The most wonderful time of the year: Leak Season!!

[Wyvern]

Another thing that troubles me about this franchise -- is that Snyder doesn't occasionally just come out and quell some of the rumors swirling around his employees.  Maybe at least he could do so about Gruden --perhaps say something like unless he does scandalous, he's coming back for the 2018 season, with his rights to organize his coaching staff intact.  

 

So, maybe the salary/negotiation  issues around Cousins prevents Snyder from commenting in that instance -- but the point I'm making is that  the lack of official rebuttals from the head of the front office, makes it easier for all these Redskins rumors to grow legs.  Maybe it's because the FO is over-deliberate or internally divided -- but these unverified media speculations regarding the team's coaches and players, etc -- rarely get officially 'de-bunked'.

[Thinking Skins]

This latest leak / story / rumor by Dan Patrick that grew into a "feud" between him and Grant Paulsen makes me think what I've always thought about these leaks. Sure they could some from some reputable source like somebody in the locker room, front office or the coaching staff, but they could just as well not. In the end they're playing to what we (the fans) want to hear and the media / reporters / radio hosts / tv personalities go with them because they (a) show us as dysfunctional even though (as Patrick admitted) the leak came from nobody in the organization and (b) give us another reason to hate/love whoever the leak is about and basically divide it into an us vs them type thing where we find some way to attribute the leak to somebody, give it credibility or lack thereof, and then form sides based on that attribution.

 

We haven't had leaks for at least the past 2 (maybe 3) years and I don't see any reason why that would start now. I do see a trial starting Monday that could expose some things about how our front office was operating the last two years though.

[Mr. Sinister]

7 hours ago, zoony said:

Bruce Allen is going to come out like a caged dog.  Nobody will be safe from the blind haymakers he will be throwing trying to save his job

 

I thinks its time for a boat ride

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

9 minutes ago, Wyvern said:

Another thing that troubles me about this franchise -- is that Snyder doesn't occasionally just come out and quell some of the rumors swirling around his employees.  Maybe at least he could do so about Gruden --perhaps say something like unless he does scandalous, he's coming back for the 2018 season, with his rights to organize his coaching staff intact.  

 

So, maybe the salary/negotiation  issues around Cousins prevents Snyder from commenting in that instance -- but the point I'm making is that  the lack of official rebuttals from the head of the front office, makes it easier for all these Redskins rumors to grow legs.  Maybe it's because the FO is over-deliberate or internally divided -- but these unverified media speculations regarding the team's coaches and players, etc -- rarely get officially 'de-bunked'.

It would require having some balls.  It's pretty obvious that Dan likes to hide behind others.  Unfortunately, the guy he hired to stand in front of the bullets for him is also a sissy, that hides from the media and only sends messages anonymously.  Of course it's done under the guise that the media are bad guys and "if I refuted every rumor..." BS.

 

 

[Mr. Sinister]

14 minutes ago, Wyvern said:

Another thing that troubles me about this franchise -- is that Snyder doesn't occasionally just come out and quell some of the rumors swirling around his employees.  Maybe at least he could do so about Gruden --perhaps say something like unless he does scandalous, he's coming back for the 2018 season, with his rights to organize his coaching staff intact.  

 

So, maybe the salary/negotiation  issues around Cousins prevents Snyder from commenting in that instance -- but the point I'm making is that  the lack of official rebuttals from the head of the front office, makes it easier for all these Redskins rumors to grow legs.  Maybe it's because the FO is over-deliberate or internally divided -- but these unverified media speculations regarding the team's coaches and players, etc -- rarely get officially 'de-bunked'.

 

He won't comment because he scared

[Reaper Skins]

I have a horrible suspicion that the "leak" will be about players not respecting Gruden, his coaching style, or his game plans. 

 

And the "anonymous sources" will originate from unrelated comments made by Swearinger and Norman.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

13 hours ago, elkabong82 said:

 

No they don't actually. They throw **** at a wall and see what sticks. Up until the McCloughan stuff they were constantly wrong, and they didn't even have a clue about that stuff until team actions took place. Now they're getting stuff wrong trying to stir the pot because the team is losing games. It's disgusting and it does have an effect on the team. Yet instead of us fans calling the jackals out and not buying their nonsense, we allow and contribute to situations becoming worse. We have actual players calling out our fanbase on twitter because of the way we act. That's Philadelphia-low. 

 

But it starts with getting rid of the snake Allen in the FO. We get good leadership in there, the kind that fans won't believe conspiracy theories over, then the shock jock stuff should decrease as fans no longer buy it. 

