A New Start! (the Reboot) The Front Office, Ownership, & Coaching Staff Thread

[FLSkinz83]

26 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

What? Dan has sabotaged the franchise on his own. Jason has just added to that sabotage. Sabotage Dan? Dan did that himself.

 

I wasn't being literal.   It just seems that everyone who comes here with good reputations does/says dumb things.

[Mrshadow008]

36 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

 

The wrapping it was delivered in was pretty crass.

The question itself has been asked directly to Wentz and the org more times than I can count this offseason, so there should be the expectation that it is both fair game and that it continues to be asked. 

 

 

Whats funny is I'm pretty sure the same guy, delivered the same question in pretty much the same delivery during Wentz introductory press convo, directly to Wentz.  5:25 mark

 

 

Maybe Scott Abraham has been warned of this blunt method in the past and his continuation kinda forced an organizational response? That would be my guess as to why Wright spoke up, rather than not saying anything when everyone else up and down the org has been fielding this same question for months.

 

Regardless, this won't be the last time Wentz, or Ron or anybody will be asked this question. Hopefully next time there will be at least some effort to have some tact. Scott straight up just puts it out there cheeks to the wind.

I haven’t seen the interviews so I can’t say for sure but I’ve seen others comment that’s he’s kinda acted this way with Curtis as well as Chase recently. But I think this has been coming to a head for a while now. Fans as well as players have called out the media this off-season. Jason just happens to be the latest and obviously highest profile. people are kinda over it. Again the team has done some of it to itself and has made mistakes recently and in the past. But there is a difference between calling out the team when it needs it and looking for things to be negative about. Seriously we just had an example of it during the first two days of training camp. media calling out the team for the lottery and poor training camp attendance that second day only for it to come out the next day that it was a suite holder only day. Call the team out when it needs it and god knows it does at times but at least try to be fair and balanced 

[JSSkinz]

I'm not surprised Jason lost his cool, if you read the Michael Phillips article from last week talking about the NFL's latest report on our team and the metrics they're tracking you could hear the frustration in his quotes when it comes to the negative coverage.

 

What he did wasn't the smartest thing but it also wasn't egregious. I like the fact Ron and Jason stick up for the people they lead on the field and in the business office, there's a good chance the employees appreciate it too.

 

 

[hail2skins]

Soomeone should ask Jason how he thinks his boss saying "we finally have a QB" makes the current backup who, limitations aside, busted his ass last season, feel.

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, FootballZombie said:

 

The wrapping it was delivered in was pretty crass.

The question itself has been asked directly to Wentz and the org more times than I can count this offseason, so there should be the expectation that it is both fair game and that it continues to be asked. 

 

 

Whats funny is I'm pretty sure the same guy, delivered the same question in pretty much the same delivery during Wentz introductory press convo, directly to Wentz.  5:25 mark

 

 

Maybe Scott Abraham has been warned of this blunt method in the past and his continuation kinda forced an organizational response? That would be my guess as to why Wright spoke up, rather than not saying anything when everyone else up and down the org has been fielding this same question for months.

 

Regardless, this won't be the last time Wentz, or Ron or anybody will be asked this question. Hopefully next time there will be at least some effort to have some tact. Scott straight up just puts it out there cheeks to the wind.

Good pull. Exact same words by same guy. 

[HigSkin]

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

10 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

That said, Jason Wright really had nothing to gain by tweeting in response to this.  Just an all around bad look by everyone but Wentz.

I think it might help him in the building with the players.  If they see that the leader of the business ops side will come to their defense, that's not a bad look for Wright inside the building and inside the player community.  He is also a former player, which helps.

 

I've said this before, but to re-state: I think there is a lot of respect across the league for everybody in the organization starting at the level right below Dan and down.  I think the narrative that "nobody wants to come here" has changed, and fans might be slow to pick up on it.  Ron is a respected coach, and Jason is seen as, at the very minimum, a good culture guy and good communicator.  

