Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=ethat001;1167912]Then, I hope Scott C can help make up for Scott McC's departure.

Regardless of how things went down, I feel bad for Scott McC. Anyone that's been fired twice and is still drinking clearly has a HUGE issue with alcohol. That's the definition of an alcoholic, when it affects your work/life.[/quote]

I 100% do not believe that alcohol is to blame for Scott's firing. There has already been "anonymous" current players who have stated that they never saw Scott drinking or drunk, and that he never seemed under the influence at work.

It came down to 2 major things: The redskins were enraged about Scott's wife tweeting pictures of Scott's superbowl rings from GB and Seattle. #2 was that it was Scott's idea to trade Cousins, when at that time the school of thought was to try and lock up Cousins long term. They have since moved on from trying to sign Cousins to a LTD....

In time, this will be proven as a smear job.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

This thing sure has gone off the rails eh

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;1167939]I 100% do not believe that alcohol is to blame for Scott's firing. There has already been "anonymous" current players who have stated that they never saw Scott drinking or drunk, and that he never seemed under the influence at work.

It came down to 2 major things: The redskins were enraged about Scott's wife tweeting pictures of Scott's superbowl rings from GB and Seattle. #2 was that it was Scott's idea to trade Cousins, when at that time the school of thought was to try and lock up Cousins long term. They have since moved on from trying to sign Cousins to a LTD....

In time, this will be proven as a smear job.[/quote]

C'mon, Snake! Many of us dislike the way Snyder and Allen sometimes treat people but that doesn't mean that Scot doesn't have a drinking problem. The history is there for all to see. He hasn't gone to rehab and until he does nobody in the NFL is going to want to hire him. I feel sorry for Scot but I can't lay all of the blame for his dismissal on Snyder and Allen.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=MTK;1167941]This thing sure has gone off the rails eh[/quote]

It is getting old. Bitching about it is dumb. I wish we would sign a big name if just to put this subject to rest.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[QUOTE=mooby;1167934]Because the guy who put it together was an alcoholic and was letting it affect his job? Otherwise why fire him now, instead of after the draft the way respectable teams do?[/QUOTE]


Again, it wasn't just him that put it together.

As to the timing of the firing it would have been a mess no matter when it happened.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mooby;1167934]Because the guy who put it together was an alcoholic and was letting it affect his job? Otherwise why fire him now, instead of after the draft the way respectable teams do?[/quote]

how about because HE decided not to show up for the combine or the start of FA . . . that is effecting your team in a negative way, so why have him here at all then?

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SkinsGuru;1167948]how about because HE decided not to show up for the combine or the start of FA . . . that is effecting your team in a negative way, so why have him here at all then?[/quote]

Yeah, I would think had he shown up ready to work for the combine, and especially the start of FA, then they would have worked to keep him through the off season. But missing those two events basically forced the team's actions.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=MTK;1167944]Again, it wasn't just him that put it together.

As to the timing of the firing it would have been a mess no matter when it happened.[/quote]

My only point is that it seemed rushed, like they didn't have a plan. If he's been drinking on the job long enough why not get rid of him after the season? They panicked after all the leaks broke when he wasn't at the combine. They don't have a plan, they are just winging it, and they are more than content to let him take the blame for drinking. If he is truly an alcoholic than by all means its' affecting the job he's supposed to be doing, yet somehow they are more than content following his board (most likely because they have no other choice but to).

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mooby;1167950]My only point is that it seemed rushed, like they didn't have a plan. If he's been drinking on the job long enough why not get rid of him after the season? They panicked after all the leaks broke when he wasn't at the combine. They don't have a plan, they are just winging it, and they are more than content to let him take the blame for drinking. If he is truly an alcoholic than by all means its' affecting the job he's supposed to be doing, yet somehow they are more than content following his board (most likely because they have no other choice but to).[/quote]

What employer would allow an employee to continue drink on the job? My former employer would call in such an employee and demand that the employee either agree to go into rehab that day or he would be fired on the spot.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mooby;1167950]My only point is that it seemed rushed, like they didn't have a plan. If he's been drinking on the job long enough why not get rid of him after the season? They panicked after all the leaks broke when he wasn't at the combine. They don't have a plan, they are just winging it, and they are more than content to let him take the blame for drinking. If he is truly an alcoholic than by all means its' affecting the job he's supposed to be doing, yet somehow they are more than content following his board (most likely because they have no other choice but to).[/quote]