 

But for a long time now I've just seen so much low-quality crap coming from sports media about the Skins team, so much of it being untrue and passed under the guise of "sources" that I don't trust them anymore than I trust Allen. **** them all!

 

Oh, please. Are we still doing this, "The media is out to get Snyder" thing in year, what, 18 of his regime?

 

The leaks are going to come from Allen and the front office. They are the ones that leak things and then deny them. That's the game here.

 

 

2 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

 

We haven't had leaks for at least the past 2 (maybe 3) years and I don't see any reason why that would start now. I do see a trial starting Monday that could expose some things about how our front office was operating the last two years though.

 

Except of the entire "Trashing the GM as a day-drinking alcoholic on his way out the door" story that dominated the first part of this year.

 

Aside from that, it's been quiet.

[Csup]

6 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

The Scot Mc arbitration hearing starting 18th Dec is the potential catalyst for an epic pre Christmas media crap fest. Drinking on the job, if Scot Mc gets formally canned as guilty then others will be dropped in the soup as well.

 

 

 

 

I would take a drunk Scott Mc over a sober Bruce A any day of the week - and twice on Sunday.

[SkinInsite]

1 hour ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Oh, please. Are we still doing this, "The media is out to get Snyder" thing in year, what, 18 of his regime?

 

The leaks are going to come from Allen and the front office. They are the ones that leak things and then deny them. That's the game here.

 

Except of the entire "Trashing the GM as a day-drinking alcoholic on his way out the door" story that dominated the first part of this year.

 

Aside from that, it's been quiet.

 

It's totally media's fault BA came out with a tone deaf statement about Kurt that tries to absolve him of all blame.

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Oh, please. Are we still doing this, "The media is out to get Snyder" thing in year, what, 18 of his regime?

 

The leaks are going to come from Allen and the front office. They are the ones that leak things and then deny them. That's the game here.

 

How do you know this. It'd be one thing if somebody on radio, the paper, or the TV said this. Are you basing this on somebody's statement, or your own assumptions? There were leaks during Shanahan and people didn't know if they came from players, coaches, front office or janitors. But they made the radio shows more listenable and the stories more readable so they got all kinds of air time. Since Shanny left the number of rumors have decreased (RG3 is also gone so there's no back and forth about what went on), but remember there were also leaks about McNabb and his wristband. So where's the blame for Shanny in leakgate? Or is it just because Allen is the Villain in Command at present?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Oh, the majority of Shanahan's leaks regarding players came from Mike and Kyle. You could tell because so many of those stories came out of the national media which had worked with Shanahan for decades.

 

The stories last year about Scot and Kirk came from Allen and his minions.

 

If you pay attention to 1) where the stories appear, 2) who the stories bash), and 3) what the end result of the saga is, you can figure this out.

 

I think prior to Allen, a lot of the leaks came from Snyder directly as he does have his cronies in the media.

 

The only person whose stories I ever really doubted were LaCanfora's. Not because people were lying to him or because he was making stuff up, but because he had a tendency to take the leaked information and then jump to his own conclusions.

 

Generally speaking, we need to be done with the approach of "The Media is Out To Get Us" nonsense of the Art days.

[Dan T.]

8 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

The Scot Mc arbitration hearing starting 18th Dec is the potential catalyst for an epic pre Christmas media crap fest. Drinking on the job, if Scot Mc gets formally canned as guilty then others will be dropped in the soup as well.

 

 

 

Why would anyone with the misfortune of  working for the Redskins NOT drink on the job?

[Thinking Skins]

7 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

Oh, the majority of Shanahan's leaks regarding players came from Mike and Kyle. You could tell because so many of those stories came out of the national media which had worked with Shanahan for decades.

 

The stories last year about Scot and Kirk came from Allen and his minions.

 

If you pay attention to 1) where the stories appear, 2) who the stories bash), and 3) what the end result of the saga is, you can figure this out.

 

I think prior to Allen, a lot of the leaks came from Snyder directly as he does have his cronies in the media.

 

The only person whose stories I ever really doubted were LaCanfora's. Not because people were lying to him or because he was making stuff up, but because he had a tendency to take the leaked information and then jump to his own conclusions.

 

Generally speaking, we need to be done with the approach of "The Media is Out To Get Us" nonsense of the Art days.

 

So in your very response you give credibility to (a) the idea that the media is getting / giving false information, some opinions. Patrick said that he had a source that wound up being somebody outside the organization, but people were so ready to say that leak was Bruce because of who it hurt (Cousins) thinking of everything as a negotiation. Some people had the audacity to say that Cravens's drops and the WR struggles are all a setup to not pay Cousins because they hurt his numbers.

