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

[SkinsWmsbg]

10 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Jay explaining again how they blew it as for compensation

 

 

 

He makes a great point.  Which is why no matter what position the player is, if he's good and he is disgruntled about his contract and you're hesitant to give it to him, don't have the "wait and see" approach, let's get him out of here asap before we love him for nothing.  Daron Payne comes to mind at the moment.  Do we really want to pay him all the money he's going to want and hinder spreading the cap out elsewhere?  Cosmi will want a new deal soon, Montez Sweat, Chase Young (if healthy), Jahon Dotson, maybe another hidden OL or another standout player we see this year.

 

Let's not LOSE a player worthy of a 1st-6th round pick or more because we want to have more time to make mental and financial love to the guy in hopes he says yes before its too late.

[Conn]

@CommanderCarson

 

I really was going to let this go, but you just keep lying. It took 4 minutes in your post history to demonstrate what I’m saying about these opinions being your own and not just a description of what you think Rivera thinks. You’ve been posting along these same lines for months and yeah, it finally made me snap because it’s ****ing terrible:

 

Let’s start with your latest martyr act that is 100% disingenuous, so we can remind the class what this post is all about:

 

On 9/2/2022 at 3:59 AM, CommanderCarson said:

You have one, assumed, that I am criticizing the fans and media and then further assume that I’m saying it shouldn’t be this way. Where did I say either of those two things?

 

And then on top of that, somehow you assume that I’m minimizing what’s occurred in ashburn and all of the terrible things that have happened there? Why? Where did I once say that it SHOULD all go away? That they have earned the right to let this stuff go? You’re going to have a really hard time digging that out of my post, because it doesn’t exist and it’s not there.

 

Thats simply my take, on how Rivera views the situation. Key part of that sentence is Rivera.
 

…

 

I wrote all of that from the perspective of Rivera

 

I don’t really care to engage further than this because I don’t like when something I say gets completely re spun as something it wasn’t intended to be. Id suggest being a little more careful with understanding the content and motive of a post before totally eviscerating said content. As I said, I didn’t blame the fans, media or anyone who’s piled on Dan. I didn’t say it shouldn’t be that way. 
 

 

Here are just a few of your recent posts showing you feel exactly this way no matter how much you want to rewrite history. Maybe take your own condescending advice from above: “I’d suggest being a little more careful with understanding the content and motive of a post before eviscerating said content”. And start with your own posts, since you seem to have forgotten them (all bolding is mine for emphasis): 

 

On 7/28/2022 at 2:03 PM, CommanderCarson said:

A thread filled with people that hate Snyder more than they like the team are somehow surprised no one shows up to the second day of practice??? That’s the whole fan movement at the moment and what all the rage is, so not sure poo pooing the team more for that embarrassment makes much sense. It’s what the masses are all about.

 

I feel awful for Ron, the players, and everyone trying to turn this hell hole around with zero fan backing or support. And it DOES matter. The players talk to players around the league, no one wants to come here to a team that the fans are more concerned about the guy sailing around the world on his yacht. No competitive advantage at home, players come out flat as a result. Ron asks for the fan base back and the next day all everyone can do is make fun of the fact we have no fan base, who would have thunk?!

^^Derisively and directly criticizing the fans holding Snyder accountable. It’s very clear what you think of them and where you personally stand.

 

On 7/24/2022 at 11:20 PM, CommanderCarson said:

It makes zero sense to me. It’s like hating a restaurant cause the owner has done a bunch of sleazy things, yet you still go in and try an app every now and then to crap on the whole staff that wasn’t even there when 95% of the unwanted and inappropriate behavior occurred. 
 

It’s no wonder Ron sounds so defeated and annoyed when addressing this type of topic. 

 

^^Again, you expressing your own opinions on the topic. 
 

On 7/14/2022 at 10:01 PM, CommanderCarson said:

Every time I come in here I expect to learn something new, and every time I’m disappointed. 
 

He’s not getting removed based on clear evidence that the NFL has his back.

 

It seems like @Voice_of_Reason is the only one who gets this, the constant swirl of negativity and hating on Dan does nothing but hurt the product on the actual field by making players not want to play here and not getting a new stadium and everyone wants to get the hell out of this circus where the ultimate goal is to get the owner removed and not support the team.

^^Again, you lamenting and criticizing the fans who prioritize getting Snyder out after all the terrible happenings he spawned over 20 years.

 

On 4/22/2022 at 2:11 AM, CommanderCarson said:

I thought from the beginning it was bogus. Dan’s investment has grown by more than 5 times, he’s not going to risk losing his team to skim a few dollars off the top from the other owners. I always thought it was either complete hogwash or in my opinion what’s more likely is that this is a diversion of funds away from the NFLPA. 
 