It probably had a lot to do with a difference of opinion over what to do with Cousins, and that decision was looming at the time.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

The fact they stuck with the Board and executed the plan with Free agency...all it does is solidify the fact McC was sound with judgment and had the complete buy in with his team of scouting and personnel.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1167951]What employer would allow an employee to continue drink on the job? My former employer would call in such an employee and demand that the employee either agree to go into rehab that day or he would be fired on the spot.[/quote]

So Scot McCloughan tells Bruce Allen to F off and EB from the Sports Junkies describes it as "not being an ass kisser". Um, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure most of us would get fired if we cursed out our boss, drunk or sober.

While I certainly don't like how things have gone down, I care more about wins and losses and will suspend my outrage until their off-season actions translate into losses. I actually like their player acquisitions so far and think they could be better. With a few exceptions, the best players on the team were here before Scot. They will get past this and having a good season is still very much in play.


Eric Bickel‏Verified account @EBJunkies Mar 10

I have been told that Scot would tell Bruce to F off. Wouldn't kiss his ass. Can't blame him. But i'm sure that also doomed him

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1167951]What employer would allow an employee to continue drink on the job? My former employer would call in such an employee and demand that the employee either agree to go into rehab that day or he would be fired on the spot.[/quote]

In what world is the NFL a regular business where you can just fire somebody as important as the GM one day and worry about the consequences later? There are ways teams in the NFL handle things. If the GM/scout (whichever term for Scot you prefer) isn't fired after the season, it's after the draft. And there's a reason for that, it's to minimize the impact it has on the franchise. Firing him during free agency reeks of panic, they didn't anticipate the leaks and they didn't have a plan for it.

As for the alcoholic thing, if you want to believe that go ahead. If it was disrupting his work and influencing the board I don't think we'd be seeing them following his plan today.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=44Deezel;1167955]So Scot McCloughan tells Bruce Allen to F off and EB from the Sports Junkies describes it as "not being an ass kisser". Um, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure most of us would get fired if we cursed out our boss, drunk or sober.

While I certainly don't like how things have gone down, I care more about wins and losses and will suspend my outrage until their off-season actions translate into losses. I actually like their player acquisitions so far and think they could be better. With a few exceptions, the best players on the team were here before Scot. They will get past this and having a good season is still very much in play.


Eric Bickel‏Verified account @EBJunkies Mar 10

I have been told that Scot would tell Bruce to F off. Wouldn't kiss his ass. Can't blame him. But i'm sure that also doomed him[/quote]

if I was at work and someone had been drinking and telling me to Ef off, we would have problems.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Welp, now that Scot McCloughan is gone, let's talk about GM candidates. Seems like Mike Maylock and Doug Williams are the two top choices. I think I'm more than fine with either guy. I think both would be well respected. I wonder when they plan on interviewing either guy?

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

We fired him for cause, but we are still following his free agent and draft planing...

Why are they sabotaging themselves.

Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Once again... a lot of input goes into putting together the draft/free agency plan, McC didn't sit down and scratch everything out himself. It was a team effort so that's why they are following the plan.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mooby;1167956]In what world is the NFL a regular business where you can just fire somebody as important as the GM one day and worry about the consequences later? There are ways teams in the NFL handle things. If the GM/scout (whichever term for Scot you prefer) isn't fired after the season, it's after the draft. And there's a reason for that, it's to minimize the impact it has on the franchise. Firing him during free agency reeks of panic, they didn't anticipate the leaks and they didn't have a plan for it.

As for the alcoholic thing, if you want to believe that go ahead. If it was disrupting his work and influencing the board I don't think we'd be seeing them following his plan today.[/quote]

but he didn't show up to work . . . what is the point of having him and paying him if he is not working? not helping with scouting any longer, not doing his job in FA? it was HIS choice not to show up even after telling the team a week before to not worry, he would be at the combine . . . they expected him there and he stayed at home . . . and he said he would be out another week and be back the next . . . next week came and guess what, he was not at work again . . . again on his own choice . . . why pay the man if he his not showing up for work??? how is that helping the team with FA or preparing for the draft???

