Agreed Chris...everyone is bashing Bruce...we all know who is behind this!!Chris Luva Luva wrote:I don't even like dividing the responsibility. This is purely on Snyder. He uses different people to mask his actions, Bruce is just the newest. I don't want there to be any confusion on who is at fault, it's Snyder 110%.Irn-Bru wrote: We had the answer and Allen/Snyder choked it to death.
I have never felt worse about the team..... and that is saying something.....Irn-Bru wrote:Here's what is (or was) new: poor management seemed to decide to get out of management for the first time in 15 years and brought in competent personnel instead. We all held our breath to see whether it would last. It didn't, and that (to me) feels like a new low.
I don't know. I understand what you're saying here - Snyder is ultimately responsible for everyone he employs and Bruce Allen in particular. But some of these stories in that Mike Jones article sure do make Allen out to be quite an a-hole. Just watching him over the past few years and from some of his past actions, that seems believable to me. He and his brother have both proven to be legit jerks for a long time.Chris Luva Luva wrote:I don't even like dividing the responsibility. This is purely on Snyder. He uses different people to mask his actions, Bruce is just the newest. I don't want there to be any confusion on who is at fault, it's Snyder 110%.Irn-Bru wrote: We had the answer and Allen/Snyder choked it to death.
Riggofan do you remember when Bruce Allen was hired here? His position was PR based. Never was it supposed to be player personnel based. This isn't nor has it ever been a strong suit of his. As I recall he was supposed to focus on marketing and dealing with the Ring of Honor and the color pants to be worn at home. He wasn't elevated until Shanahan was fired and Danny seems to have done that to temper the critics that believed Shanny over Snyder. We must look high level and the entire body of work since Snyder has owned this team. From signing past their prime free agents, Bruce Smith, Deion as direct examples to contracts given to players and then not using them in the type of system to put them in the best way to succeed, Haynesworth, Snyder has been terrible. Hiring Shotty going 8-8 and firing him, firing Turner and simply being unable to let true football people run this he simply does nothing but lie to the fans, his ignorance and inablity to accept he sucks at football decisions doesn't allow for anyone that isn't going to bow down to him to do his job. Daniel Snyder is a cancer when it comes to owning this team and the sad thing is he isn't going anywhere and there will always be fans giving in and allowing him to laugh all the way to the bank. How does a team go from in a 20 year time period having "2 consecutive" winning seasons to all of a sudden the GM is a drunk, lose both your starting receivers alienate your QB to the point that he goes directly to Snyder and begs for a trade to saying we must sign our homegrown and we don't even make one offer to our best DL but will bring in yet another Cowboy DL that has injury concerns along with another DL that no one has heard of? We can't hire Wade Phillips or any other REAL DC because the coaching tree in the NFL is all connected and no real coach is going to come here and deal with this little man's attitude. This past 2 years was a marketing ploy to make many fans believe again and Danny and Bruce just can't help themselves they believe and know that eventually luck will come and they will luck up and have a winning season and get to the playoffs and then anything can happen. But we who aren't delusional know we will be back in last place again and again are the laughing stocks of the NFL. I mean anytime the Browns get better press then your team you know you suck. We suck and as long as Danny and Bruce are in charge we won't be nothing but a laughing stock. That to me is simply the cold hard truth.riggofan wrote:I don't know. I understand what you're saying here - Snyder is ultimately responsible for everyone he employs and Bruce Allen in particular. But some of these stories in that Mike Jones article sure do make Allen out to be quite an a-hole. Just watching him over the past few years and from some of his past actions, that seems believable to me. He and his brother have both proven to be legit jerks for a long time.Chris Luva Luva wrote:I don't even like dividing the responsibility. This is purely on Snyder. He uses different people to mask his actions, Bruce is just the newest. I don't want there to be any confusion on who is at fault, it's Snyder 110%.Irn-Bru wrote: We had the answer and Allen/Snyder choked it to death.
If you're going to be that type of person, you'd better at least be great at your job.
I do remember when he was hired here. I don't think he was brought in as a PR guy though - that's a more recent thing since he was named Team President. At the time he came in with Shanahan, he seemed to be kinda like GM-lite. Shanahan seemed to be picking the guys with Allen more the numbers/cap guy. So, no I don't agree with your characterization.DaSkinz Baby wrote:Riggofan do you remember when Bruce Allen was hired here? His position was PR based. Never was it supposed to be player personnel based.