Yeah the team doesn’t come down that specific and blatant unless they are totally and absolutely convinced that the statements by Friedman can’t be backed up. 
 

The more these false claims come out, the more it just makes this a miserable place to play where everyone is more consumed with removing the owner instead of actually winning football games. Go win some damn games. 

^^Again. Your opinion, not an assumption of Rivera’s opinion. 
 

Shall I go on? There’s probably more. Do you remember posting all this now or do you still want to play the victim and act like I misinterpreted your post when I said that you believe all of the things you’ve posted above—that the current regime has somehow earned Snyder out of being held accountable for his actions by the fans, that fans and media who continually want Snyder gone and won’t stop that drum beat are a problem, that people should just let this “old” stuff go after two short years of a “new culture” for the sake of the on-field product. 
 

I’m not saying you can’t believe these things (though others will post accordingly). But follow your own advice and just own up to your posts. Don’t directly lie because you don’t like being criticized. And make no mistake, this was not a misunderstanding—you chose to lie because you felt called out. You began with this: 

 

“You have one, assumed, that I am criticizing the fans and media and then further assume that I’m saying it shouldn’t be this way. Where did I say either of those two things?” 

 

And I think we can see that it wasn’t at all a genuine representation of the content of MANY of your posts the past few months. So if you don’t want people to drop the hammer, just own your posts. I’ll disagree with them on this topic (and I’m sure we agree on plenty of other topics), and I’ll push back on the things that I think are harmful or dumb. But at least we’ll all be truthful about our intent. 

[88Comrade2000]

7 minutes ago, SkinsWmsbg said:

He makes a great point.  Which is why no matter what position the player is, if he's good and he is disgruntled about his contract and you're hesitant to give it to him, don't have the "wait and see" approach, let's get him out of here asap before we love him for nothing.  Daron Payne comes to mind at the moment.  Do we really want to pay him all the money he's going to want and hinder spreading the cap out elsewhere?  Cosmi will want a new deal soon, Montez Sweat, Chase Young (if healthy), Jahon Dotson, maybe another hidden OL or another standout player we see this year.

 

Let's not LOSE a player worthy of a 1st-6th round pick or more because we want to have more time to make mental and financial love to the guy in hopes he says yes before its too late.

We drafted Payne’s replacement; don’t see us resigning him.

 

Also, I don’t see us signing both Montez and Sweat. Probably draft a replacement.

Remember at some point; we will have a qb getting $40-$50 million/ year. That could be Carson or someone else.

[Skinsinparadise]

39 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

It was a total debacle.  What's worse is it was like slow coach pitched little league.  They got a guy who was friendly to the organization who wasn't going to ask hard questions, and she still fell all over herself.

 

The only defense I have for her is I'm sure she was nervous.  I don't know when the last time she'd ever done anything like that before was, or if she had every done an interview like that.  Being nervous in an interview is very understandable.

 

That said, it was still a complete debacle.  

 

I do think, however, the response is incorrect.  I think they need to keep putting her, and for that matter, Dan, out there.  I think they would both get better and more comfortable with time.  But I would have them start with Julie.  I mean, a 5 minute sit-down monthly with Julie would be as safe a haven as you could get. She's not going to try and trip them up, and if they mis-speak, they can just edit it, because she works for the team.  

 

Would it be all that insightful?  Probably not.  But at least it would be something.  Do that a few times, and get used to it.  Then maybe do a hit with Bram on the radio broadcast. 

 

I think the lack of public appearances actually hurts them.  If I was advising them, I'd say they need to get out there more, but in a controlled way.  Eventually, I do think they should have an open press conference, at least annually.  

 

The problem with Dan going Greta Garbo.  It feeds IMO three things.

 

A.  Based on what others who have worked with Dan have said, Dan's PR team's leaks to the media and his own occasional public statements from his PR team -- Dan doesn't think squat is his fault.   It's always someone else's fault.  And its been a part of the culture issues there as far as the scapegoating, ruling by fear, odd arrogance on and on.  So to double down on that, Dan not speaking to the media (in other words not speaking to his customers -- the fan base) comes off like he doesn't think he has to or want to publicly take accountability for squat.  His public silence is defeaning

 

B. It makes him look like a coward.  George Steinnbrenner (not as bad as Dan, granted) was known as a culture killer like Dan and would interfere with personnel -- yet he had the guts to face the music.  Jerry ditto.  Dan comes off like a coward who is willing to do people dirty behind the scenes with his nasty leaks and using his legal team to scare people legally.  He's a bully but doesn't have the guts to do the bullying himself unless its in the dark  -- Jerry wears his nonsense on his sleave for better or worse.  Dan doesn't have the guts to do even a puff friendly talk show to at least try to explain his takes like its not his fault and its all on Bruce Allen or whatever wacky things he believes. 

