JLC vs. Cerrato takes a new twist?

Cerrato has NOT been our GM the last few years or ever. At no time did he have duties that could even be construed as GM duties. He directed our personel scouting both collegiate and pro. That's it. He didn't make deals, sign players, makes trades. Those moves were done by Joe Gibbs as president of football operations. This year is Vinny's first at calling the shots.

Very true, but VC was always taken the brunt end of everything negative that happend with the redskins, when in turn, that was not his fault. Vinny has done a great job this year so far, and I think he has handled things great. I used to have a diff opinion about him until I actually started seeing all the good he does for this team and he actually cares, and he has done some reallll good things.; He did wonders for the 49ers back in the day. Vinny C is good for our organization, especially now that him and DS are growing and not just tossing money around at old,worn out vets. theres nothing wrong with spending big, just make sure you dont get worn out players who wont be able to play more than 1-2 years ( J. TAylor is different)

Cerrato has NOT been our GM the last few years or ever. At no time did he have duties that could even be construed as GM duties. He directed our personel scouting both collegiate and pro. That's it. He didn't make deals, sign players, makes trades. Those moves were done by Joe Gibbs as president of football operations. This year is Vinny's first at calling the shots.

Official job names aside, VC has been here for 7-8 yrs has worked as Dan's #1 the whole time, and yes, i guess JG's was indeed President of Football Operations. VC has been an intrigal part of free agency, drafting, and how this football team operates. He was the main reason we signed Brandon LLoyd, he admitted as much. Not trying to nitpick but VC, names aside, has played a huge role in this teams overall FO dealings.

But, yes, technically this is VC's first year calling the shots.

What I meant was that JLC takes petty swipes at VC and DS as people, not as GM and owner of the Redskins. Would you agree that JLC seems to really, really personally dislike VC and DS and he lets those feelings show in his blog?

I would agree. He does issue praise from time to time as well.

Could it have been a harmless question? Sure, but I doubt it. It sounds more like "tattling."

JLC was highly critical of VC's appearance on the show and I would bet money that JLC said to himself, "It would be great if VC's appearance on the show resulting in tampering penalties. I could then say, 'See how stupid this whole idea, and VC, are?'" IMO, JLC was once again making a mountain out of a mole hill.
If I'm correct they are talking about VC's new show called "IN THe Red Zone" which is on Mon. & Fri. for two hours. I also heard someone on one station talking about this issue and how easy the tampering rule could become an issue when talking about players from other teams.

Wow, this is pathetic. I think I've just lost all respect for JLC. The funny thing is I think that certain fractions of the Post are encouraging this type of behavior. Hopefully someone will get through to JLC and the others (Cindy Boren) and help them realize that this isn't objective reporting. In fact it's downright bias. The only one that doesn't seem to have an axe to grind is Reid and honestly it's about time for JLC to move on.

Could it have been a harmless question? Sure, but I doubt it. It sounds more like "tattling."

JLC was highly critical of VC's appearance on the show and I would bet money that JLC said to himself, "It would be great if VC's appearance on the show resulting in tampering penalties. I could then say, 'See how stupid this whole idea, and VC, are?'" IMO, JLC was once again making a mountain out of a mole hill.

I do not care for the word 'tattling', but I agree that he was likely scrutinizing the VC show to a greater degree given the relationship. But I think it is an interesting question nonetheless. What are some possible implications of an NFL executive discussing NFL matters for four hours a week? It is a legitimate question for a reporter to ask. I think someone should ask the question. I also think that JLC has placed himself in a position where he can be attacked for asking what is a legitimate question. Carrying on sophmoric personal feuds in a public blog does not help his legitimacy as a reporter. I do agree with that.

Wow, this is pathetic. I think I've just lost all respect for JLC. The funny thing is I think that certain fractions of the Post are encouraging this type of behavior. Hopefully someone will get through to JLC and the others (Cindy Boren) and help them realize that this isn't objective reporting. In fact it's downright bias. The only one that doesn't seem to have an axe to grind is Reid and honestly it's about time for JLC to move on.

Well they now have 3 guys on the beat and my guess is they are preparing a succession. Reid has hit the beat for a while now and Svrgula(sp?) has just been added so maybe the Post is hedging their bets.

Can someone tell me why JLC is calling the NFL in the first place. Is that his job? Is it his place to call the NFL? He'a a reporter. Right? His check isn't signed by the NFL. Why is he doing this? If this is true some needs to sit this guy down and remind him what his job is.

JLC needs to go. Make him cover DC United or the Capitals. I think Barry Svrluga (sp) would be a huge upgrade as a beat writer. He did a great job when he covered the Nats.

I think JLC definitely has an axe to grind with our FO. He needs to get over it and just do his job. What douche....Amen Brother. JLC has worn out his welcome on this beat. It's almost as if his highest aspiration is to personally knock Vinny down a peg. The guy needs to just shut the hell up, and do his job.

I do not care for the word 'tattling', but I agree that he was likely scrutinizing the VC show to a greater degree given the relationship. But I think it is an interesting question nonetheless. What are some possible implications of an NFL executive discussing NFL matters for four hours a week? It is a legitimate question for a reporter to ask. I think someone should ask the question. I also think that JLC has placed himself in a position where he can be attacked for asking what is a legitimate question. Carrying on sophmoric personal feuds in a public blog does not help his legitimacy as a reporter. I do agree with that.

If the question had been asked of the NFL in such a fashion - a generic, non-specific "what are the boundaries" type of inquiry - then I would have no problem with it (An example could even be used analogizing it to coaching shows - how much can a coach, on a local radio show, say about player controversies?) But apparently, the question was pointed and accusatory. As others have said, the manner in which the "investigation" was done appears to be a way to create a story for JLC rather than to determine how VC's may or may not be affected by the NFL's tampering rules.