Perhaps your right. I could be mistaken but I do recall Allen dealing with the non player evaluation portion upon being hired. I then recall Shanny being let go and he saying he was taking on more responsibility and being more hands on with player personnel. But at this point who the hell knows. We are screwed regardless.riggofan wrote:I do remember when he was hired here. I don't think he was brought in as a PR guy though - that's a more recent thing since he was named Team President. At the time he came in with Shanahan, he seemed to be kinda like GM-lite. Shanahan seemed to be picking the guys with Allen more the numbers/cap guy. So, no I don't agree with your characterization.DaSkinz Baby wrote:Riggofan do you remember when Bruce Allen was hired here? His position was PR based. Never was it supposed to be player personnel based.
I'm not defending Snyder or Allen btw. Snyder has ruined this franchise.
... two words... Sally Jenkins. She and Snyder live at the same credibility address...Bishop Hammer wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/tired-of-the-redskins-dysfunction-theres-one-person-to-blame/2017/03/11/2aef60dc-05d3-11e7-ad5b-d22680e18d10_story.html?utm_term=.89af6ab79c76
Won't disagree on Snyder. I have respect for, but disagree with Boswell... sad to see the link to Jenkins unvalidated (as usual) venom buried within. That, I will never be a baseball fan again, and will never forget the fan rape by Bobby Short and that Griffin ass hole, and the refusal of baseball to put a stop to it. The Nats seem to have picked up a mastery of choking from the Caps are among the best teams every year, and the first to choke their way from the playoffs every year. When the Wizards reclaim the Bullets name, I will consider a return.welch wrote:Well...I rarely notice the by-line on a Redskins story (who is Sally Jenkins?), but I doubt that any sports franchise owner could be worse than little Dan Snyder. Bob Short tried for a year or two, but, best I remember, Little Dan's first action was to fire Charley Taylor and Bobby Mitchell, second was to hire Jeff George, third was to fire Charley Casserly, and fourth was to fire Norv Turner. Thinking back, the John Kent Cooke / Casserly / Norv teams were well run, compared to Snyder's teams.
Little Dan is at the bottom of the barrel, down with the George Preston Marshall of the '50s. Marshall at least owned the Redskins when the team won a couple of NFL championships. Then GPM lost his mind: claimed that wanting to make the Redskins integrate was an insult to white people; changed the fight song from "Fight for Old Dc" to "Fight for old Dixie"; insisted that he wanted to trade for Bobby Mitchell if only the Browns would accept Redskins' third string QB, MC Reynolds; was described (by Eddie LeBaron?) as have a 25 cent college scouting department...that being the price for Street & Smith's Football. Snyder is bad in a different way.
Here is Tom Boswell's view:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/r ... 1fe2a4cef6
Yet the article echos virtually every poster on this board concerning Snyder.SkinsJock wrote:^^ Sally Jenkins has possibly less credibility as a reporter than Dan Snyder does as an NFL owner ... it's close
None of whom have anything but gut or tenuous anecdote to back their stance. Look, I detest Snyder, too... but the fact is, they took a chances on a very strong talent evaluator who was a dry drunk, and whom had lost two jobs due to drunkeness. Everything we see screams "off the wagon, and burned his last bridge".DarthMonk wrote:Yet the article echos virtually every poster on this board concerning Snyder.SkinsJock wrote:^^ Sally Jenkins has possibly less credibility as a reporter than Dan Snyder does as an NFL owner ... it's close
Everything after the highlight makes sense to me but golly, don't we have 20 some years of hard evidence on Snyder? I mean, he hired Marty and then fired him and it wasn't for cause. Anyway, I mostly agree with your post but I think I have more than gut or tenuous anecdote to back my stance on Snyder. He's a bad owner.Countertrey wrote:None of whom have anything but gut or tenuous anecdote to back their stance. Look, I detest Snyder, too... but the fact is, they took a chances on a very strong talent evaluator who was a dry drunk, and whom had lost two jobs due to drunkeness. Everything we see screams "off the wagon, and burned his last bridge".DarthMonk wrote:Yet the article echos virtually every poster on this board concerning Snyder.SkinsJock wrote:^^ Sally Jenkins has possibly less credibility as a reporter than Dan Snyder does as an NFL owner ... it's close
None of that makes Snyder any worse. But, if my impression is accurate, there was no option for him but to cut Scot out.