 

C.  How can he complain as he supposedlly constantly does behind the scenes about the media's "spin" about the narrative around the team when he doesn't even try to put out his own spin?  He basically has given the media the floor.  How can he complain about it, then?

Edited September 3, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[formerly4skins]

54 minutes ago, skinsfan4128 said:

Point is, I don't think lumping her in the same context as her asinine hubby is exactly fair considering she was placed in this situation by that scumbag cretin.

 

I'm sympathetic to the fact that being married to Dan is probably terrible in many (most?) ways not related to his net worth, and agree that she's not on his level of depravity or malicious incompetence. 

 

Still, at this point, given her role with the team over her time "stepping in for Dan" and the continuation of the same-old management clown-show...I stand by what those asterisks in my previous comment would indicate she needs. 

[FootballZombie]

Googly-moogly man brought receipts.

 

 

Where's my popcorn?

 

[Conn]

[Voice_of_Reason]

25 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

The problem with Dan going Greta Garbo.  It feeds IMO three things.

 

A.  Based on what others who have worked with Dan have said, Dan's PR team's leaks to the media and his own occasional public statements from his PR team -- Dan doesn't think squat is his fault.   It's always someone else's fault.  And its been a part of the culture issues there as far as the scapegoating, ruling by fear, odd arrogance on and on.  So to double down on that, Dan not speaking to the media (in other words not speaking to his customers -- the fan base) comes off like he doesn't think he has to or want to publicly take accountability for squat.  His public silence is defeaning

 

B. It makes him look like a coward.  George Steinnbrenner (not as bad as Dan, granted) was known as a culture killer like Dan and would interfere with personnel -- yet he had the guts to face the music.  Jerry ditto.  Dan comes off like a coward who is willing to do people dirty behind the scenes with his nasty leaks and using his legal team to scare people legally.  He's a bully but doesn't have the guts to do the bullying himself unless its in the dark  -- Jerry wears his nonsense on his sleave for better or worse.  Dan doesn't have the guts to do even a puff friendly talk show to at least try to explain his takes like its not his fault and its all on Bruce Allen or whatever wacky things he believes. 

 

C.  How can he complain as he supposedlly constantly does behind the scenes about the media's "spin" about the narrative around the team when he doesn't even try to put out his own spin?  He basically has given the media the floor.  How can he complain about it, then?

I agree, which is why I suggest that he (and The High Empress Tonya) should be out there more, at the very least in controlled settings.  If I were advising him, would I suggest that he do an AMA presser?  Not yet.  Honestly, the last interview I remember of his was during training camp one year when he went on with Cooley.  I think it was Cooley and Kevin.  But that was almost 10 years ago.  And I don't think Kevin (or whoever the co-host was) asked any questions.  I think it was basically a conversation between Cooley and him. 

 

He's got to get out from under the rock.  There are "safe" places for him to talk.  Julie, Bram, hell maybe even an interview with Standig or Keim, neither of whom are going to try and "gotcha!" him, though they would probably ask some more detailed questions.  Mostly because they will want a second interview, but also because it's not their style.  

 

The fact that he does NOTHING hurts him.  I know it doesn't make him feel comfortable.  But literally nobody else can do it for him.

 

It's just a bad PR strategy.  

[goskins10]

3 hours ago, skinsfan4128 said:

 

 

I'll add that on top of how it would affect their marriage would be how it would impact her children. I'd imagine that went over like a lead balloon. 

 

However, most women I would assume would've had that Frodo looking **** in court though. So sticking by that narcissistic assclown is probably worth some scrutiny. 

 

Point is, I don't think lumping her in the same context as her asinine hubby is exactly fair considering she was placed in this situation by that scumbag cretin. 

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

HTTR!

 

It is not only air it hard strong facts to support that contention. She is a growm woman. If she didn't want to be in the situation she could and should geto ut of it. I am sorry, but blaming him for her situation as if she is some poor victim is pretty lame, not ot mention jsut not true. Here are the reasons lined out: 

 

1. She married the POS. Hered decision. Not shotgun wedding that i know of. Not an aranged marriage. 

2. She is known to treat people like trash just as he does - just ask thier Nanny who had to sure for back wages due to tonya's abuse. 

3. She at least now knows of all the **** he did to the women in the organization and she remains silent. She should be disgusted and speak out about it. Silence is complicity. 

