Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

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


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I think it's safe to say I was one of Jay's harshest critics, if not the harshest critic on the board. In my defense, I started the criticism in 2015, so before most.  Though I've never said I didn't like him as a person. 

 

Believe it or not, I was a critic before even that.  I blasted him during the 2014 season, the later part of it.  I also probably gave one of the most detailed takes of why I thought his playcalling grossly failed to factor anaylitics.  So I never loved Jay as a head coach.  But i liked him as a dude.  And I felt somewhat bad about the hand he was dealt here and that had to be considered as part of the soup -- but I feel the same way for all the coaches who coached here.  I felt about Zorn the way you do about Jay.  I blasted Zorn a ton.  Yet I still thought they handled Zorn with dysfunction and lack of class and said so at the time. 

 

Main reason why I didn't want to hammer Jay much was because the theme of the criticism regardless of whether it was intentional or not gave Bruce an out.  I felt Bruce (aside from Dan) was the #1 problem by a mile.  In retrospect I still do.  And if Jay is some sort of disaster (which I didn't feel) my anger would still fall to Bruce/Dan not Jay since they are the ones hiring him and extending his contract, etc.  I also think you got to grade almost everyone there on a curve because of Dan.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 Contrast that to Kyle Shanahan, who after being fired by Washington, got a job with the Browns, quit, and immediately got hired by the Falcons. Good coaches/coordinators tend not to be unemployed if they don't want to be.   Jay said he's looking to do some studio or color commentary work.  I actually think he'd be pretty good at that.  

 

 

Kyle was disliked by many here when he was coaching here.  Personally I didn't love aspects of Shanny the head coach but I did think he and Kyle really knew offenses.  Kyle is considered by many the best play caller in the league.  Jay not so much.  I think Jay's niche is play design versus play calling which are two different things.   I think Jay though is a smart dude and will get a job next year if he chases one.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

With that said, I think this interview was extremely insightful, and is really be an "eye of the beholder" type of thing.  There are things Jay said where you could either argue, "Damn, he had a lot to deal with, poor guy" or the flip side "You made your bed, sleep in it." Clearly you know what camp I'm in. :) 

 

 

I get the point.  But, he didn't really come off whiny about it.  He joked through most of it versus coming off bitter.  In a different interview he said, he was very grateful for the opportunity so no regrets.  And he sounded sincere when he said it.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I

A few examples: 

- Jay said he was really ambivalent to the defensive coordinator (at least initially) because he thought the talent level was so poor, who the DC was didn't really matter. He said the defense was old and slow, and they needed to get more talent. And it didn't really matter who the DC was. (That's basically an exact quote) Some could read this as "he's right, the talent WAS poor, have to get that shored up first. Talent wins, and without talent, coaching really doesn't matter." Obviously, that's not my take. I read it as a complete admission Jay has absolutely no idea how to put together a winning coaching staff, or the value of good coaching in developing and getting the most out of the players you have on your roster WHILE you are developing talent. In fact, good coaching HELPS develop talent.  The two things are not mutually exclusive.  I think this was my biggest takeaway.  I personally found this entire part of the discussion extremely damning.  

 

 

This wasn't Jay's first interview where he's talked about this.  He wasn't saying our defenses weren't going to be good any way so lets just hire any guy to coach them.  That was him excusing the coaching performance implying Wade Phillips wasn't going to excel with this group either and it was a talent issue.  

 

I criticized Jay at the time for not hiring Phillips.  Shanny did the same thing preceding Jay where he didn't hire defensive coordinators with big reps.  I didn't like it with him either.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

  --  Jay KNEW Pierre didn't like back shoulder fades which was the play which was called, Pierre had a preference for where he wanted the ball, because that's where Peyton threw it, yadda yadda yadda.  We know Jay knew this because he said so.  And yet in the most critical of situations, he allowed a play to be in the game plan where the primary target didn't feel comfortable with the play.  McVay was the OC.  So there's actually a little on him too, but to me this falls on approach.  If you KNOW a player doesn't like a type of play, why the hell is it in your goal-line script?  In a well coached team, the play design is married with the personnel.  And this is just a stark example that Jay didn't force that concept.  He had an theory, and even if the players didn't like it or even execute it well, it could get in the game plan.  

