Per PFT: Scott Campbell Out as Senior Personnel Executive

[JSSkinz]

I don't use social media like many on here but I've read enough over the last year to know they love Smith, this is not surprising at all.

 

He's had 2 solid drafts so I think they feel comfortable moving forward with him now.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

9 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

 

Last year his title comes with an asterisk since most involved acknowledge it was Scot’s board they were operating off of for the most part, anyway. 

 

 

To play off of this point.  It doesn't matter to me personally about Scot getting credit.  But to me it says something about people's personality as to how they responded to that issue.  

 

Jay when asked (even with Scot gone) said heck yeah Scot had a major influence on their draft/draft board.  Scott Campbell said the same thing.  Bruce when asked played down Scot's role.

 

To plug Jay a little more.  The dude is a straight shooter-honest-integrity-likable.  And as a fan to me that's a big bonus.   Kyle Smith from what I hear at least is all business no nonsense type.  Schaffer from what I hear is likable/good with people and is honest. 

 

I used to be concerned about Doug from the context of I don't think he has the pedigree to head personnel.  However, I've heard him speak enough along with others talk about him to get a pretty clear sense that he's not running personnel but instead he's a facilitator in that building.  And some beat guys say people at Redskins Park like Doug to be out there talking to the media because he's likable and not as likely to put his foot in his mouth versus Bruce. 

 

 To me Bruce is the weak line in that chain.  And I know some think hey who cares about Bruce since he isn't doing the actual personnel scouting decisions.  Two thoughts on that.

 

A. Maybe its because I am trying to indoctrinate my kids that the Redskins are the good guys -- in a sea of Giant and Dolphin fans among my extended family and friends.  That's not easy to do with Bruce running the ship because he doesn't present the air of competence and class and that filters to some of the national shows I watch with them.   If you are outside the DC market at least from my experience -- you got to apologize a little for being a Redskins fan and I hate that.  I doubt that would be the case with Kyle Smith or Schaffer as GM (assuming Dan keeps a low profile)

 

B.  In my line of work I take on helping clients.  Sometimes its with me in charge.  Sometimes its with someone else in charge.  I am more of the technician type in what I do (like Kyle Smith) than an overseer type.   When I have complete autonomy to do things my way -- my work is different than it is when I have someone overseeing me.  When someone is overseeing me, I take into account what the person likes and doesn't like and I try to fit it within those parameters.    It's hard to explain but I am still producing a product but when I am doing it with someone above me -- its different.    My point, is the guy in charge even if they aren't creating the product often influences the product anyway.   Plus the guy in charge is synchronizing everything -- that's a big deal.   For example, lets chase player X in FA so we can forgo being pressured to draft X.  And there are a ton of these type of decisions.   

 

So that's why for me for example if Kyle Smith is this stud football guy, let him run the whole operation.  It's much different and a bigger deal when you are synchronizing everything.  This chess piece effects that chess piece, etc. That's how you build a roster.   

 

I am not saying this went down.  But there is some smoke that this is possible and I am not saying this to get into a debate about the issue. I am just using this to illustrate a point.    There is a vibe (mainly from Doug) that some people within the draft room disagreed about the Payne pick.  And based on something else I saw I got the vibe that maybe Bruce tipped the balance toward Payne.  Bruce in FA did nada about the DT position in FA.  If scouts in the room only care about BPA, and they want to go in a different direction on a player but are overruled by Bruce lets say because of how HE approached FA.  Then, its a prime example of why the guy in charge does matter.  Maybe this didn't happen but I got no doubt that you have enough moving part decisions like this that make the actual decision maker VERY important.   And in that position IMO its best to have your smartest football in the building calling that shot.  IMO that guy isn't Bruce.