 

Nobody can do anything about Dan.  

 

I honestly didn't see the entire clip the first time around.  I saw the question about his accuracy issues, and thought that question was fair, even though the way it was phrased was maybe a little rough around the edges.  

 

The "Philly didn't want you, Indy didn't want you..."  that's out of bounds. You find another way to ask that question.  Or don't.  It's been asked and answered about 50 times so far.  

2 hours ago, hail2skins said:

Soomeone should ask Jason how he thinks his boss saying "we finally have a QB" makes the current backup who, limitations aside, busted his ass last season, feel.

Literally nobody cares about TH's feelings.  He was the backup QB last year, was never supposed to start, and had to because Fitzy got hurt.  

 

Then they drafted his replacement.  TH might not be in the league in 12 months.  

 

He busted his ass last year.  Fine.  He still wasn't very good for much of the year, and most likely wouldn't be very good this year if he played.  

 

I'm glad he tried hard, and thank him for his service.  If Howell beats him for the backup job, I hope they cut him and bring him back on the PS.  They won't, but they should.  IF Howell wins the backup job.  

[Mrshadow008]

3 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I think it might help him in the building with the players.  If they see that the leader of the business ops side will come to their defense, that's not a bad look for Wright inside the building and inside the player community.  He is also a former player, which helps.

 

I've said this before, but to re-state: I think there is a lot of respect across the league for everybody in the organization starting at the level right below Dan and down.  I think the narrative that "nobody wants to come here" has changed, and fans might be slow to pick up on it.  Ron is a respected coach, and Jason is seen as, at the very minimum, a good culture guy and good communicator.  

 

Nobody can do anything about Dan.  

 

I honestly didn't see the entire clip the first time around.  I saw the question about his accuracy issues, and thought that question was fair, even though the way it was phrased was maybe a little rough around the edges.  

 

The "Philly didn't want you, Indy didn't want you..."  that's out of bounds. You find another way to ask that question.  Or don't.  It's been asked and answered about 50 times so far.  

Speaking of which not saying necessarily related but would be awfully coincidental 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

3 hours ago, profusion said:

 

This is exactly it. It's Public Relations 101. All Wright did was ensure that everyone watched this silly clip. Maybe that was his goal? 

 

There's nothing to be gained by picking fights with the local media. You know how you get rid of stuff like this? Start winning some games. The local media will turn into lapdogs really quickly if that happens.

Here's the counter-point to that.  Who gives a flying **** what fans or media members think of the tweet?  Carson didn't have a choice of whether to come here or not.  He was traded here, and had no vote.  Ron has been telling him (and everybody else) "he's wanted" at every chance he gets.

 

Now the team President stands up for a player to the media.  I get you don't want to pick a fight with the media, God knows Dan picking a fight with the Washington Post has been a disaster.

 

But this situation was different: this was clearly a really aggressive, accusatory way of questioning Wentz, a specific player about specific situations.  It was a team granted interview, at their facility.

 

I think in the building, and also across the league with players, this helps the reputation of the organization.  It's a "they've got my back" type of thing.  I like that.  

 

I'm not the biggest Wright guy, but I think, in this instance, calling out a member of the media for being unprofessional wasn't a misstep.  It showed clearly that the organization has Wentz's back, and I think that will resonate inside the locker room.

 

Also, as far as picking a fight with local media and revoking special access, EVERY TEAM has basically a quid pro quo with the media outlets that cover the teams:  We will grant you access, but you will act professionally.  That doesn't mean you can't ask hard questions, but it means you have to ask questions in a professional way.  That was violated in this case, so it's totally reasonable to turn down and not provide availability to the reporter who broke the rules.  

 

And again, this is VERY DIFFERENT than the pissing match between Dan/Larry Michael (no S, just Larry Michael) and the Post (specifically Jason La Confora) from years ago.  That was sortof a broad, wide ranging beef.  This is a very specific, "you did this thing and it was out of bounds" thing.  Very different.  