4. She stays married to the POS. If she were not the same POS she would divorce his ass. She wpuld get enough money to live for life. So she doesn't stay as some endentured servant. 

 

She is jsut as big a POS as dan is and deserves all the same critisim unless she divorces him and burys him. Until ,then, yes she gets lumped in with the garbage. Lay with garbage, you are also garbage. 

[CommanderCarson]

2 hours ago, Conn said:

@CommanderCarson

 

I really was going to let this go, but you just keep lying. It took 4 minutes in your post history to demonstrate what I’m saying about these opinions being your own and not just a description of what you think Rivera thinks. You’ve been posting along these same lines for months and yeah, it finally made me snap because it’s ****ing terrible:

 

Let’s start with your latest martyr act that is 100% disingenuous, so we can remind the class what this post is all about:

 

 

Here are just a few of your recent posts showing you feel exactly this way no matter how much you want to rewrite history. Maybe take your own condescending advice from above: “I’d suggest being a little more careful with understanding the content and motive of a post before eviscerating said content”. And start with your own posts, since you seem to have forgotten them (all bolding is mine for emphasis): 

 

^^Derisively and directly criticizing the fans holding Snyder accountable. It’s very clear what you think of them and where you personally stand.

 

 

^^Again, you expressing your own opinions on the topic. 
 

^^Again, you lamenting and criticizing the fans who prioritize getting Snyder out after all the terrible happenings he spawned over 20 years.

 

^^Again. Your opinion, not an assumption of Rivera’s opinion. 
 

Shall I go on? There’s probably more. Do you remember posting all this now or do you still want to play the victim and act like I misinterpreted your post when I said that you believe all of the things you’ve posted above—that the current regime has somehow earned Snyder out of being held accountable for his actions by the fans, that fans and media who continually want Snyder gone and won’t stop that drum beat are a problem, that people should just let this “old” stuff go after two short years of a “new culture” for the sake of the on-field product. 
 

I’m not saying you can’t believe these things (though others will post accordingly). But follow your own advice and just own up to your posts. Don’t directly lie because you don’t like being criticized. And make no mistake, this was not a misunderstanding—you chose to lie because you felt called out. You began with this: 

 

“You have one, assumed, that I am criticizing the fans and media and then further assume that I’m saying it shouldn’t be this way. Where did I say either of those two things?” 

 

And I think we can see that it wasn’t at all a genuine representation of the content of MANY of your posts the past few months. So if you don’t want people to drop the hammer, just own your posts. I’ll disagree with them on this topic (and I’m sure we agree on plenty of other topics), and I’ll push back on the things that I think are harmful or dumb. But at least we’ll all be truthful about our intent. 

I’m just going to ask you this.

 

Of the bolded, are those criticisms or assertions that fans shouldn’t feel the way they feel, or are they just plain cold hard facts?

 

 Do the masses not feel the way I described? Am I mis characterizing that? 
 

Is this thread not filled with people that hate Snyder more than they like the team? Am I mis reading 700 plus pages of content with fans that say Snyder pushed them away and they actively root for the team to lose? 
 

Are people or the majority of the fans, not more concerned with removing Snyder than they are supporting the current regime? I mean your post bears this out, where you are directly saying to me that the current regime has NOT earned their way out of Snyder and the organization’s past transgressions. 
 

The bolded are just pure observations of where much of the fan base currently resides. And I totally respect and understand why people would feel that way. Do I agree? No. Do I think it’s productive in turning things around? No. Am I lamenting people and criticizing peoples posts that they have those opinions? Also no.

 

I appreciate the “gotcha” attempt. I’m sure you feel real slick and clever, but I’m not here to push an agenda. Nothing I say or do will change anything lol. 

 

Im literally just calling a spade a spade, and I’ll absolutely own up to the fact that I disagree and would love for things to be different. 1000% own that. 
 

But don’t confuse observations of facts as direct criticsim or that their opinion is stupid or that I don’t understand what caused them to feel that way or arrive there as a fan. I’m a huge believer in everyone has their opinion and shouldn’t be criticized for it. We all have different perspectives and observations of things.

 

Ive never said “it shouldn’t be this way.” I’ve also never to my knowledge directly quoted anyone and crtitisized them for feeling the way they do. I will again, own the fact that I wish it weren’t this way. But those are two very very different things, and you seem to be assuming that because I have a different opinion of what would positively impact the team, that I am acting derisively.

 

If we’re being honest, it’s you that doesn’t like me having that outlook and condemning me for it. 
 