 

 

[TSO]

On 5/9/2018 at 6:57 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

B.  In my line of work I take on helping clients.  Sometimes its with me in charge.  Sometimes its with someone else in charge.  I am more of the technician type in what I do (like Kyle Smith) than an overseer type.   When I have completely autonomy to do things my way -- my work is different than it is when I have someone overseeing me.  When someone is overseeing me, I take into account what the person likes and doesn't like and I try to fit it within those parameters.    It's hard to explain but I am still producing a product but when I am doing it with someone above me -- its different.    My point, is the guy in charge even if they aren't creating the product often influences the product anyway.   Plus the guy in charge is synchronizing everything -- that's a big deal.   For example, lets chase player X in FA so we can forgo being pressured to draft X.  And there are a ton of these type of decisions.   

 

Great post as usual, SIP, but I wanted to highlight this here in particular. This is what is often missed by so many. Team building isn’t this simplistic, “just add quality”, type of deal. There’s so much more nuance and subtlety to it. There’s seeing the big picture, how everything is interconnected and interrelated, how players fit within schemes but also which coaches can develop what attributes, the overarching theme or philosophy trying to be achieved that is dependent on external factors that can change (like, say, the present CBA and cheaper rookie deals), etc... 

 

A great example of this nuance often being missed is in the arguments about Payne being taken by you and some others. It wasn’t a hatred for the player himself or even a slight dislike (to the contrary, you like him). It was the implications to team building that it meant when evidence came out that he wasn’t necessarily at the top of their board. 

 

Advocates of BPA as well as “following the board” can simultaneously like the player but not like the method of the pick. We can legitimately question if it would’ve been better had we signed Hankins, even to a big deal, but then took Edmunds or James or whoever the research by the scouting department had above him (which should mean a higher chance of more impact over their careers). We can go back to last offseason and wonder if the philosophy that saw Campbell’s deal with the Jags being something we were unwilling to match or beat, but then sign two average players in McGee/McClain instead, is something still lingering and if the Payne pick was a residual effect. 

 

So Payne could end up the better player than everyone in the draft and it still wouldn’t mean, if the evidence that shows they didn’t just follow their board and reached ever so slightly for the position they needed proved true, that it was the right approach in terms of overall team building. It would be more about luck. 

 

Now, before anyone loses it I’m just speaking from a comprehensive perspective. Personally, I haven’t done the research to judge the pick in any way, and as one of those (along with SIP) who’ve been adamant now for years about upgrading our interior Dline... I absolutely LOVE the pick just by virtue of that. I’ll never complain about expending out most valuable resources on that position. EVER. 

 

But the point is, there’s more nuance to team building than that. And if BPA wasn’t truly implemented and/or they didn’t follow their own board that they created via the experts they hired to do that job? That’s a problem  organizationally and even if the pick pans out it’s not something you want to ever see from leadership. 

 

Again, that’s one example but since it’s so recent I think it’s a good one to use. Plus I’ve been so busy with a million things I never really got to talk about that pick, so I needed an excuse, lol. 

 

But, yeah, we can love certain aspects of the FO like Jay, like Schaffer, like Kyle, etc... while also recognizing that they’re likely hindered by their leadership in ways we see and in ways we don’t. Even if they’re ultimately successful, you wonder how much of that success came in spite of said leadership and not because of it.

 

I sometimes wonder how far ahead we’d be as a roster right now, and thus how much more successful guys like Jay would already be, with a better support structure provided to them by better leadership. What took 5-6 years to build here, with all the crazy obstacles needed to be overcome, could’ve easily taken 2-3 otherwise. I really believe that. 

[zoony]

But was the board really Scotts?  He was adamant in his entire time here, whenever asked, that personnel was a group decision.  He described getting input from coaches, scouts, strength coaches, everyone.  He talked about arguing and disagreeing and finally coming to a decision.  I think its a little misleading to say it was scotts board... besides, he apparently fell off the face of the earth for the 2 months leading to the draft.

 

I think a gm is more of a facilitator, leader, motivator, and organizer.  Which is why ive advocated getting someone from outside of football who has strong entreprenurial and leadership qualities... the team that does that and stops overpaying all of these aging ex jocks who sort of float from organization to organization and take care of their buds is going to have an advantage in the market, imo.

