recently that this team more than most relies on injury prone players so in his mind this injury bug isn't going away because it's somewhat driven by the actual construction of the roster as opposed to purely about bad luck.

[KDawg]

9 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah agree.  Feels to me 6-10.  The off season is still young so will see though if they have something else up their sleeve.  I often don't agree with Casserly but it was interesting to hear it from him since he typically takes homer positions and I recall reading he's gotten tight now with Dan-Bruce...he said recently that this team more than most relies on injury prone players so in his mind this injury bug isn't going away because it's somewhat driven by the actual construction of the roster as opposed to purely about bad luck.

 

This is something myself (and others) have been saying for years. Years.

 

That is the biggest problem with the team. Not Gruden. Not the talent levels. Not the defensive coordinator(s). The roster construction. 

[veteranskinsfan]

22 hours ago, ColonialWBSkinsFan said:

 

Who'd we rank ahead of?  ... I'm asking seriously...

Cincinnati Bengals were ranked 29th and Tampa Bay Bucaneers were ranked 28th

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah agree.  Feels to me 6-10.  The off season is still young so will see though if they have something else up their sleeve.  I often don't agree with Casserly but it was interesting to hear it from him since he typically takes homer positions and I recall reading he's gotten tight now with Dan-Bruce...he said recently that this team more than most relies on injury prone players so in his mind this injury bug isn't going away because it's somewhat driven by the actual construction of the roster as opposed to purely about bad luck.

 

That was the criticism of the Cowboys for awhile as well...taking chances on talented, injury-prone players. They're starting to get some dividends from that approach at the moment, though...but it took awhile.

[Voice_of_Reason]

13 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am ok with their off season.    Just saying accruing comp picks doesn't seem to be their thing this off season or if so at least its not in a big way.   If it were, they'd be pursuing guys who were cut versus FAs who offset their comps.

 

I like albeit don't love their off season.  I still don't think they've moved the needle one whit as to being improved from 2018 thus far.  But that's more than fine for me because to stay on theme for this thread, if its true that Dan has Bruce on a one year prove it deal -- then I am ok with Bruce not proving it if it leads to his ouster.  Vegas and most power rank NFL types think this is one of the worst teams in the NFL headed to 2019 (some saying it is the worst).   I don't agree with them.  I don't see this team as a 3-13 type.  It feels more like a 6--10 maybe 7-9 season.  

 

Do I think this FO is dysfunctional?  Heck yeah IMO and big time.  When CNBC talks down a stock and actually uses the Redskins of all teams as an example of a poorly run company as an apples to apples reference for their audience to follow -- you know that the reputation of this organization isn't hot.  

 

Do I think they produce the worst product in the NFL.  Nope. Will they ever win a SB with this set up?  I greatly doubt it.  Will they become a perennial contender?  I greatly doubt that, too.   Could they stick to that middle range 6-10 to 10-6 and appear in the playoffs one every four years or so.  Sure, why not?  I think they got that formula down.  Only thing that changes this trajectory IMO is either lucking into a franchise QB or Dan finds his own Dorsey type.   

They don't have the worst product in the NFL.  They have the most average product in the NFL, and possibly the most boring product in the NFL.  Even the teams that really stunk last year like the Cardinals and Giants have SOME intrigue.  The Cards had just selected Rosen, the Giants had Beckham and Barkley, the whole Eli debate, etc. 

 

The 'Skins are just just so average.  9-7, 8-7-1, 7-9, 7-9.  The only shocking thing about them is they haven't actually achieved 8-8 itself yet. They keep flirting with it but miss it by an inch.

 

Both the player acquisition approach, generally the players on the team, and the coaching is all average.  Not great, not awful. Just "meh."  I will say I like the philosophy of just getting guys from Alabama, because you're counting on Saban to have scouted and developed them, and that's at least something.  Not that every Alabama player will work out, however you are almost certainly getting NFL talent and well developed players.  The fact I like the philosophy is more of an indictment of the FO than a complement though. 

 

And I'm not even sure if lucking into a franchise QB, with this FO and coaching staff would make things that much better.  Cousins was playing at a HIGH level in 2015, especially at the end, and they still went 9-7 and lost in the first round of the playoffs.  They had weapons, a QB playing well, and enough talent to compete on defense, and the OC/play caller was an up and coming genius.  However, the decisions they made on coaching and players on defense doomed the team.  If Drew Brees had been QBing the 2015 Redskins, would they have been a SB team?  Maybe. 