[Mrshadow008]

12 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Here's the counter-point to that.  Who gives a flying **** what fans or media members think of the tweet?  Carson didn't have a choice of whether to come here or not.  He was traded here, and had no vote.  Ron has been telling him (and everybody else) "he's wanted" at every chance he gets.

 

Now the team President stands up for a player to the media.  I get you don't want to pick a fight with the media, God knows Dan picking a fight with the Washington Post has been a disaster.

 

But this situation was different: this was clearly a really aggressive, accusatory way of questioning Wentz, a specific player about specific situations.  It was a team granted interview, at their facility.

 

I think in the building, and also across the league with players, this helps the reputation of the organization.  It's a "they've got my back" type of thing.  I like that.  

 

I'm not the biggest Wright guy, but I think, in this instance, calling out a member of the media for being unprofessional wasn't a misstep.  It showed clearly that the organization has Wentz's back, and I think that will resonate inside the locker room.

 

Also, as far as picking a fight with local media and revoking special access, EVERY TEAM has basically a quid pro quo with the media outlets that cover the teams:  We will grant you access, but you will act professionally.  That doesn't mean you can't ask hard questions, but it means you have to ask questions in a professional way.  That was violated in this case, so it's totally reasonable to turn down and not provide availability to the reporter who broke the rules.  

 

And again, this is VERY DIFFERENT than the pissing match between Dan/Larry Michael (no S, just Larry Michael) and the Post (specifically Jason La Confora) from years ago.  That was sortof a broad, wide ranging beef.  This is a very specific, "you did this thing and it was out of bounds" thing.  Very different.  

I think part of it too is as someone pointed out earlier the reporter literally asked Carson this same exact question in March. which makes it even more disrespectful 

[Mrshadow008]

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CbN6n4rp4t7/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
 

so make it three times now 

[DJHJR86]

I'm sure that if this same reporter had asked Alex Smith why the Chiefs decided to dump him after his best season and Bruce Allen released a statement on social media threatening to remove his credentials that the same people would have been cheering the team President "sticking up for his guy".  This whole "the media is too tough and negative on us" is the perfect excuse and one that has been used by other Presidents in DC.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

On the Wentz/Wright thing...

 

I don't get what Wright is thinking here on this. You have a reporter who is covering ground that's been covered hundreds of times since the off-season began. Granted, the phrasing was less delicate and more direct than usual, but probably true. The Eagles couldn't wait to move on and the Colts ate a lot of money to move on after one season. Caveat and qualify that with whatever reasons you'd like...it happened. He's in his third locker room in three years. Period. The reporter said as much without sprinkling sugar on it. 

 

But, here's the main point...Wentz (really the only person here who should care) handled it just fine. He's an adult and he conducted himself perfectly. 

 

Wright doesn't have to swoop in on his white horse and be a savior there. All he did was pour gasoline on the spark. For all the early indications that Wright was great for the organization because he was smart and young and new blood, he seems to have some of the same characteristics as some of the people who have come before him. He likes to be part of the story. He has thin skin (maybe not about himself, but about the team or the players). He seems to do or say the wrong things at the absolute worst times (tone deaf). 

 

I don't know if he's always been this way and he's just getting more of a stage or Ashburn is rubbing off on him. Either way...here we go again. 

[Mrshadow008]

14 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

On the Wentz/Wright thing...

 

I don't get what Wright is thinking here on this. You have a reporter who is covering ground that's been covered hundreds of times since the off-season began. Granted, the phrasing was less delicate and more direct than usual, but probably true. The Eagles couldn't wait to move on and the Colts ate a lot of money to move on after one season. Caveat and qualify that with whatever reasons you'd like...it happened. He's in his third locker room in three years. Period. The reporter said as much without sprinkling sugar on it. 

 

But, here's the main point...Wentz (really the only person here who should care) handled it just fine. He's an adult and he conducted himself perfectly. 