 

 

I presume McVay called that play but Jay had to deal with the fallout in the lockeroom about it.  It's not up to the player to dictate what plays they are willing to run.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 Do you think there's a CHANCE if Ron was coaching the team, 2 WRS just stand there with their hands on their hips because they don't like the play call, giving the QB no options, so he just has to fall down?  I don't.  I think if it was Bill B. he might not let either player out of the locker room and just say, screw it, we lose, we lose, but you can't do that. it's just

unfathomable to me that the thought even crossed into their minds they could do that and get away with it.  That's the "C" word.  Culture.  If your team has the culture where this type of behavior is acceptable, it will continue to occur. 

 

Nope.  Rivera though is a natural leader of men.  I don't think Jay is that.  Most players though did like him as a dude including D. Jax who echoed it even through this day.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

-  I liked the story about the playoff game.  And again, he recounted a lot of specifics, and I found it extremely interesting and entertaining.  He was really specific in a lot of ways.  However.  Here's the thing.  The way he described it, it was almost as though he was a spectator to all of it, and not a leader of it.  He said that they had managed to get GB into a punting situation on the 3rd or 4th drive, and "one of our fat asses tried to substitute."  And he said they had told them all week not to do that.  Aaron caught them for a 5 yard penalty,

then they went on to score.

 

Like Gibbs, like Rivera, Jay wasn't calling the defensive plays.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

- Culture.  So, his excuse for a bad culture was basically he didn't control the roster.  And he's envious of Ron who has final roster say.  I get that.  But.  There are A LOT (the vast majority) of coaches in the league without final roster say who can still instill accountability. I think it's much more to it than that.   

 

That wasn't really what he said though.  What he said (and said so on the Standig podcast too) is that he couldn't get rid of the players who disrupted the culture.  That's different than mere roster control.  He wanted to get rid of those who he thought were the bad seeds and they didn't let him do it.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

-The fact Dan/Bruce (probably more Bruce) didn't even consult Jay on the QB of the team is absolute madness.  I don't care how incompetent I thought Jay was as a HC, he was still the goddamn HC, and you don't make a QB move without consulting the HC. 

 

 

Big time.  Talk about dysfunction.  They just on their own go get a QB without even discussing it with the coach?  Wow.  Jay at that point was running the offense. When Doug slipped in an interview that they don't care about the scheme when making decisions about players -- that clearly was no joke.   

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

- If you believe him, he put a lot of the Kirk drama on Scot McLoughan who thought he could get Kirk cheap because he evaluated Kirk as above average.  Maybe GMSM got that one wrong.  Then Dan/Bruce got involved and it was just stupid.  I think Jay had a better idea of what Kirk's value was than any of the other nuckleheads.  I did like the line that Dan said, "have you ever known me to lose a player over money?" to which Jay thought there were some non-monetary issues which were not going to get worked out.  

-

 

He also threw in there that at some point there was too much bad blood between Kirk's agent and Bruce and Dan.   I talked about it many times back in the day which was if I recall Mike Jones leaked that he heard that Kirk's side understood why they didn't get a strong offer after the 2015 season but what set them off was Bruce opened with a low offer after the 2016 season -- and i got the inpression that they gave Kirk's agent an earful for the loss against the Giants.   If I recall even Kirk said in an interview later that if they won that game he thought the outcome with him and the WFT would have been different.

 

The low point for me with Jay was that Giants game.  Lol, I was practically screaming on the game thread that week that reading the NY clippings they came off fired up to take us out of the playoffs.  Some on that thread thought I was overrreacting and the Giants won't give a hoot.  Apparently, that's how Jay took it too that week.  I recall he said in a post game interview that he was surprised that the Giants played their starters that long, etc.  And the expressions of shock on Jay's face during that game were priceless because he'd wear his emotions on his sleave. 

 

I am a big Rivera guy.  Do I think he's a better coach than Jay, yeah definitely.  But as much as i like Rivera, I wouldn't bet on him if he had to deal with the same set up as Jay.  With Bruce above him.  Dan doing his thing.   If he had the same set up as Jay, Haskins likely for example would still be on the roster and in play for 2021.  