That's the key bit for me.SkinsJock wrote:I'm not as upset about Snyder letting Scot go as I am about how this whole GM situation has been managed
Yes... we have plenty of evidence that Snyder is a moneyed buffoon who possesses the keys to the board room. However, please, give me ONE FACT that doesn't fall into the category of rumor, postulation, "unnamed/unverified source", or emotional rant, pertinent to THIS situation, which validates your belief.DarthMonk wrote:Everything after the highlight makes sense to me but golly, don't we have 20 some years of hard evidence on Snyder? I mean, he hired Marty and then fired him and it wasn't for cause. Anyway, I mostly agree with your post but I think I have more than gut or tenuous anecdote to back my stance on Snyder. He's a bad owner.Countertrey wrote:None of whom have anything but gut or tenuous anecdote to back their stance. Look, I detest Snyder, too... but the fact is, they took a chances on a very strong talent evaluator who was a dry drunk, and whom had lost two jobs due to drunkeness. Everything we see screams "off the wagon, and burned his last bridge".DarthMonk wrote: Yet the article echos virtually every poster on this board concerning Snyder.
None of that makes Snyder any worse. But, if my impression is accurate, there was no option for him but to cut Scot out.
If only...
BTW... None of the above should be taken as an endorsement of Snyder by me. I would be thrilled to hear of a league intervention aimed at getting a new ownership group in Redskins Park.
And how about one more bit of criticism, this from ESPN 980’s Bram Weinstein. That station, of course, is controlled by Snyder, but Weinstein was withering in his remarks. He said Bruce Allen’s comments about the situation at the NFL scouting combine were “a blatant, abject lie.” He said there is nothing the Redskins complain about more than the use of unnamed sources, making this episode especially ironic. And he said he doesn’t need to know whether McCloughan was actually drinking too much to draw certain conclusions.
“Career sabotage occurred yesterday, which is unseemly and problematic, just for me as someone who is a consumer of this team,” Weinstein said. “This is two decades of clear, abominable activity by the organization that we emotionally and financially have put our heart and soul into. And this has happened over and over and over. … To fire him on the first day of free agency is patently absurd, unless something happened that they eventually should be transparent about. Because we’re owed an explanation. We are owed that. We are stockholders, emotionally and financially, in the team, and we are owed something beyond what we’ve gotten, which is that we’re just firing the guy a week after we abjectly lied about his place in the organization.”
“It’s not right, it’s unseemly, it’s wrong, it’s not how you treat people, and it does not come off in any way positive or optimistic about the future of the organization,” he went on. “If this was some level of anomaly and this team was a steady ship and these things don’t happen, then I would be more inclined to take the side of the organization and automatically say they’re probably telling the truth. … But because every couple of years something like this — where you’re slapping your forehead, trying to figure out what in the world the direction of the team — occurs, then it’s hard to take the side of the organization, to take them at face value.”
I'm pretty sure he got fired because of a relapse but that's not the only thing that happened these last several weeks with regard to this situation. We were given an ever-changing and self-conflicting narrative by Dan's spokesperson. That's a fact. More of the same old same old. Why not just fire him, tell us why, and move on?Yes... we have plenty of evidence that Snyder is a moneyed buffoon who possesses the keys to the board room. However, please, give me ONE FACT that doesn't fall into the category of rumor, postulation, "unnamed/unverified source", or emotional rant, pertinent to THIS situation, which validates your belief.
To me, everything so far would be typical and predictable in dealing with a high profile employee who has fallen off the wagon, AND was given time to address the problem, but failed to. Try thinking without the prejudice that (admittedly) Snyder has earned.
I'm more than happy to join the lynching... when it's deserved. Without more info, this ain't it. To me (as someone who worked with alcoholics for nearly 20 years) this story smacks of a valued employee who hit bottom. If that is true, I simply can't condemn Snyder for cutting the cord, and ending his investment in Scot. MY gut says this was a risk worth taking, that simply didn't work out for the team.
I'm sure that, at some point, the truth will come out... and the source won't be talking to Jenkins.
BTW... None of the above should be taken as an endorsement of Snyder by me. I would be thrilled to hear of a league intervention aimed at getting a new ownership group in Redskins Park.