This is my last piece on it, I can tell it’s going no where productive and you’re out here pounding your chest thinking you’re exposing me for an agenda that just really isn’t there. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I agree, which is why I suggest that he (and The High Empress Tonya) should be out there more, at the very least in controlled settings.  If I were advising him, would I suggest that he do an AMA presser?  Not yet.  Honestly, the last interview I remember of his was during training camp one year when he went on with Cooley.  I think it was Cooley and Kevin.  But that was almost 10 years ago.  And I don't think Kevin (or whoever the co-host was) asked any questions.  I think it was basically a conversation between Cooley and him. 

 

He's got to get out from under the rock.  There are "safe" places for him to talk.  Julie, Bram, hell maybe even an interview with Standig or Keim, neither of whom are going to try and "gotcha!" him, though they would probably ask some more detailed questions.  Mostly because they will want a second interview, but also because it's not their style.  

 

The fact that he does NOTHING hurts him.  I know it doesn't make him feel comfortable.  But literally nobody else can do it for him.

 

It's just a bad PR strategy.  

 

I recall back in the day Chad Dukes and Lavar Arrington who would kill Dan on their radio show but one time they got Dan for 5 minutes out of the blue during radio row for SB week and they treated him with kid gloves.

 

Most of the time if you get an interview -- the interviewee won't kill you especially if you make some agreement on that front in advance.

 

The ironic thing is back in the day when Dan would do the occasion interview, you'd hear later that they agreed bascially to a soft ball arrangement with certain topics off limits.  So Dan knows how to play that game.  And I gather its the only game he's willing to play in interviews which is somewhat of a Larry Michael style agreement -- yet the dude is still scared which is wild to me.

 

A nightmare for Dan would be to do the standard press conference that NFL owners typically do a few times a year.  But he could avoid that. 

Edited September 3, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

I got to go listen to this to confirm if this is true.  Jay for his faults is brutally honest so if he said it I believe it but wanted to hear if he actually said it.

 

If he did its comforting to know that an owner whose football acumen is on the level of a 2nd grader and a politician feel like they can dictate coachiing.  Bad enough that they think they know personnel and overrule their scouts.  But coaching, too?

 

It brings me back to an interview with Gibbs once.  The irony is I think Gibbs thought it was endearing-funny and didn't realize at the time what fans thought of Dan.  In the interview, Gibbs talked about Dan calling him after watching Minny play (Minny was their next opponent) to let him know what he needs to watch for.

 

If I recall it was in the Shefter interview where Tanya played up her strengths and Dans and cited that Dan's really the sharp football mind in the family but she brings other things to the table.  I talked about this on this thread at the time.  Cringe worthy stuff for me. 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

I listened to it, Jay indeed did say it, but as usual he said it in a jocular way. 

[skinzplay]

56 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

It brings me back to an interview with Gibbs once. In the interview, Gibbs talked about Dan calling him after watching Minny play (Minny was their next opponent) to let him know what he needs to watch for.

 

If I recall it was in the Shefter interview where Tanya played up her strengths and Dans and cited that Dan's really the sharp football mind in the family but she brings other things to the table.

 

Thankfully, there are now enough votes and less legal apprehension about taking him out; more than when the initial story was published. He will need to do some incredibly effective personal lobbying throughout the course of the coming season. His ass, as they say, is grass.

[Koolblue13]

On 9/3/2022 at 9:07 AM, formerly4skins said:

 

 

Tanya's involvement

Tanya starting to get involved with the draft

 

[Skinsinparadise]

29 minutes ago, skinzplay said:

 

Thankfully, there are now enough votes and less legal apprehension about taking him out; more than when the initial story was published. He will need to do some incredibly effective personal lobbying throughout the course of the coming season. His ass, as they say, is grass.

 

Standig interviewed agents on Dan.   Some did think Dan could be voted out.  More thought he wouldn't be.  But i'll take "some" for now.  that seems like progress. 

 

I think at a minimum perception wise (with some meat considering some owners said they'd consider voting him out to a national paper) we've gone from there is no chance to there is at least a fighting chance. 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[88Comrade2000]

Jay was a weak coach. He was Bruce's little puppet.  Jay should've taken a job elsewhere but he want with his safe choice from his one time buddy, Bruce.

[Zim489]

Dan wanting to be pound and ground is funny considering his love of QBs. He must be in love of Rons and Cos 2005 approach to football 

On 9/3/2022 at 12:45 AM, 88Comrade2000 said:

Jay should’ve been fired after year 4.