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Why does everyone want to boil this down and make everything so simple?

Oh, it was McCloughan's draft board, and they are still using it, yet they fired McCloughan?? I can't make sense of that!!

Shocker, because you don't think very well, that's why you can't make sense of it.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1167949]Yeah, I would think had he shown up ready to work for the combine, and especially the start of FA, then they would have worked to keep him through the off season. But missing those two events basically forced the team's actions.[/quote]

Scot not attending the combine was a mutual decision between he and Bruce. He was effectively done here already...

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SirLK26;1167969]Scot not attending the combine was a mutual decision between he and Bruce. He was effectively done here already...[/quote]

not from what i've read . . . he and his agent were telling the team a week prior that he would be there . . . promising he would . . . and he didn't show up . . . saying he would be back at the office the next week, then still didn't show up

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=MTK;1167960]Once again... a lot of input goes into putting together the draft/free agency plan, [B]McC didn't sit down and scratch everything out himself[/B]. It was a team effort so that's why they are following the plan.[/quote]

This goes with the mindset of Redskins fans wanting to always pin the consequences (positive or negative) on a single person.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

I'm not gonna sit here and question whether some of these posts are directed at me, if you are gonna call me out just do it.

This is all I am asking: If McC had been drinking on the job for an extended period of time why did they not make a plan and stick with it? Clearly he was a weakness that needed to be addressed, why did they do in the haphazard way of firing him during free agency? It wasn't like they saw him having 1 beer on the job and decided he had to leave immediately. Who was the last GM fired during free agency not named McCloughan? Shit, the Seahawks and 49ers knew he had a drinking problem and they still didn't end up with the mess we have now.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mooby;1167978]I'm not gonna sit here and question whether some of these posts are directed at me, if you are gonna call me out just do it.

This is all I am asking: If McC had been drinking on the job for an extended period of time why did they not make a plan and stick with it? Clearly he was a weakness that needed to be addressed, why did they do in the haphazard way of firing him during free agency? It wasn't like they saw him having 1 beer on the job and decided he had to leave immediately. Who was the last GM fired during free agency not named McCloughan? Shit, the Seahawks and 49ers knew he had a drinking problem and they still didn't end up with the mess we have now.[/quote]

It's all speculation at this point. Maybe the death of his mom, even at 100, did throw him deeper than is being acknowledged. Maybe the team hoped to get through FA, and maybe even the draft, but when he missed both the combine and the start of FA, they felt they had to act. Maybe the darkest reports of smears and jealousy by BA are in fact the actual reason.

We may not know for several months/years. It's a shame because he was a fan favorite, and in that respect, maybe they had to let the fans see him miss both the combine and FA in order not to have a fan revolt (even doing it with him missing has cracked that door open).

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

The truth is that an organization that didn't repeatedly step on it's dick would a) be getting the benefit of the doubt and b) probably not even be in this situation.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Plus, regardless of the actual specifics of the situation I don't see how anyone can even remotely defend the team's handling of the situation. From the outside, which is all we have to go on and all that matters perception-wise, this looks like an utter and complete failure of the team to operate in even something resembling a professional manner. Again

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mooby;1167978]I'm not gonna sit here and question whether some of these posts are directed at me, if you are gonna call me out just do it.

This is all I am asking: If McC had been drinking on the job for an extended period of time why did they not make a plan and stick with it? Clearly he was a weakness that needed to be addressed, why did they do in the haphazard way of firing him during free agency? It wasn't like they saw him having 1 beer on the job and decided he had to leave immediately. Who was the last GM fired during free agency not named McCloughan? Shit, the Seahawks and 49ers knew he had a drinking problem and they still didn't end up with the mess we have now.[/quote]

You don't see the Machiavellian logic in letting him go at the start of free agency? The drinking wasn't the reason for dismissal, the drinking was the excuse.