 

Anywho, if there was a strength to GMSM, i think it was more ahout his leadership qualities than anything.  Players really seemed to love him and so did, wlell, everyone except Bruce.  People WORKED for him, which is the highest praise you can give any leader imo.   Now imagine if we got a dynamic, intelligent, highly organized and skilled leader crom outside of football to come in and run the org.  Would never happen, as that requires a gravitas and confidence that Snyder lacks... but its fun to daydream

[Skinsinparadise]

26 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Advocates of BPA as well as following the board can simultaneously like the played but not like the method of the pick. We can legitimately question if it would’ve been better had we signed Hankins, even to a big deal, but then took Edmunds or James or whoever the research by the scouting department had above him (which should mean a higher chance of more impact over their careers). 

 

 

The other problem to me is if the guy in charge isn't arguably a true football guy and has at least in his public statements and how he handles things -- doesn't come off like someone who is ultra-competent or classy it makes you question things even more.

 

For example, one of my top FA quests this off season was Sheldon Richardson.  Then I see the Vikings of all teams sign him for what I think is a reasonable term.  The Vikings who are the same team that built a monster roster.  So somehow I am supposed to subjugate my own instincts and say yeah the Vikings have been better at building a big time roster than the Redskins -- and yeah their instincts happen to dovetail with mine.  But let me throw that out the window and just trust that Bruce knows better.  Ironically, the Vikings the same team who had so much talent on their roster already and managed their cap so well that they could seamlessly give Kirk a nice contract where Bruce was so reluctant and lost him for a ham sandwich. 

 

I hate that feeling of not trusting the guy in charge.  It's to me similar to the Cerrato era but just in a different way.  They have a better operation now than back then IMO.  But like then, I don't trust the main guy in charge.  If a real football guy like Kyle Smith was in charge, I'd never have that feeling.   

 

We got ex-Redskins goofing on Bruce.   As Cooley said when the article about the agents and Bruce came out -- players are going to see it and that's not good.  The idea that the guy who is the top of the totem pole is competent -- I think is a really big deal.  And even if its just perception that doesn't mirror reality -- to me that's almost immaterial.

 

Some people brush off the perception of Bruce as being overblown or unfair, etc.  For me, even if I bought into that, I'd still think it would help if he were reassigned because I don't think it helps the vibe around the franchise to have a guy in charge that some perceive to be incompetent and or a bad guy and or more of a politician than a football guy -- whether its true or not.

 

I recall the tweet from Evan Silva, Rotoworld, for example months back where he said he checked with some of his league sources and they told him yeah Bruce really is a dumb guy.  We got Laconfora saying people tell him as along as Bruce is running things the Redskins have no chance.  

 

For me, do I think Bruce is a dumb guy?  No.  But do I think its a problem that so many national guys clown on the guy (because of his self inflicted wounds), coupled with that agent story about how untrustworthy and unprepared they think he is?  Yeah I do.  

[TSO]

5 hours ago, zoony said:

 

But was the board really Scotts?  He was adamant in his entire time here, whenever asked, that personnel was a group decision.  He described getting input from coaches, scouts, strength coaches, everyone.  He talked about arguing and disagreeing and finally coming to a decision.  I think its a little misleading to say it was scotts board... besides, he apparently fell off the face of the earth for the 2 months leading to the draft.

 

I think a gm is more of a facilitator, leader, motivator, and organizer.  Which is why ive advocated getting someone from outside of football who has strong entreprenurial and leadership qualities... the team that does that and stops overpaying all of these aging ex jocks who sort of float from organization to organization and take care of their buds is going to have an advantage in the market, imo.

 

 

I don’t think anyone saying it was “Scot’s board” meant that he was putting it together alone. It just means he was the one with the ultimate control over it. So when a guy like Kyle Smith scouts his region and reports back to him, Scot takes that info and either trusts it or doesn’t. 

 

So while you’re right, I don’t think there’s any problem with calling it his board. I don’t have an issue calling this year's board Kyle Smith’s, either. 

 

That doesn’t negate the fact that it’s a group effort. It has to be in any organization, the question is who has ultimate say in whatever respective field he/she is hired to handle. That’s who should ultimately be responsible. 