 

So I don't mind at all Rivera having unusual control.  It's the crazy dysfunctional set up that Jay and others have had is what worries me as to future success along with Dan.  So if Rivera even if its just temporarily puts that to rest and runs this organization, I am all for it.  Will see if it works but I prefer it to the alternative by a mile.   I have zero faith in Dan.  I have a ton of faith but not unlimited faith in Rivera. 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I'm a little concerned our drafts are going to start taking a hit. I just get the feeling that all these new FO hires are moving into an already well established young roster but won't continue to add onto it. Like the 2021 rookie class I will immediately start looking at after the season. We've had a good amount of rookies flow in and be productive the last 3-4 years, if that stops next season it will be noticeable. 

We'll see but one thing to keep in mind is that its clear Kyle wasn't making all the personnel decisions.  I'm not sure who was responsible for picking what players but in the Sheehan interview Jay said he was the one responsible for us drafting Matt L and C Holcomb, he also pointed out he made some draft mistakes but he didn't elaborate by giving names.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

We'll see but one thing to keep in mind is that its clear Kyle wasn't making all the personnel decisions.  I'm not sure who was responsible for picking what players but in the Sheehan interview Jay said he was the one responsible for us drafting Matt L and C Holcomb, he also pointed out he made some draft mistakes but he didn't elaborate by giving names.

 

 

 

 

Oh I know, one guy doesn't establish a draft board, scouts have to piece information together and that information has to be accurate for Smith to even make a solid board. It just seems like the main talent evaluators we've had the last 3 years are gone and now people are moving in after we have a young established roster. It doesn't sit well with me that the people we brought in didn't help build this roster (apart from year 1 Ron).

Edited by Burgundy Yoda
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I'm a little concerned our drafts are going to start taking a hit. I just get the feeling that all these new FO hires are moving into an already well established young roster but won't continue to add onto it. Like the 2021 rookie class I will immediately start looking at after the season. We've had a good amount of rookies flow in and be productive the last 3-4 years, if that stops next season it will be noticeable. 

 

Gribble as for title is who Kyle Smith was before his reputation went mainstream.  Gribble was in charge of college scouting/draft last year.  Just like Kyle was until last year.  Gribble was Kyle's handpicked duy to run the draft.  

 

Also Stokes has Kyle's old job now.  Stokes rubbed elbows with some pretty big time personnel guys like Schneider and McCloughan.   We aren't bereft of potential up and comers.

 

Will see.  I like Kyle Smith.  I am guessing there is some backstory to it.  It is what it is.  I'll trust that they make this work until it doesn't. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

Oh I know, one guy doesn't establish a draft board, scouts have to piece information together and that information has to be accurate for Smith to even make a solid board. It just seems like the main talent evaluators we've had the last 3 years are gone and now people are moving in after we have a young established roster. It doesn't sit well with me that the people we brought in didn't help build this roster (apart from year 1 Ron).

I get what you're saying but I've heard Ron say we've built a great core on the D line and he wants to keep that intact and build around it.  That's really the extent of our good young players besides what we drafted this year at RB and S.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I get what you're saying but I've heard Ron say we've built a great core on the D line and he wants to keep that intact and build around it.  That's really the extent of our good young players besides what we drafted this year at RB and S.

That's the right thing for Ron to say, I'm sure he's happy as can be coming into a defense that has already built arguably a top 3 DL with players on their rookie contracts. I'd add McLaurin and Roullier to the list of good players drafted. Those guys aren't even first rounders and they're good NFL players. I never want to go back to the 2000s drafts where we couldn't hit on anything in the drafts apart from the 1st round. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said:

Welp, Jason Wright, Dan Snyder Lackey. What a spiteful hateful little troll...

image.png.2b6f5d85a1e061686b9f547901ecbfd3.png

I’m all about criticizing Dan Snyder, who is awful, and the stuff with the cheerleaders was abhorrent (and possibly criminal) but this is a flat out ridiculous take. Pausing all aspects of game day entertainment, transforming the fan experience, rebrand etc. IS happening. Whoever recently was hired should decide whether to have cheerleaders, a band, pregame stuff, music, etc.  based on trends and fan interest and that’s totally logical and clearly would have happened regardless of the lawsuit. 
 

Jason Wright doesn’t have to answer your question by eviscerating the team and his boss’ misconduct (that’s why they paid a settlement, so they don’t have to talk about it publicly). He can choose not to answer. Get the **** over it.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Like Gibbs, like Rivera, Jay wasn't calling the defensive plays.