 

You can comment on the Scot story and say that's a leak on Allen or you can believe Allen and say that he worked to get rid of the leaks since Shanny and was really upset that somebody leaked that. I don't see why people act like leaks have been Allen's MO. Under Vinny JLC was always getting "sources", so much that Larry Michaels was calling him the Sourcerer. Is that on Allen too? This has actually been a pretty respectable organization since Shanny/RG3 left but people refuse to see that since the Cousins and Scot drama clouds their judgement.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

This has actually been a pretty respectable organization since Shanny/RG3 left but people refuse to see that since the Cousins and Scot drama clouds their judgement.

 

Yeah man, how dare folks let the two of the biggest blunders cloud their judgment.  

 

 

[Thinking Skins]

7 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Yeah man, how dare folks let the two of the biggest blunders cloud their judgment.  

 

 

 

You can call them blunders, but whatever. You also shouldn't let those two blunders make Bruce something he's not. Suddenly the Shanny rumors are attributed to Bruce? What has he "leaked"? There's the possibility of the Scot story. Other things - Cooley saying what he said? That's on Cooley. Allen's press conference? That's the opposite of a leak.

 

Not liking the way he does things is one thing, but saying that there are going to be all kinds of leaks because thats what he does is another thing and it just doesn't hold water.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 hours ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Except of the entire "Trashing the GM as a day-drinking alcoholic on his way out the door" story that dominated the first part of this year.

 

Aside from that, it's been quiet.

 

And the "WRs hate Kirk Cousins" leak just last week. Yep, tight ship indeed. 

[elkabong82]

2 hours ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Oh, please. Are we still doing this, "The media is out to get Snyder" thing in year, what, 18 of his regime?

 

The leaks are going to come from Allen and the front office. They are the ones that leak things and then deny them. That's the game here.

 

 

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

For some reason, they lowballed Kirk (well, they offered him an okay deal in a vacuum, but a terrible deal in light of the what he was owed under the tag) and then made it seem like he was an ingrate looking to hurt the team with unreasonable demands.

 

They absolutely trashed RG3's reputation on the way out of town. 90 percent of the RG3 stories may have been true, but there is just no point in destroying a player because he disappointed you.

 

They really attempted to destroy Scot's career on his way out the door. Again, everything they said was and probably is true. But, this insatiable need to "win the exit" does not help the team succeed on the field in any way.

 

The low point of this team was the coaching search that ended with Zorn. It's not because Zorn was a bad guy or a bad hire (he was a good guy who was a bad hire but that's not important). The problem was, the organization had become so poisonous at that point that coaches were actually taking the "I'll wait for the next deal" attitude.

 

We joke about the "winning off the field" line, but we know that Bruce needs to "win the negotiation" every time, and it's pretty clear that he needs to "win the exit interview." That's a silly thing for a team to be overly concerned with.

 

 

[Unbias]

2 hours ago, Csup said:

I would take a drunk Scott Mc over a sober Bruce A any day of the week - and twice on Sunday.

 

The Scot Mc thing still bugs me. In the end he'll sue and get a big settlement, but will give away his ability to talk about the issue. The Skins have done the job of blasting him in the media, so with no conclusion that will be the last message heard. 

 

The saddest part is anyone inside the league will know the real story. There are GMs or prospective GMs who will talk about this opening and just not thing about it as a good work environment. Scot actually was respected within the league and the team sent him packing in a public, humiliating way. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

10 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

You can call them blunders, but whatever. You also shouldn't let those two blunders make Bruce something he's not. Suddenly the Shanny rumors are attributed to Bruce? What has he "leaked"? There's the possibility of the Scot story. Other things - Cooley saying what he said? That's on Cooley. Allen's press conference? That's the opposite of a leak.

 

Not liking the way he does things is one thing, but saying that there are going to be all kinds of leaks because thats what he does is another thing and it just doesn't hold water.

They are blunders worthy of much more than a "whatever".

 

Bruce's presence in the FO creates and fosters an environment that is conducive to leaks.  Think about the poor scouts in that building that are sweating bullets, not knowing what to do or say, during this grievance hearing.  That's just one small example of what the environment is like at Redskins Park due to the actions of Bruce.  Above that, the only public message he's sent since the summer is that Kirk is greedy and he worked hard to land a long term deal.  A solid FO jumps right out there and makes a statement backing their quarterback and denouncing crap like "the Redskins need to see more from Kirk down the stretch".  He didn't, wonder why that is?  Perhaps because it came from him.  The guy he hand picked - Jay Gruden, is being raked over the coals, labeled as being on the hot seat.  Not a peep from him in regards to any of that.  Bottom line, things are not handled appropriately and effectively within this organization and he's in charge of all of it.  This type of environment is ripe for leaks, anonymous sources and on down the line.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

31 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

This has actually been a pretty respectable organization since Shanny/RG3 left but people refuse to see that since the Cousins and Scot drama clouds their judgement.