 

But don't forget, the Saints and Packers have failed to win anything of note with 2 of the top 3 QBs in the league because of bad coaching decisions and some stupid personnel moves. McCarthy got fired over it, and the Saints went 7-9 like 3 years in a row while Brees was throwing for 5k yards and 30 TDs. (Ok, the Saints were ROBBED with a mask and a gun in the NFC Championship game last year. I get that)  Rivers in San Diego is another example.  Borderline HOF player.  Ben in Pittsburgh. 2 SBs, (1 he lucked into), and the most explosive skill position players in the league, and they still couldn't get it done.  Why? 

 

The only real example of a franchise QB consistently winning is Brady.  What's the difference?  Bellichick. Also, I'd remind folks in 2006, the Patriots tried to go with a cast of nobodies at WR, and they came up just short with a drop by that bug-eyed WR in the end zone in the AFC Championship game against the Colts.  The next year they went out and got Moss and basically committed to not do that again.  They've had skill position players which fit what they do

 

So while a franchise QB would be good, and would help, it won't cover up all of the other ills.  It won't cover up huge holes in the roster and average to below average coaching across the board.

 

13 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

But I think the challenge they face is the more casual fan has gone beyond being turned off.  Too many of them look to be apathetic and or bored with this set up so I don't know how long they can last on this mediocre treadmill without the TV ratings continuing to slide and ditto the stadium attendance.   Like I've said on this thread, I was floored when GMF joked on one of their shows about how some complain that they talk too much about the bigger-better NFL franchises and in response they goofed on the idea of hey we can try next time to talk about teams people typically don't care about and actually said the Titans and the Redskins. 

You're 100% right, the casual fan is basically gone, and all that remains are the die-hard fans clinging to the past and hoping something changes, or people too stupid to know better.  

 

And it's not all Bruce/Jay.  And it's not even all Dan.  It started in 1993, and we haven't had a consistent relevant franchise since then.  Not only is the product on the field bad, but the stadium sucks (not Dan's fault) to add insult to injury.  There's no reason to go to the games.  Almost no fans believe in Bruce and what he's doing, they see Doug as a mouthpiece (rightfully or wrongfully), and the best most can say about the coaching staff is "it could be worse, it could be Zorn or Spurrier."  That's not a ringing endorsement, and not a lot to sell hope on.  Hope leads to interest.  When there is no hope, there's no interest.  Dan/Bruce/Jay and the rest of the gang just don't provide any hope things will get better.

 

13 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

They actually referred to the Redskins as one of the two teams that national fans would have no interest in -- wow.  Finlay actually talked about the same subject on air today saying when he talks to the national reporters the vibe he gets is they don't see the Redskins as relevant as to national football conversation.  They don't move the needle.  Finlay saying that is quite a change from how things once were when the Redskins were much more relevant nationally. 

The reason they don't move the needle is because they've won 1 playoff game since 1992, and that playoff game was now 14 years ago.  They also have no players which stand out as "the best" at their position who have any personality.  National folks respect Jay for keeping the team together through a lot of injuries the last 2 years.  But Jay doesn't create a lot of interest.  Alex Smith is about the most boring "good" starting QB in the league, and now he's gone. McCoy and Keenum are "meh."  The best players on defense are Allen and Payne, and they don't talk much.  There's nothing to generate interest. 

 

13 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

My point is as much as I don't think highly of Dan, I can sympathize with his predicament.   He made that bed with a nice helping from Bruce IMO.   With all the craziness of Dan's tenure, the team has mostly been relevant even if its just about their off season or having nationally recognized players or coaches or something.    The old school Dan Redskins were known as mostly losers but they did it with some pizzaz and attention.  The new school Dan Redskins are mediocre but with the same dose of dysfunction-soap opera of the old school version -- but the kicker is now its with no pizzaz.    Heck zero Sunday Night football games last year.  

Here's where we differ.  I don't sympathize with his predicament because it's one of his own making through a variety of stupid hiring decisions.  Dan has two major flaws: he trusts the wrong people to give him good advice, and he isn't willing to do things which make him uncomfortable.  Marty made him uncomfortable.  Marty was shown the door.