Yeah, my point wasn't so much that specific play, it was the discipline of the team to keep making bone-headed mistakes.  Sure, every team is going to have some of that.  But the well coached teams have a whole heck of a lot less of it.  And Jay's team's had A LOT of it.  For years.  And Years.  To which I hold him accountable. 

 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I presume McVay called that play but Jay had to deal with the fallout in the lockeroom about it.  It's not up to the player to dictate what plays they are willing to run.

My point here is that if you're the HC, and you've set up a system where you're putting players in the best position to succeed, and you're reviewing the game plan:

 

1. McVay should know not to call a back-shoulder fade to Pierre because he isn't comfortable with it.  

2. Jay should have seen the plan in game-plan review and thrown the play out of the gameplan.  

 

There were offenses on everybody in this situation, except probably Kirk who took most of the media heat for it.

1. Jay for not making sure McVay didn't call a play he knew neither Pierre nor DJax liked (this is an "in the week" thing, not a game time thing

2. McVay for putting in a play and calling it when he has to have also known the receivers weren't good at it or didn't want to run it

3. Both receivers for not at least attempting to run the play.  Even if #1 and #2 fail, just standing there and pouting is not acceptable.

4. Back to Jay, allowing an environment where both guys thought they could rebel without any consequence.

 

It sounded like Jay had to go in and play peace-keeper between Kirk, probably McVay, Pierre and DJax. I'm not sure if making everybody get along after that display of rebelion is what was called for. But, eh.  Who knows.

 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I am a big Rivera guy.  Do I think he's a better coach than Jay, yeah definitely.  But as much as i like Rivera, I wouldn't bet on him if he had to deal with the same set up as Jay.  With Bruce above him.  Dan doing his thing.   If he had the same set up as Jay, Haskins likely for example would still be on the roster and in play for 2021.

I tend to agree, however I think Ron would have been able to make it work more than Jay.  First, he comes with more clout.  Second, I think he's a pretty smooth operator, and I think he'd be able to "manage up" more effectively than Jay was able to.  

 

However, I could see a situation, like the Haskins situation, where he said no, Dan said yes, and Ron said, "No.  Seriously, we're not doing that on my watch.  If you want to do it, fire me."  And Dan might just do it.  Or he might back off.  I don't think Ron would allow himself to be pushed around.  Just doesn't come across as part of his personality. He might be convinced, but I don't think he would allow anybody to bully him.  

 

But yeah, with Bruce in the building, there's no question it would be somewhere between "a lot harder" and "impossible" to change the culture the way Ron wanted to.

 

There's also the fact Ron, or a coach of Ron's caliber, would NEVER agree to coach with Bruce in place as President of Football Ops.  EVER.  EVER EVER EVER.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said:

Welp, Jason Wright, Dan Snyder Lackey. What a spiteful hateful little troll...

image.png.2b6f5d85a1e061686b9f547901ecbfd3.png

I think Jason Wright inherited a no-win situation. John Feinstein is a huge horse's ass and team hater, and has been for decades.  So, whatever. 

 

There's no question Jason is trying to put lipstick on a pig.  But he didn't buy the pig, he's trying to get past it as best as possible.  

 

I do feel bad for the cheerleaders though.  The ones I've known always loved the cheerleading team, being part of the experience, and the fact it's paused is unfortunate for the ladies on the team now.  

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

It sounded like Jay had to go in and play peace-keeper between Kirk, probably McVay, Pierre and DJax. I'm not sure if making everybody get along after that display of rebelion is what was called for. But, eh.  Who knows.

 

 

Following the Kirk contract saga at the time, heard numerous time that Kirk and McVay were super close and when McVay left Kirk's desire to stay abated a lot.  How that factors in all of this?  Don't know.  Jay also said Garcon and D. Jax were competitive with each other.  So sounded like a stange dynamic.  Remember the story that got leaked about how Garcon (and I think D Jax too?) erupted in the locker room with the offense/McCoy's performance in the first half against the Dallas game on MNF?  The story took a backseat in the end because they won the game.  But I recall hearing about the drama.

 

I do agree Rivera would have the gravitas to get it under control.  Rivera IMO as a leader is special. 

 

25 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

I tend to agree, however I think Ron would have been able to make it work more than Jay.  First, he comes with more clout.  Second, I think he's a pretty smooth operator, and I think he'd be able to "manage up" more effectively than Jay was able to.  