Should have fired him after year 1. I’ve never seen a more evidence of a non HC in my life. The way he backed the bus over Rob multiple times is still wild to me. 
 

still can’t believe how close it was to Bruce being barred from football relation, Jay being fired and Scot taking over everything in 2015. They lose that game Vs TB and Jay is gone. 
 

but instead the Bucs run a sweep from the 1 yard line instead of using their 6’5 255 lb QB on a sneak. 
 

Led us to years of more mediocrity over one yard 

[Voice_of_Reason]

On 9/3/2022 at 1:28 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I recall back in the day Chad Dukes and Lavar Arrington who would kill Dan on their radio show but one time they got Dan for 5 minutes out of the blue during radio row for SB week and they treated him with kid gloves.

Now that you mention it, I seem to recall it as well. 

 

The thing is, apart from that complete hack-job-ass-hat Scott on channel 7 who has proved to have the ability to ask questions in the most unprofessional way possible, I don't thing any of the other local media, even Sheehan, would be either rude or aggressive with Dan if he appeared on their radio/tv show/podcast.  Why?  Because you want the second interview.  And the third.  And the fourth.  

 

Which doesn't mean you can't ask some tough questions.  But you can couch them in a way which is neither aggressive or off-putting. 

 

"Dan, there has been a lot of reporting you were the driving force behind drafting Dwayne Haskins, while some of the other people in the room were less bullish on the pick.  Can you walk through your thought process, what you saw in Haskins, and how the decision was ultimately made, and what your role was in the making of the decision?"  

 

vs.

 

"It has been reported Kyle Smith, most of the scouts and coaching staff did not want to select Haskins at 15, but it has also been reported that you overrode the opinion of the people with actual football knowledge to select a player who played for the same HS as your son.  This is not the first time you have overridden the opinions of people who you hired for their football acumen, and frankly, none of your meddling has worked out.  Can you explain why you did it and commit to not doing it again."

 

 

On 9/3/2022 at 1:28 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

Most of the time if you get an interview -- the interviewee won't kill you especially if you make some agreement on that front in advance.

I think they would have an agreement with almost anybody who he goes on with, but again, honestly, apart from one or two here or there, I think they would treat him respectfully, even if begrudgingly.  Though I think Sheehan would call him "Dan" and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't like that.  

 

On 9/3/2022 at 1:28 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

The ironic thing is back in the day when Dan would do the occasion interview, you'd hear later that they agreed bascially to a soft ball arrangement with certain topics off limits.  So Dan knows how to play that game.  And I gather its the only game he's willing to play in interviews which is somewhat of a Larry Michael style agreement -- yet the dude is still scared which is wild to me.

He could have NO agreement with Julie or Bram because he pays both of them, and could talk weekly, and never get a question he doesn't want to answer.  It would be SOMETHING.  I agree, it's WILD that he or Her Great High Empress Tonya won't even do THAT regularly.  

 

On 9/3/2022 at 1:28 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

A nightmare for Dan would be to do the standard press conference that NFL owners typically do a few times a year.  But he could avoid that. 

It would be for now.  I think he could work his way up to it over time.  Having a winning season or two first would probably be helpful.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Jay was a weak coach. He was Bruce's little puppet.  Jay should've taken a job elsewhere but he want with his safe choice from his one time buddy, Bruce.

Wow.  A post of yours which I agree with. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I got to go listen to this to confirm if this is true.  Jay for his faults is brutally honest so if he said it I believe it but wanted to hear if he actually said it.

 

If he did its comforting to know that an owner whose football acumen is on the level of a 2nd grader and a politician feel like they can dictate coachiing.  Bad enough that they think they know personnel and overrule their scouts.  But coaching, too?

 

It brings me back to an interview with Gibbs once.  The irony is I think Gibbs thought it was endearing-funny and didn't realize at the time what fans thought of Dan.  In the interview, Gibbs talked about Dan calling him after watching Minny play (Minny was their next opponent) to let him know what he needs to watch for.

 

If I recall it was in the Shefter interview where Tanya played up her strengths and Dans and cited that Dan's really the sharp football mind in the family but she brings other things to the table.  I talked about this on this thread at the time.  Cringe worthy stuff for me. 

 

 

I wonder how much of this was the Callahan influence on Bruce, and then Dan.  Callahan famously thought they should run the ball more.  Jay and Callahan didn't get along.  Jay wanted Callahan gone, but Bruce wouldn't let Jay fire him and replace him. 

 

I wonder if Callahan and Bruce were in cahoots, and putting pressure on Jay.  That wouldn't surprise me at all, in fact I think it might be somewhat probable.

 

The issue, to me, still is Jay was the HC.  And at the end of the day he was responsible  And he was going to be the one hung out to dry if things didn't go well.   So, if Jay wanted to throw the ball more, he should have just done it and made Bruce/Dan fire him.  Because if you're going to get fired either way, you might as well get fired doing what you think is right.