 

Vinny and Bruce give him bad advice.  But he was comfortable with both of them, and reluctant to change.

 

Now he's in a situation, of his own making, where he's trusting Bruce to do everything, and he doesn't know what plan B is.  So even if he wanted to move to plan B, he has no clue what to do, so he's just going to ride it out and see what Bruce can do. 

 

What's fascinating is that "his way" might work better now, while it didn't work in the 2000s. With the caveat you still need to pick the right players to be aggressive with, not the over-the-hill gang. The Broncos were really the first team to load up with free agents and make a run, and have it be successful.  The Rams, Bears, Cowboys (to an extent), and others have been more aggressive in player acquisition through FA or trades and it's paying dividends.  Dan's instinct is to be aggressive, but he's letting Bruce be conservative.

 

As strange as it might sound, the best likely situation could be Bruce gone, a personnel guy who isn't stupid (Vinny was stupid), and let Dan be Dan, dust off Redskins One and let's go after it.  It would, at the very least, be more entertaining, and there is the possibility he could catch lightening in a bottle. 

 

 

13 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

So if I am in Dan's shoes, I am not quite sure what I'd do.  Because heck if they go 7-9 with Case Keenum leading the way, I think the TV ratings and attendance issues only get worse.  And all of this is going down when they are trying to secure a stadium.    I still think though Dan's best shot at hitting the lottery remains the draft so maybe they get lucky on that front (that's the strength of this organization IMO). Will see.

I've said it before, and I don't think it's popular, but I think it would have the best chance of success: if I were Dan, I'd hire Peyton Manning to be the head of football operations.   I'd pay him a gagillion dollars, and make him the face of the franchise. Then have him pick a VP of Personnel or something like that with a scouting background to work with.  Here's why:

 

1. You gotta think he knows how to evaluate film, players and scheme and figure out what's good and what's not.  Especially with QBs, I'm sure he could look and say, "this guy gets it" or "this guy doesn't get it." This is an assumption, but he did it, for a different purpose, for close to 20 years.  The counter-example would be Jordan.  The difference is between football and basketball.  In football, the art of film study and game planning and learning, especially for the QB, is so much more than anything which is done for basketball. 

 

2.  Like him or hate him, he's a big name, a personality, and brings instant credibility and interest to the team.

 

3. Dan would probably listen to him.  He's the type of person and personality I think Dan could get along with.  He's a big enough star Dan probably would leave him alone most of the time.

 

4. Peyton has to have a great network of former players and coaches, and if you're a coach and Peyton calls to talk to you about a job, you listen. 

 

5. It couldn't be worse than it is now.  Because even if the record was worse, it would at least be interesting.

 

 

FWIW, I don't know if I would do the same thing with Brady or Brees, but maybe.  All of the same criteria would still hold. 

 

Peyton is the biggest name out there which could make a FO splash and actually work.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

That was the criticism of the Cowboys for awhile as well...taking chances on talented, injury-prone players. They're starting to get some dividends from that approach at the moment, though...but it took awhile.

 

I am gathering you are thinking Jaylon Smith?  They did pay off.   Trying to think of other examples with Dallas.   Just about every team takes some chances.  But some of the Redskins key players have a tendency to get hurt and arguably more so than most teams. 

 

It's not that they were all acquired with injury history but some of them were and they got a bunch of guys who tend to get hurt:  Chris Thompson, Jordan Reed, Trent, Lauvao (that experiment I gather is finally over), Nicholson.  I was cool with signing Richardson last year but in retrospect I was wrong on that one considering the dude was rarely healthy in Seattle.  We just got Reuben Foster who tends to get banged up and his injury concerns.  Sean Dion Hamilton ditto.  Colt.   Moreau came off of a serious pec injury. Dunbar is now coming off of an injury where there is some concern.   Quinn couldn't stay healthy last year.  Doctson has had his issues with his heel.

 

Some of this is from their drafting, some of it is just via bad luck.  But I'll double down on the same thing I said last off season which was I am not counting on players coming off of injury to just have an injury free season just because the law of averages is such that you can't have bad luck two years in a row like that.   I thought it could happen and said so last off season.  

 

Dallas' thing seems to be taking chances on players with drug issues.  And they tend to get burned by it though.    Dallas has drafted though very well IMO -- Jerry supposedly has let his son and McClay do their thing in recent years.