[Warhead36]

I've been reading that Kyle Smith is the real shining star in the FO.

 

We'll see I suppose. We've let some real smart people out of our building. John Schneider, Mark Murphy to name a couple.

[Koolblue13]

Wait, we don't have an official GM because we've got 2 home grown ones that are respected league wide that we want to keep? Who the **** are we? 

[Skinsinparadise]

8 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

I've been reading that Kyle Smith is the real shining star in the FO.

 

We'll see I suppose. We've let some real smart people out of our building. John Schneider, Mark Murphy to name a couple.

 

Schneider is a great case in point.  Some act in retrospect that heck who knew that he was this young emerging personnel stud - as if it was some big surprise that he emerged later.   But nope.  Google those times.  Schneider back then was considered a young emerging hot shot personnel guy.   And we let the dude go to bring back Dan's pal Vinny.  So we let go arguably the best GM in the league for a guy who is punch line status comically bad.

 

I know some here might disagree but to me parallels of keeping Bruce to let Kyle Smith go (if that happened) might not be that wildly off if that went down.  I don't think it will though -- but if it did, geez.  Though it's not apples to apples to Schneider because Kyle is the son of one of Bruce's closest friends so I gather that he will do what he can to keep him. 

 

I am not a Dan guy at all.  But I am a little easier on him than some as for the topic of whether he's pulling Bruce's strings.  My #1 beef with Dan though is he in the past seemed more driven by what GM/President etc is he pals with and comfortable socially with versus who helps him win.

 

And apparently that extends sometimes to coaching, too.  I always like going back to the Zorn/Gregg Williams coach hire drill.  When Vinny recanted the story years later on a radio show about why he and Dan decided not to go with Gregg by telling how they didn't bond like pals when they watched the playoffs together at Dan's house and that was the kicker -- that story that Vinny told in such a matter of fact way as if of course Dan/him wanted to hire a coach they felt was a pal -- that story always stood out to me.  That's how they roll? 

[HigSkin]

 

[bedlamVR]

I am not as sure that Schnider would have lasted here even if Schottenheimer did last beyond one season - Marty wanted all the power (as he did in SanDeigo) and John even then was a shooting star. - Maybe it would have worked out - but if Schnider was involved with personnel decisions in 2001 then ouch - seriously ouch (Rod Gardner/Fred Smoot was the highlight of the draft - and Kevin Lockett ? was the notable name free agency) - But anyway.. 

 

I have also heard this 'Pals' thing with Gregg Williams - It sounds terrible - but lets put this into a bit of context here. When Gregg Williams was fired from the Bills the biggest knock on him was he had a hard time communicating with the players and he had a tendency (reputation?) to be arrogant and aloof - That is fine when you are a co-ordinator because you can focus soley on the x's and o's - but a head coach ? The most important thing for a head coach is communication and planning  - and if Dan  thought if we cannot mesh then he was worried that Greggs personality might cause problems in the locker room - 

 

Of course the other narative on the entire why Williams did not get the HC job was because he turned up to the interview with the belief it was a formailty and planned nothing, and came to the the interview unprepared. Yes the team knew what he could do - but thats not the point - Just like a drugs test at the combine is not really a test for illegal narcotics - but an intellegence test - If you cannot get clean for the football horse and pony show then how on earth can you be expected to contribute to any NFL team that selects you (idiot - see Greggory - Randy; Jackson, Tannard) - If Gregg Williams did go in unprepared to what was a pretty important interview - what did that tell you about his interest in the job or in the franchise as a whole? 

 

But anyway - back onto Scott - I really liked him, its interesting they are parting ways but I have heard enough about Kyle Smith to think anything that can be done to retain him should be ... If this is associated at all 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, bedlamVR said:

I am not as sure that Schnider would have lasted here even if Schottenheimer did last beyond one season - Marty wanted all the power (as he did in SanDeigo) and John even then was a shooting star. - Maybe it would have worked out - but if Schnider was involved with personnel decisions in 2001 then ouch - seriously ouch (Rod Gardner/Fred Smoot was the highlight of the draft - and Kevin Lockett ? was the notable name free agency) - But anyway.. 