 

Though, I will say this:  I don't think Jay is ALWAYS truthful, and I think he sometimes makes things up for good theater.  I can't remember who it was, but Jay told quite the tale about the Kirk kneel down, which let Kirk off the hook a little bit and put the responsibility on Pierre and DJax.  I can't remember who, but I think it was either @Califan007 The Constipated  or @Conn who showed the film clip and it didn't remotely align to the web Jay was spinning.

 

He also has everything to gain by bashing Bruce/Dan, and there are probably a lot of people who would believe whatever he said, just because they want to put more blame on Bruce/Dan.  

 

I get that my track record on Jay isn't exactly that I'm a fan, so maybe I'm not the most credible when I say this, but I'm NOT taking what he's saying without some degree of a grain of salt, because it is massively self serving, as he's trying to re-build his reputation so he might get another job again.  

 

Could it be true?  Sure.  Do I absolutely believe there was back-channel stuff going on between Callahan and Bruce?  Yeah.  Do I ultimately think Bruce/Dan influenced how Jay called a game?  I really don't know, I guess it's possible.  It's also possible he's stretching the truth a bit in order to take the blame off of him and put it on somebody else for running on 70% of first downs with the same play for 6 years for a 1 yard average.  

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I wonder how much of this was the Callahan influence on Bruce, and then Dan.  Callahan famously thought they should run the ball more.  Jay and Callahan didn't get along.  Jay wanted Callahan gone, but Bruce wouldn't let Jay fire him and replace him. 

 

I wonder if Callahan and Bruce were in cahoots, and putting pressure on Jay.  That wouldn't surprise me at all, in fact I think it might be somewhat probable.

 

The issue, to me, still is Jay was the HC.  And at the end of the day he was responsible  And he was going to be the one hung out to dry if things didn't go well.   So, if Jay wanted to throw the ball more, he should have just done it and made Bruce/Dan fire him.  Because if you're going to get fired either way, you might as well get fired doing what you think is right.

 

Though, I will say this:  I don't think Jay is ALWAYS truthful, and I think he sometimes makes things up for good theater.  I can't remember who it was, but Jay told quite the tale about the Kirk kneel down, which let Kirk off the hook a little bit and put the responsibility on Pierre and DJax.  I can't remember who, but I think it was either @Califan007 The Constipated  or @Conn who showed the film clip and it didn't remotely align to the web Jay was spinning.

 

He also has everything to gain by bashing Bruce/Dan, and there are probably a lot of people who would believe whatever he said, just because they want to put more blame on Bruce/Dan.  

 

I get that my track record on Jay isn't exactly that I'm a fan, so maybe I'm not the most credible when I say this, but I'm NOT taking what he's saying without some degree of a grain of salt, because it is massively self serving, as he's trying to re-build his reputation so he might get another job again.  

 

Could it be true?  Sure.  Do I absolutely believe there was back-channel stuff going on between Callahan and Bruce?  Yeah.  Do I ultimately think Bruce/Dan influenced how Jay called a game?  I really don't know, I guess it's possible.  It's also possible he's stretching the truth a bit in order to take the blame off of him and put it on somebody else for running on 70% of first downs with the same play for 6 years for a 1 yard average.  

 

Yeah I am not with the thought that Jay might be not telling the truth.  I don't give Dan and Bruce the benefit of the doubt since it fits like a glove other narratives that have popped up by others over time about the two of them.

 

 And if I can have a dollar for every time I've heard (even Keim who is very careful has hinted about this) that things with Dan is actually much worse than what has been leaked -- I'd be a rich dude. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

56 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah I am not with the thought that Jay might be not telling the truth.  I don't give Dan and Bruce the benefit of the doubt since it fits like a glove other narratives that have popped up by others over time about the two of them.

 

 And if I can have a dollar for every time I've heard (even Keim who is very careful has hinted about this) that things with Dan is actually much worse than what has been leaked -- I'd be a rich dude. 

Ok.  And it fits like a glove for a bad coach who can't get hired to blame everybody else for the fact he's a bad coach.

 

He's basically been caught in "stretching the truth" already. You say you "know" Jay is a straight shooter.  How do you know that?  You don't know that.  You believe it, and you want to believe it, but you actually don't know that.  

 

I get that you believe everything bad about Dan and Bruce.  Which is, of course, why Jay does it.  Whether it's true or not, people will believe it. So there is absolutely no downside in doing it.  As I said, it could be true.  But I'm also open to the possibility that it's not true.  