 

However, I could see a situation, like the Haskins situation, where he said no, Dan said yes, and Ron said, "No.  Seriously, we're not doing that on my watch.  If you want to do it, fire me."  And Dan might just do it.  Or he might back off.  I don't think Ron would allow himself to be pushed around.  Just doesn't come across as part of his personality. He might be convinced, but I don't think he would allow anybody to bully him.  

 

But yeah, with Bruce in the building, there's no question it would be somewhere between "a lot harder" and "impossible" to change the culture the way Ron wanted to.

 

There's also the fact Ron, or a coach of Ron's caliber, would NEVER agree to coach with Bruce in place as President of Football Ops.  EVER.  EVER EVER EVER.  

 

 

As @thesubmittedonelikes to say every coach has a weakness and the key for the higher ups is to bring out the best of our coaches and minimize their weaknesses.   I am a big Ron guy but even he has flaws like anyone else.  So while I agree he could tell Dan to take a hike or whatever but you never know what happens in the heat of the battle.  Shanny was a strong personality yet he apparently conceded some points to Dan and Bruce and if you listen to his recap of his experiences he had to pick his battles.

 

I think ideally you don't want a coaching situation where you have to pick your battles and deal with dysfunction.   Dan doesn't bring out the best in his coaches.  Some of Dan's few defenders left like to say his coaching choices simply let him down.   I am sure he loves to delude himself into thinking that.  But I've heard enough stories to have a clear picture that Dan creates a work environment based on fear, office politics among other things.  And Dan adds his own poor football instincts from time to time to spoil the soup.  So you aren't really getting the best out of anyone.  Hopefully things change.   

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Believe it or not, I was a critic before even that.  I blasted him during the 2014 season, the later part of it.  I also probably gave one of the most detailed takes of why I thought his playcalling grossly failed to factor anaylitics.  So I never loved Jay as a head coach.  But i liked him as a dude.  And I felt somewhat bad about the hand he was dealt here and that had to be considered as part of the soup -- but I feel the same way for all the coaches who coached here.  I felt about Zorn the way you do about Jay.  I blasted Zorn a ton.  Yet I still thought they handled Zorn with dysfunction and lack of class and said so at the time. 

 

Main reason why I didn't want to hammer Jay much was because the theme of the criticism regardless of whether it was intentional or not gave Bruce an out.  I felt Bruce (aside from Dan) was the #1 problem by a mile.  In retrospect I still do.  And if Jay is some sort of disaster (which I didn't feel) my anger would still fall to Bruce/Dan not Jay since they are the ones hiring him and extending his contract, etc.  I also think you got to grade almost everyone there on a curve because of Dan.

 

 

Kyle was disliked by many here when he was coaching here.  Personally I didn't love aspects of Shanny the head coach but I did think he and Kyle really knew offenses.  Kyle is considered by many the best play caller in the league.  Jay not so much.  I think Jay's niche is play design versus play calling which are two different things.   I think Jay though is a smart dude and will get a job next year if he chases one.

 

 

I get the point.  But, he didn't really come off whiny about it.  He joked through most of it versus coming off bitter.  In a different interview he said, he was very grateful for the opportunity so no regrets.  And he sounded sincere when he said it.

 

 

This wasn't Jay's first interview where he's talked about this.  He wasn't saying our defenses weren't going to be good any way so lets just hire any guy to coach them.  That was him excusing the coaching performance implying Wade Phillips wasn't going to excel with this group either and it was a talent issue.  

 

I criticized Jay at the time for not hiring Phillips.  Shanny did the same thing preceding Jay where he didn't hire defensive coordinators with big reps.  I didn't like it with him either.

 

 

I presume McVay called that play but Jay had to deal with the fallout in the lockeroom about it.  It's not up to the player to dictate what plays they are willing to run.

 

Nope.  Rivera though is a natural leader of men.  I don't think Jay is that.  Most players though did like him as a dude including D. Jax who echoed it even through this day.

 

 

Like Gibbs, like Rivera, Jay wasn't calling the defensive plays.

 

 

That wasn't really what he said though.  What he said (and said so on the Standig podcast too) is that he couldn't get rid of the players who disrupted the culture.  That's different than mere roster control.  He wanted to get rid of those who he thought were the bad seeds and they didn't let him do it.