At the start of free agency you've got the guy's thinking on free agents and you've got his draft board mostly done. You take that information and you:

a) execute on the free agent plans, knowing that you Bruce Allen could not have come up with a better one on your own, you roll with McCloughan's and take credit for it since he's gone at the time the pen hits the paper on those free agent contracts

b) in parallel, hand your draft board to Jay and Doug Williams and say OK go work off this, and interview the players, and tweak this board based on what you think. Go into the April draft executing a McCloughan draft board with input from Jay and Doug. You, Bruce Allen, get the credit because McCloughan is gone, and you're the one in charge.

c) do all the talking to the media so that all of the screw ups can be blamed on McCloughan, and so that you can take personal credit for all the good stuff.

d) find a new GM to put in place in May, following the draft, and go into the next season with a clean slate.

I don't know what we're arguing about here. McCloughan wasn't fired for drinking, does anybody really think that? Nobody here is arguing that. McCloughan was fired because he wasn't a yes man and Bruce Allen is a Machiavellian dickhead. Drinking was the built in excuse to fire McC for cause whenever they wanted.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=FRPLG;1167987]Plus, regardless of the actual specifics of the situation I don't see how anyone can even remotely defend the team's handling of the situation. From the outside, which is all we have to go on and all that matters perception-wise, this looks like an utter and complete failure of the team to operate in even something resembling a professional manner. Again[/quote]

Who is defending the team?? I feel like we're talking in circles.

Nobody in the last five pages has defended the team. They're indefensible.

I think what you're taking as defending the team is really just several posters who are the types that look forward, not backward. I'm like that myself. Bruce Allen is a piece of shit, but McCloughan is gone, history, spilled milk. I don't cry over it. I'm more interested in what happens next with Cousins, who runs our draft board, and who gets the next GM job.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SirLK26;1167969]Scot not attending the combine was a mutual decision between he and Bruce. He was effectively done here already...[/quote]

Pretty much, though probably much more Bruce's decision than Scot's.

Not to make light of it, but how much must it suck for Scot to see Bruce drink as much as he does and be able to "handle his alcohol" while Scot has to forever battle demons and perceptions

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1167990]Pretty much, though probably much more Bruce's decision than Scot's.

[B]Not to make light of it, but how much must it suck for Scot to see Bruce drink as much as he does and be able to "handle his alcohol" while Scot has to forever battle demons and perceptions[/B][/quote]


Is there a vice versa of how can Bruce sit there and see a drunk with such an ability to build superbowl contending/winning personnel with 2 different clubs but yet battle his own Front office perceptions(clown show/dumpster fire) built around McNabb/RG3 trades and salary dumps which resulted in crippling penalties (Haynesworth)? That has to suck for Bruce...and Dan (drinking bro)

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1167989]Who is defending the team?? I feel like we're talking in circles.

Nobody in the last five pages has defended the team. They're indefensible.

I think what you're taking as defending the team is really just several posters who are the types that look forward, not backward. I'm like that myself. Bruce Allen is a piece of shit, but McCloughan is gone, history, spilled milk. I don't cry over it. I'm more interested in what happens next with Cousins, who runs our draft board, and who gets the next GM job.[/quote]

I guess I'm sensing more of a tolerance for the situation than I currently have. I've long been a defender of the DS tenure as I have simply refused to believe he was as bad others shrieked about. But I am as close as ever to having to give up. Year after year of losing is one thing. I can take bad luck and unfortunate football decisions. That's part of being a fan. The hope that one day everything will finally fall into place. But year after year of making the same mistakes because one individual is simply unable or unwilling to develop as person and that individual has absolutely no accountability. It's hard to see hope from where I stand.

While you say (as I have similarly in past said):
[quote]I'm more interested in what happens next with Cousins, who runs our draft board, and who gets the next GM job.[/quote]

I now think that whatever we're presented with on a silver platter next will just be the next iteration of the con job that DS is doing on all Skins fans.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=FRPLG;1167995]I guess I'm sensing more of a tolerance for the situation than I currently have. I've long been a defender of the DS tenure as I have simply refused to believe he was as bad others shrieked about. But I am as close as ever to having to give up. Year after year of losing is one thing. I can take bad luck and unfortunate football decisions. That's part of being a fan. The hope that one day everything will finally fall into place. But year after year of making the same mistakes because one individual is simply unable or unwilling to develop as person and that individual has absolutely no accountability. It's hard to see hope from where I stand.