 

 

They had only 5 picks and no 3rd rounder.   Smoot as a 2nd rounder, good pick.  Antonio Pierce as an undrafted free agent stud.  Sage Rosenfels for a 4th rounder QB -- decent career.  I'd say that draft was at least average.   

 

This point isn't directed at you but to the point if we give a new guy like Kyle Smith the reigns we need to be patient with him.  We IMO have to give ANY personnel guy a leash where we aren't living and dying with each pick or for that matter each draft.  Otherwise, EVERY personnel guy stinks.  They all do.  If I wanted to I can easily make the case that Belichick is a moron by highlighting certain drafts and picks.  They all have bad drafts, bad picks.  Schneider still has bad drafts but overall he does well.    It's a long term game -- some drafts, picks better than others but I can't think of an example where its a total smooth ride.  You have to ignore the bumps otherwise you are going to zig and zag from one strategy to another.  And that typically doesn't end well. 

 

1 hour ago, bedlamVR said:

 

I have also heard this 'Pals' thing with Gregg Williams - It sounds terrible - but lets put this into a bit of context here. When Gregg Williams was fired from the Bills the biggest knock on him was he had a hard time communicating with the players and he had a tendency (reputation?) to be arrogant and aloof - That is fine when you are a co-ordinator because you can focus soley on the x's and o's - but a head coach ? The most important thing for a head coach is communication and planning  - and if Dan  thought if we cannot mesh then he was worried that Greggs personality might cause problems in the locker room - 

 

I am not hung up on Gregg and I know the backdrop around him very well.  But this narrative isn't exactly an isolated example of a buddy system being in play with Dan.  I recall some saying part of the reason why it was so hard for Dan to ever let go of Vinny was that Vinny was so close to his family.   And yeah its in play am sure with every team but it seems a bit more pronounced with Dan. 

[SWFLSkins]

I was killed for saying Doug's role was more than just a PR move, told it =Snyder saving his face with Scot firing. I think/hope this is setting up a legit F/O with Bruce on Stadiums and stuff, Doug being the Football VP and a GM role coming for a rising exec. 

 

Smith as general manager of the Redskins makes sense, whether that happens this season or a few seasons down the road.

What about Doug Williams?

Remember, last year at his introductory press conference, the Senior VP of Player Personnel made clear he doesn't want to be GM.

Eric Schaffer does a million things at Redskins Park, but player evaluation is not considered his strong suit.

[SWFLSkins]

 

 

[Peregrine]

17 hours ago, JoggingGod said:

Oh my god, the Redskins are trying to keep executives that other teams really want, they’re so dysfunctional, why can’t they hire a real GM for once???

OMG, twitter says some people want Redskins executives, it must be true despite the fact no team in the past decade has ever actually signed a Redskins executive.

 

Its really easy for Larry in his grandparents basement in Nebraska to throw something up on twitter, but its a very different thing for a team to actually make an attempt to sign a guy.  When and if that happens it would be a first.

[OVCChairman]

24 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

OMG, twitter says some people want Redskins executives, it must be true despite the fact no team in the past decade has ever actually signed a Redskins executive.

 

Its really easy for Larry in his grandparents basement in Nebraska to throw something up on twitter, but its a very different thing for a team to actually make an attempt to sign a guy.  When and if that happens it would be a first.

 

 

This isnt though, this is Craig Hoffman, someone in touch with the team on a very regular basis.  He referenced multiple teams and other beat reporters referencing Kyle Smith while was at the combine and draft.  

 

https://thefandc.radio.com/being-a-great-guy-got-the-best-of-scott-campbell

 

Quote

 

Smith was courted by at least two NFL teams a year ago, helping fuel his promotion, and at least one new team is very interested in his services currently.

 

Redskins Senior VP of Personnel, Doug Williams, knew exactly what the Redskins had in Smith and essentially aligned his plan for the front office re-alignment last summer, with Smith playing a featured role and Campbell playing a more senior or reduced role.