 

 

Big time.  Talk about dysfunction.  They just on their own go get a QB without even discussing it with the coach?  Wow.  Jay at that point was running the offense. When Doug slipped in an interview that they don't care about the scheme when making decisions about players -- that clearly was no joke.   

 

 

He also threw in there that at some point there was too much bad blood between Kirk's agent and Bruce and Dan.   I talked about it many times back in the day which was if I recall Mike Jones leaked that he heard that Kirk's side understood why they didn't get a strong offer after the 2015 season but what set them off was Bruce opened with a low offer after the 2016 season -- and i got the inpression that they gave Kirk's agent an earful for the loss against the Giants.   If I recall even Kirk said in an interview later that if they won that game he thought the outcome with him and the WFT would have been different.

 

The low point for me with Jay was that Giants game.  Lol, I was practically screaming on the game thread that week that reading the NY clippings they came off fired up to take us out of the playoffs.  Some on that thread thought I was overrreacting and the Giants won't give a hoot.  Apparently, that's how Jay took it too that week.  I recall he said in a post game interview that he was surprised that the Giants played their starters that long, etc.  And the expressions of shock on Jay's face during that game were priceless because he'd wear his emotions on his sleave. 

 

I am a big Rivera guy.  Do I think he's a better coach than Jay, yeah definitely.  But as much as i like Rivera, I wouldn't bet on him if he had to deal with the same set up as Jay.  With Bruce above him.  Dan doing his thing.   If he had the same set up as Jay, Haskins likely for example would still be on the roster and in play for 2021.  

 

So I don't mind at all Rivera having unusual control.  It's the crazy dysfunctional set up that Jay and others have had is what worries me as to future success along with Dan.  So if Rivera even if its just temporarily puts that to rest and runs this organization, I am all for it.  Will see if it works but I prefer it to the alternative by a mile.   I have zero faith in Dan.  I have a ton of faith but not unlimited faith in Rivera. 

 

Agreed. Except that Ron and Bruce wouldn't co-exist. Ron has too much credibility and respect in the league. Jay was a clown, plain and simple. I simply go back to the nipple pinching incident with DJax. Just a clown. He can make all the excuses he wants for why this **** show continued under his watch. If he would have come in all business and all football maybe he could have been more forceful. Personally, I think he was a recipient of good 'ole boy ****. Remember him and Bruce was down in TB. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I'm a little concerned our drafts are going to start taking a hit. I just get the feeling that all these new FO hires are moving into an already well established young roster but won't continue to add onto it. Like the 2021 rookie class I will immediately start looking at after the season. We've had a good amount of rookies flow in and be productive the last 3-4 years, if that stops next season it will be noticeable. 

 

I get what you're saying, and agree it's what I (and everyone) will probably be looking at to gauge what's happened.  A counterpoint though, maybe the rosters starting to pick up enough talent to where the rookies are the same quality as before, but just haven't deserved playing time over the existing talent?

 

I will say though, what I want to see is what happens in FA.  Last year we had a lot of small signings that somehow, against the odds, almost all worked.  That doesn't happen normally.  Lucas worked at LT.  Thomas worked at TE.  Schweitzer worked at LG.  Darby worked at CB.  McKissic worked at RB.  Barber...kind of worked as a short yardage RB.  Kevin Pierre-Louis  worked as a rotational LB in coverage.  Then there was the higher priced Fuller at CB, and he worked.  Only one that didn't work out was Sean Davis at FS.  Then we swung and missed at the biggest ticket FA, Amari Cooper.

 

That's 8 of 9 FA signings that worked.  That's so good it's absurd. 

 

If we employ that same strategy to help with projected holes in the 2021 roster (and then just add BPA through the draft).  We're looking at FS, WR, MLB, possibly more OT depth, maybe QB vet for added competition (Fitz?), CB (what happens to Darby?), 2nd TE, etc.  And maybe one of those we'll be chasing after a high profile FA.

 

if that happens, and the majority of that class plays well?  Something is cooking in DC.  Doesn't even have to be the absurd 8 of 9, but even just 4 of 7 or something.  I'll repeat the earlier counterpoint, that if our next FA class is as good as last season's, it's going to be harder for rookies to get playing time and that wouldn't be indicative of the quality of the draft class.

 

2020 was a surprising off-season on so many levels.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Gribble as for title is who Kyle Smith was before his reputation went mainstream.  Gribble was in charge of college scouting/draft last year.  Just like Kyle was until last year.  Gribble was Kyle's handpicked duy to run the draft.  