Let me start by saying, that I don't entirely disagree with the first part of what you said. Having said that, if any organization is incapable of retaining the best GM and QB they've had in decades all in the same calendar year, then they cease to be considered respectable.

 

They were GIFTED (being conservative) a borderline franchise QB with a 4th round pick and have spent the past 2-3 years driving up his cost and making him nearly impossible to retain. Then, they seemingly made the mature decision to employ the best talent evaluator they could find and ran him out of town using rumors of unprofessionalism and drinking on the job. 

 

You can't really swing and miss worse than screwing up the guy who picks the players and the QB. 

[Thinking Skins]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

They are blunders worthy of much more than a "whatever".

 

Bruce's presence in the FO creates and fosters an environment that is conducive to leaks.  Think about the poor scouts in that building that are sweating bullets, not knowing what to do or say, during this grievance hearing.  That's just one small example of what the environment is like at Redskins Park due to the actions of Bruce.  Above that, the only public message he's sent since the summer is that Kirk is greedy and he worked hard to land a long term deal.  A solid FO jumps right out there and makes a statement backing their quarterback and denouncing crap like "the Redskins need to see more from Kirk down the stretch".  He didn't, wonder why that is?  Perhaps because it came from him.  The guy he hand picked - Jay Gruden, is being raked over the coals, labeled as being on the hot seat.  Not a peep from him in regards to any of that.  Bottom line, things are not handled appropriately and effectively within this organization and he's in charge of all of it.  This type of environment is ripe for leaks, anonymous sources and on down the line.

 

What poor scouts? The ones that Scot kept, and were a part of our good drafts lately? Or did Super Scot do all the scouting himself, flying to every college football game and watching every minute of tape on every player, trusting only himself and his own judgement?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

What poor scouts? The ones that Scot kept, and were a part of our good drafts lately? Or did Super Scot do all the scouting himself, flying to every college football game and watching every minute of tape on every player, trusting only himself and his own judgement?

What does any of that have to do with anything?  You're flailing to defend Bruce and his piss poor track record of practically everything he's ever touched in professional sports.

 

I'm talking about the scouts that have no idea how truthful to be in this hearing because their livelihoods depend on being employable in their field.  I'm sure they'd prefer to be working on their craft, rather than sweating bullets about what questions they are going to be asked.  A grievance hearing that's only necessary because of the actions of the one and only Bruce Allen.

[Thinking Skins]

1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

What does any of that have to do with anything?  You're flailing to defend Bruce and his piss poor track record of practically everything he's ever touched in professional sports.

 

I'm talking about the scouts that have no idea how truthful to be in this hearing because their livelihoods depend on being employable in their field.  I'm sure they'd prefer to be working on their craft, rather than sweating bullets about what questions they are going to be asked.  A grievance hearing that's only necessary because of the actions of the one and only Bruce Allen.

 

They should treat it as a meeting. What do you mean they have no idea how truthful to be. Their livelihood is based on giving honest evaluations and that shouldn't change now. You seem to be implying that they'll get fired and expose that Scot was in fact improperly terminated. What if he wasn't. What if they don't know. There are a thousand different scenarios that are possible. I don't see it as much different than being asked my opinion on a guy we're about to hire or fire? I'm asked about my thoughts on his performance and potential. I'd rather be doing my actual job, but the higher up I get in my current position the more I get called into meetings like this. Its kinda why people have a problem staying "technical" as they grow in business. These scouts are getting a view of how the sausage is made, and if they value being more than a scout (many don't) this can be a valuable lesson (no matter which side you're on).

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

They should treat it as a meeting. What do you mean they have no idea how truthful to be.

Believe it or not, Scot McCloughan is still a respected individual in the NFL.  The way they did him on his way out with that anonymous source's statement was not seen in a good light by most everyone.  If they come across as pro-Scot, they fear retaliation by Bruce.  If they come across pro-Bruce, they fear what that means for job prospects outside of Washington.  It's in Bruce's best interest to simply settle with Scot and pay the man his money to avoid having his scouts open for questioning in this grievance hearing and to avoid any other disparaging information to get out there.  But fitting with what we've heard and known about Bruce, he's more worried about winning the personal side of the situation.