 

Wright doesn't have to swoop in on his white horse and be a savior there. All he did was pour gasoline on the spark. For all the early indications that Wright was great for the organization because he was smart and young and new blood, he seems to have some of the same characteristics as some of the people who have come before him. He likes to be part of the story. He has thin skin (maybe not about himself, but about the team or the players). He seems to do or say the wrong things at the absolute worst times (tone deaf). 

 

I don't know if he's always been this way and he's just getting more of a stage or Ashburn is rubbing off on him. Either way...here we go again. 

Well actually it’s not at all accurate that the eagles couldn’t wait to move on. The eagles did not initially want to trade wentz even telling coaches during interviews that wentz was the guy going forward and wentz asked to be traded. They then hired sirianni thinking that would appease wentz and he still wanted out so that’s when they actively began trying to trade him. Secondly this reporter has now asked wentz this same question three separate times. He asked during the introductory press conference, immediately after the introductory press conference, and now again 5 months later 2 days before the teams opening preseason game. He’s also supposedly done stuff like this with chase and Curtis. Third Jason was not threatening dudes credentials but they give channel 7 and more importantly Scott Abraham special access for 1 on 1 interviews etc that they are not contractually obligated to give hence the special access comment 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

The perception of this org is what it is.  What Wright tweeted certainly doesn’t make or break that perception.  I can subscribe to the thought that perhaps this does bode well for the people in the locker room and that positive certainly outweighs whatever the public fallout is.  They are already at the bottom with the public, and no tweet of that nature is going to move the needle one way or the other. 
 

There is nowhere to go but up, and the only potential way it goes up - is to win football games.  
 

My only critique would be that he should have kept it to calling out the lack of class the reporter exhibited and made no mention of special access publicly- that’s something you address with him directly.
 

 

[profusion]

3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

My only critique would be that he should have kept it to calling out the lack of class the reporter exhibited and made no mention of special access publicly- that’s something you address with him directly.
 

 

Channel 7 isn't going anywhere. Given how few locals seem to care much about the Commanders (this is a Nationals/Capitals town, now), I'd say they need Channel 7 onsite a lot more than Channel 7 needs them. You just have to put up with the jerkish behavior until the equation changes. Not defending the reporter --to be honest, I haven't watched a local sports news segment here in probably 15 years--but drawing attention to it on Twitter (which reaches far more people) is just dumb. Mr. McKinsey & Co. should know better.

[Mrshadow008]

19 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

Channel 7 isn't going anywhere. Given how few locals seem to care much about the Commanders (this is a Nationals/Capitals town, now), I'd say they need Channel 7 onsite a lot more than Channel 7 needs them. You just have to put up with the jerkish behavior until the equation changes. Not defending the reporter --to be honest, I haven't watched a local sports news segment here in probably 15 years--but drawing attention to it on Twitter (which reaches far more people) is just dumb. Mr. McKinsey & Co. should know better.

I hope you don’t actually believe the nats caps town comment. Caps in Stanley cup 2.7 avg rating. Nats in World Series 8.1 avg rating. WFT in 2021 16 avg rating. Even now it’s not that close 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

36 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

Channel 7 isn't going anywhere. Given how few locals seem to care much about the Commanders (this is a Nationals/Capitals town, now), I'd say they need Channel 7 onsite a lot more than Channel 7 needs them. You just have to put up with the jerkish behavior until the equation changes. Not defending the reporter --to be honest, I haven't watched a local sports news segment here in probably 15 years--but drawing attention to it on Twitter (which reaches far more people) is just dumb. Mr. McKinsey & Co. should know better.

I dunno man, we’re not talking about George Michael here.  Generally, nobody cares about Scott Abraham.  Nobody is checking for the next Scott Abraham piece.