 

I'm also not blind to the possibility Jay is desperately trying to rebuild his image, and a way of doing that is going on the Junkies and saying bad stuff about Dan, because everybody is going to eat it up, and absolutely NOBODY is going to try and fact check it, because, hey, Dan's a dick. 

 

I get it, you are going to believe, blindly, anything bad about Dan. That's fine.  It's your prerogative.  But isn't it interesting it's taken 3 years for this particular claim to come out?  He's been on Sheehan, Standig and I think Galdi's shows multiple times.  You'd think this would have been one of the earlier things he would have revealed. 

 

I can absolutely believe Callahan -> Bruce was a thing. 

 

And I'm not giving Dan the benefit of the doubt.  Which I know is what you're going to say.  I'm strictly looking at Jay as the source, the timing, the story, the evidence that he's at the very least stretched the truth before, and saying, "eh, I'm not going to take everything that comes out of his mouth as gospel."  He has an agenda.  He has a reason why he's doing these appearances.  And it's not just to entertain.  

[Skinsinparadise]

10 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Ok.  And it fits like a glove for a bad coach who can't get hired to blame everybody else for the fact he's a bad coach.

 

He's basically been caught in "stretching the truth" already. You say you "know" Jay is a straight shooter.  How do you know that?  You don't know that.  You believe it, and you want to believe it, but you actually don't know that.  

 

I get that you believe everything bad about Dan and Bruce.  Which is, of course, why Jay does it.  Whether it's true or not, people will believe it. So there is absolutely no downside in doing it.  As I said, it could be true.  But I'm also open to the possibility that it's not true.  

 

 

When Jay was here, he by a mile was the target for your wrath about the state of the team.   You were so light on Bruce that some of Bruce's fans (yes he had them) thought you were an ally to their point of view.  I recall even talking to you about it on the Jay hate thread.   And on this thread you are one of the softer people on Dan.  I am not saying you are a fan of Bruce and Dan but certainly no one would accuse you of being a loud critic of either guy relatively speaking.

 

So I mean it in good spirits, to each their own, but yeah I am not going to get anywhere arguing Jay-Bruce-Dan with you.  If there is a person on this board who would question Jay's veracity versus Dan-Bruce, it would be you.   So as much as you say I am predisposed to not give Bruce-Dan the benefit of the doubt -- and heck yeah that's true.  It's equally true that its on brand for you to make the point you are making here.

 

So lets call it a draw.  😎

Edited September 5, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Voice_of_Reason]

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

So as much as you say I am predisposed to not give Bruce-Dan the benefit of the doubt -- and heck yeah that's true.  It's equally true that its on brand for you to make the point you are making here.

Actually, it's not.  I said twice, I am open to EITEHR possibility:  1) Jay is telling the truth, Dan/Bruce were forcing his hand on the coaching, and I even gave a way that I think that could have played out through Callahan or 2) He's a dirty liar and is, at the very least, stretching the truth.

 

In your mind, there is no "either/or."  It's "Dan/Bruce did this because Jay said it.  It is fact, so let it be said, so let it be written."

 

I'm saying, eh, I can absolutely believe it could be fact, but I can also believe it might not be, and I think it's worth keeping the source and situation in mind when coming to your conclusion.  

 

Btw, I have softened on Jay since he's not the coach here any more.  I've come to his defense a few times.  It made me feel a little dirty, if we're being honest.  But I did it anyway.  

 

Look, if I got somebody out there to report tomorrow that Dan somehow was responsible for the Kennedy assassination, you'd buy it hook, line and sinker, even though Dan was -1 years old.  (Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and Dan was born on November 23rd 1964.)  You'll believe anything and everything anybody, regardless how credible or the circumstance, reports on Dan. 

 

So, yeah, we can call it a draw, we're not going to get anywhere on this. 

 

EDIT: One more thing: It's totally not my fault that a whole bunch of people don't understand more than one thing can be true at the same time.  I was hard on Jay. Sure.  If folks took that to mean I was defending Bruce, there's nothing that I can do about it.   I think I wore my keyboard out typing "more than one thing can be true at the same time: Bruce sucks, and Jay sucks, and Bruce, who sucks, hired Jay, which was a sucky hire to begin with."  If people wanted to look at me as an ally for Bruce, fine, but I wasn't.  I always maintained Jay was 3rd on the responsibility list. But was NOT a victim. I think there was a very binary line which was drawn by some posters: If you don't think Jay is a victim, then you are defending Bruce.  I think that position was hogwash. 

 

If that fact was missed by other posters, you can't hold it against me.  That's on them.  

Edited September 5, 2022 by Voice_of_Reason