 

Also Stokes has Kyle's old job now.  Stokes rubbed elbows with some pretty big time personnel guys like Schneider and McCloughan.   We aren't bereft of potential up and comers.

 

Will see.  I like Kyle Smith.  I am guessing there is some backstory to it.  It is what it is.  I'll trust that they make this work until it doesn't. 

 

 

I was always more concerned with the scout shuffle that I read than Kyle Smith leaving. It sounded like a lot of scouts were going to get replaced, Kyle Smith is one man and didn't do it all himself. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean honestly outside of being eye candy whether sidelines or being put in a swimsuit calendar what do NFL cheerleaders do anymore?  They aren’t leading chants.  Heck no cheerleaders do that anymore at really any level.  As far as current times it sucks for the cheerleaders but many stadium are barely open or still without fans so it makes their presence their even less needed. Sure they are nice to look at but honestly I don’t see the purpose so I can’t really blame the move especially after they had this entire situation happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, joeken24 said:

Agreed. Except that Ron and Bruce wouldn't co-exist. Ron has too much credibility and respect in the league. Jay was a clown, plain and simple. I simply go back to the nipple pinching incident with DJax. Just a clown. He can make all the excuses he wants for why this **** show continued under his watch. If he would have come in all business and all football maybe he could have been more forceful. Personally, I think he was a recipient of good 'ole boy ****. Remember him and Bruce was down in TB. 

 

I disagree that Jay is a clown.  But to play along Shanny might go to the hall of fame, he was no clown.  He dealt with Bruce.  Hearing some about what down, Bruce beat Shanny in the power dtuggle behind the scenes.  Joe Gibbs was no clown, yet dealt with Cerrato and even praised the heck out of him, and praised Dan, too

 

Some beat guys said Gibbs was a master at making Dan believe his ideas were Dan's ideas.  There are people who coached here with big reps who sucked it up and dealt with the dysfunction. Only coach that battled Dan without taking it was Marty and Marty was canned in short order versus quit. 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, seantaylor=god said:

I’m all about criticizing Dan Snyder, who is awful, and the stuff with the cheerleaders was abhorrent (and possibly criminal) but this is a flat out ridiculous take. Pausing all aspects of game day entertainment, transforming the fan experience, rebrand etc. IS happening. Whoever recently was hired should decide whether to have cheerleaders, a band, pregame stuff, music, etc.  based on trends and fan interest and that’s totally logical and clearly would have happened regardless of the lawsuit. 
 

Jason Wright doesn’t have to answer your question by eviscerating the team and his boss’ misconduct (that’s why they paid a settlement, so they don’t have to talk about it publicly). He can choose not to answer. Get the **** over it.

 

In a vacuum this is fine. But, when there is a 20-year precedent of people taking a job here intending to change the culture and then eventually falling in line, it's not ridiculous for people to question things. I've been following the cheerleader story very closely for 6-7 months now and (despite hating Feinstein) had the same exact reaction. 

 

It might suck for Jason Wright, but he took a job with this team. He is going to need a demonstrated track record before everyone is just going to assume things have changed. That's not his fault, but it's completely fair. 

1 hour ago, RichmondRedskin88 said:

I mean honestly outside of being eye candy whether sidelines or being put in a swimsuit calendar what do NFL cheerleaders do anymore?  They aren’t leading chants.  Heck no cheerleaders do that anymore at really any level.  As far as current times it sucks for the cheerleaders but many stadium are barely open or still without fans so it makes their presence their even less needed. Sure they are nice to look at but honestly I don’t see the purpose so I can’t really blame the move especially after they had this entire situation happen.

 

It's fair to argue that. But, the timing and way it's handled definitely makes it seem like "well, we have men here who can't get their **** together around hot girls so let's just get rid of the hot girls"

 

That's the message. If they had quietly disbanded the squad absent any of these events, that's different. If they (or any team who doesn't have these issues) had announced a change to the cheerleader program, that's also different. But, the chain of events screams "these girls are being punished for the actions of the team executives" which sucks. You can explain it away all you want, but there's no getting around all of that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be real, everyone knows damn good and well that the disbanding of the cheerleaders has very little to do with rebranding and very much to do with the investigation and settlement.  Anyone claiming otherwise is drunk on the kool-aid.  That said, I don't blame Jason Wright for conveniently using the rebranding as an excuse and sidestepping any conversations about the allegations.  I'd imagine he couldn't talk about that even if he wanted to.  This is merely just Feinstein being Feinstein.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

In a vacuum this is fine. But, when there is a 20-year precedent of people taking a job here intending to change the culture and then eventually falling in line, it's not ridiculous for people to question things. I've been following the cheerleader story very closely for 6-7 months now and (despite hating Feinstein) had the same exact reaction. 