 

I recognize the history here of the top brass/ownership whining about the media.  I just think this scenario in particular is different.  I’m no apologist for anything this org does and believe they’ve earned most all of the negative coverage they receive.  I just think in this circumstance the dude was being extra, considering he already made the same statements to Wentz during his initial presser and he’s already answered the “you’ve been dumped twice” questions umpteen times since he showed up here.  There was just no reason to go that route and continue beating a dead horse other than for Scott Abraham to feel bold and to be a dick for no reason.

[NickyJ]

Honestly, with more time I'm kind of liking this. I want a grudge match between Wentz and Scott Abraham in the future. Scott's looking out for his own to be the tough guy reporter who pulls no punches to get to the real story. Once he achieves his dream and gets his own TV hosting job, this is gonna be his interview of Wentz:
 

 

[Mrshadow008]

 

[Wildbunny]

20 hours ago, hail2skins said:

Soomeone should ask Jason how he thinks his boss saying "we finally have a QB" makes the current backup who, limitations aside, busted his ass last season, feel.

I thought we got our QB when we drafted Dwayne Haskins on the order of our beloved dear Leader Dan the 1st.

Or Kirk Cousins,

Or RG3,

Or McNabb...

 

Nevermind...

[Voice_of_Reason]

7 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

My only critique would be that he should have kept it to calling out the lack of class the reporter exhibited and made no mention of special access publicly- that’s something you address with him directly.

Yeah, I agree with you.  I listened to Bram's show (via podcast) where he addressed this.  You can't really do it justice in a tweet.

 

But the fact is, the Commander's media team are the ones who granted permission for this guy (Scott? I can't remember the reporters name, I'm not going to look it up) to have the 1:1 interview, and according to Bram, that's like gold.  It's up to the team who they grant interviews with, and they can basically do whatever they want.  This is true for every team.  

 

By granting the 1:1 with Wentz, and then having Scott (?) essentially break the unspoken rules, that's a massively bad look for Scott and ABC7.  You are allowed to ask anything you want, but the unwritten rule is essentially, they are granting you permission to do the interview, don't ambush the guy, be respectful and tactful.  Scott (?) chose not to do that, and was a bit over the top with the way he approached the question, and there is NO DOUBT he did it to see if he could get a reaction from Wentz AND he wanted the attention on him.

 

THAT is what Wright took the most exception to.  The team's media relations group probably granted this request, it was done in the team's facility, and Wright felt (I believe correctly) that Scott (?) ambushed one of the players.  

 

So he stuck up for one of the players. 

 

There was no mention of revoking press credentials, or anything like that.  But the Media Relations group will probably not grant any more 1:1's, and if they do, it wouldn't be with the starting QB, for sure.  That's what Wright meant.  Should he have said it out loud?  Eh, maybe, maybe not.  I'd probably go with not just because it's impossible to explain the nuance in a tweet. 

 

Bram thought Wright "hit the gas a bit hard" but also he said it might have been his former player vibes coming out, where he felt very defensive of Wentz, because, in that situation, what happened should NEVER happen.  And in a way, it makes the media relations team look bad, because THEY greenlight the 1:1, and weren't able to protect their player from an ambush.

[SkinsFTW]

17 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

THAT is what Wright took the most exception to.  The team's media relations group probably granted this request, it was done in the team's facility, and Wright felt (I believe correctly) that Scott (?) ambushed one of the players.  

 

So he stuck up for one of the players. 

Well, they might want to be a little more selective. It's not like this same dude hadn't asked the same exact question multiple times before and it seems that is the only thing he comes up with each time.

 

How many times do they let the guy in who basically says "nobody in the league wants you, you've been **** canned by 2 teams in 2 years, and this is your last chance to be a starter in the NFL. What do you think about that?"

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

I would pay money to see Wentz leap over a table and pummel a reporter within an inch of his life. 😂

[CobraCommander]

13 minutes ago, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

I would pay money to see Wentz leap over a table and pummel a reporter within an inch of his life. 😂

That might make you an accessory to attempted murder.