 

Nothing changed in that thought process over the last 11 months or so, the exception being that the Redskins realized they simply cannot lose Smith for any reason.

 

Quote

For now, Smith did not receive a promotion, but it’s not out of the question that, at some point, he could be elevated to the title of general manager, per Craig Hoffman and 106.7 The Fan sources.

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

5 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

This isnt though, this is Craig Hoffman, someone in touch with the team on a very regular basis.  He referenced multiple teams and other beat reporters referencing Kyle Smith while was at the combine and draft.  

Kyle Smith has the pedigree for sure.  It makes sense that he'd be interesting to other teams.  That hasn't been the case here in forever.

 

I took Peregrine's response to JoggingGod as more of a - cool your jets bud, if this is true - it'll be the first time - kind of response. 

[OVCChairman]

3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Kyle Smith has the pedigree for sure.  It makes sense that he'd be interesting to other teams.  That hasn't been the case here in forever.

 

I took Peregrine's response to JoggingGod as more of a - cool your jets bud, if this is true - it'll be the first time - kind of response. 

 

 

point still there... referring to twitter saying any body can make a claim is one thing, but this wasn't a twitter claim... from everything out there it's a legitimate report.  

[DC9]

I'm taking this as a move in the right direction.

 

Hopefully it's a move away from Bruce and a move towards a Doug Williams as team President/GM and a Smith in charge of personnel/drafting. 

 

I'd be fine with that if it's based on merit and not the old boy network.  Which on it's face it appears to be. 

[goskins10]

16 minutes ago, DC9 said:

I'm taking this as a move in the right direction.

 

Hopefully it's a move away from Bruce and a move towards a Doug Williams as team President/GM and a Smith in charge of personnel/drafting. 

 

I'd be fine with that if it's based on merit and not the old boy network.  Which on it's face it appears to be. 

 

I understand what you are saying but if they get to the right place does it really matter how they got there? I could care less personally - as long as they get there. 

 

Part of that is ultimately I do not think it's ever that black and white. While they may promote someone they like they are not completely void of any abilities. And while they may bring someone in that has great abilities, part of why they want to talk to them is because they like that person. 

 

So if Dan brought Doug is to cover his ass in the eyes of the fans but Doug turns out to do a great job - do we really care that much how Doug get there? Again, I do not as long as you do a good job once you get there. 

[pjfootballer]

This organization sure hates anyone named “Scott or Scot”

[Warhead36]

I just don't want Allen in charge of personnel. I actually think the rest of our FO is half decent when it comes to evaluating talent and drafting.

[Skinsinparadise]

34 minutes ago, pjfootballer said:

This organization sure hates anyone named “Scott or Scot”

 

Not even a tiny bit true from what I've observed.

 

21 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I just don't want Allen in charge of personnel. I actually think the rest of our FO is half decent when it comes to evaluating talent and drafting.

 

Bullseye. 

 

[DC9]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

 

I understand what you are saying but if they get to the right place does it really matter how they got there? I could care less personally - as long as they get there. 

 

Part of that is ultimately I do not think it's ever that black and white. While they may promote someone they like they are not completely void of any abilities. And while they may bring someone in that has great abilities, part of why they want to talk to them is because they like that person. 

 

So if Dan brought Doug is to cover his ass in the eyes of the fans but Doug turns out to do a great job - do we really care that much how Doug get there? Again, I do not as long as you do a good job once you get there. 

 

Well, since Doug has been a personnel guy in the league for quite some time I would say it's more likely that he made it based on merit.  He was also a HC at a high level in college and knows something about recruiting and identifying talent.

 

Jeff Bostic hasn't had anything to do with football since he retired (to my knowledge)... if they gave it to him it would raise an eyebrow.

 

So yes, it matters how they get there because if you hire the RIGHT people based on merit you are less likely to **** it up.  

[JSSkinz]

It sure feels like the team is phasing Bruce out of the process, next step reassignment or a pink slip.