 

It might suck for Jason Wright, but he took a job with this team. He is going to need a demonstrated track record before everyone is just going to assume things have changed. That's not his fault, but it's completely fair. 

 

It's fair to argue that. But, the timing and way it's handled definitely makes it seem like "well, we have men here who can't get their **** together around hot girls so let's just get rid of the hot girls"

 

That's the message. If they had quietly disbanded the squad absent any of these events, that's different. If they (or any team who doesn't have these issues) had announced a change to the cheerleader program, that's also different. But, the chain of events screams "these girls are being punished for the actions of the team executives" which sucks. You can explain it away all you want, but there's no getting around all of that. 

I think it’s the removal of the liability that goes with the cheerleading program now.  I’m sure there was a massive amount of money paid in these settlements.  The team is under no obligation to keep the cheerleaders in place.

 

As much as I loved the First Ladies over the years, an unfortunate side effect of the precedent that has been set by these massive settlements are the assurance you don’t have to do it again.  I think In all likelihood some variation of the program returns, but I expect it will be much different.  There is a reason most NFL teams don’t have cheerleaders anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Painkiller said:

I think it’s the removal of the liability that goes with the cheerleading program now.  I’m sure there was a massive amount of money paid in these settlements.  The team is under no obligation to keep the cheerleaders in place.

 

As much as I loved the First Ladies over the years, an unfortunate side effect of the precedent that has been set by these massive settlements are the assurance you don’t have to do it again.  I think In all likelihood some variation of the program returns, but I expect it will be much different.  There is a reason most NFL teams don’t have cheerleaders anymore.

A couple things...

 

1) The team is well within its right to remove the cheerleaders...I wasn't debating that. I just feel that the timing looks bad

2) Most NFL teams DO have cheerleaders...26 of the 32 in fact

 

Again, it's the optics and the fairness...not the legal right. This comes across as the victims getting the short end of the stick and, not only does that suck for girls who have worked hard to be professional athletes, but it looks bad for the organization. 

 

What would the reaction be if Snyder's resolution for all the non-cheerleader sexual misconduct allegations is to bar women from working at Redskins Park? Pretty ****ty, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

A couple things...

 

1) The team is well within its right to remove the cheerleaders...I wasn't debating that. I just feel that the timing looks bad

2) Most NFL teams DO have cheerleaders...26 of the 32 in fact

 

Again, it's the optics and the fairness...not the legal right. This comes across as the victims getting the short end of the stick and, not only does that suck for girls who have worked hard to be professional athletes, but it looks bad for the organization. 

 

What would the reaction be if Snyder's resolution for all the non-cheerleader sexual misconduct allegations is to bar women from working at Redskins Park? Pretty ****ty, right?

I honestly didn’t know there were still that many squads left.  I thought the number was far fewer...although I will say I expect all the other owners are now taking a very hard look at what happened here.  If they aren’t they better be.  I would expect in the years to come more cheerleading programs are “paused” for “review”
 

I work in a field that carries with it a lot of liability.  Whenever there is a lawsuit and/or settlement, whatever caused that to happen gets thoroughly reviewed. Policies and/or procedures are totally revamped and updated.  All that makes sense as to why the program has been stalled now.  The rebranding also gives them another reason, but any fool can see that isn’t the real reason.  As for Jason Wright’s explanation, I don’t know what people really expect.  The guy isn’t going to provide an itemized list of why they are pausing the program, and how it relates to the settlements nor does he have to.  
 

I get people strongly dislike Snyder, but some of us have been saying from the start this is not going to cause him to lose the team.  It’s just not.
 

Recommendations are going to be made and the team will follow them to a tee.  Of course, Snyder cannot ban women from working at the park nor should he (Federal law rightly forbids this), but he can decide what jobs he created that they can hold. Litigation always carries with it unintended consequences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...