While you say (as I have similarly in past said):


[B]I now think that whatever we're presented with on a silver platter next will just be the next iteration of the con job that DS is doing on all Skins fans.[/B][/quote]

And when the draft arrives and delivers you a side of 10 draft picks, you'll eat it up.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

The team handled it about as poorly as can be, but in the end there was never going to be anything other than a messy end to it?

Is there any circumstance where we would have accepted Scot leaving as anything other than the team fucking it up in some manner?

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Here's a pretty scathing op-ed. [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2017/03/13/tony-kornheiser-eviscerates-the-redskins-for-their-savage-cutdown-of-a-human-being/?utm_term=.78bd81db8bf6[/url]

Nothing new, but gives the perspective I think most who are disgusted with the FO are seeing this from.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

If you believe that the Redskins owner and Front office is terrible and that Snyder and Allen are really bad people then WHY would you ever root for this team again??? I don't get it..pages of post saying really bad stuff about Snyder and Allen and yet the same folks still follow the team..why not just find another team?? Snyder is not selling the team so to have that much hatred towards the man..there is no way I could root for anybody that I could not stand. Some of you hate him more than the Cowboys..or at least that is what it appears.Or are you guys jest venting frustration ?? I am confused because even though I don't like every move they make IF i detested Snyder then I would never pull for the team again.. The whole Scott deal is unfortunate I have heard/read lots of different takes on it and To be honest I don't trust the media to tell it straight..so what really happened? Did Allen back stab Scott because of EGO then blame it on his drinking??? then Snyder backs it up? IF that is truth then why would any of us want to root for this team( to root for Skins you root for Snyder)..SO which is it..are The REDSKINS a horrible franchise run by terrible people ..or is the media piling on and some fans just frustrated..because I can't pull for a team that does the things some are saying the Skins are doing..help me decide!!

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

^^^
I don't dislike Snider. I wish he did things better. I do dislike Allen because he seems like such a weasley shithead. I've been a fan of this team my whole life. Can't just throw that away because I don't like 1 of the employees. And just because I don't like him, doesn't mean I don't want him to be successful. I hope they nail all 10 picks. But even if they do, my impression of him doesn't change.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

I hate Donald Trump but I don't hate America

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1167989]Who is defending the team?? I feel like we're talking in circles.

Nobody in the last five pages has defended the team. They're indefensible.

I think what you're taking as defending the team is really just several posters who are the types that look forward, not backward. I'm like that myself. Bruce Allen is a piece of shit, but McCloughan is gone, history, spilled milk. I don't cry over it. I'm more interested in what happens next with Cousins, who runs our draft board, and who gets the next GM job.[/quote]

Don't take it personally but I feel Matt has defended the team as getting rid of a drunk who let his personal life interfere with his professional life. Whereas I feel that's not the case. It seems to me that Bruce couldn't be happy with Scot getting most of the credit for the turnaround job.

It also seems fair to think that if this was a model franchise, Scot would've had his role reduced as much as possible going forward, and then would've been released after the draft. If it truly was the drinking affecting his work, they could've worked together to make a statement about Scot stepping away from the team to get his personal affairs in order. Or if it was a case of Scot and Bruce not seeing eye to eye, announce that working together wasn't going the way they had planned it and it was best for both sides to seperate. I'd be upset but I wouldn't be nearly as upset as I am now.

As it stands now, the Redskins look like the same old shitshow we've come to know over the years. I don't care who they bring in, I have lost nearly all hope that things will ever change as long as Dan/Bruce run the show.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

That's not my take at all.

I've said the team handled it as poorly as can be. The leaks are absolute bush league. Do I think McCloughan has a drinking problem? Yeah I think it's safe to say he does. Anyone denying that he's drinking is an absolute fool. By his own admission he never stopped, and it seems to be pretty common knowledge among players and reporters that he is a functioning drunk. Was that the reason for him getting fired? Probably not, it's likely a convenient excuse when the real problem stems from a power struggle between Allen and McC, and there's probably a lot more to the situation that we'll never know about.

It was a messy situation with a messy ending. I really can't think of any way it could have been resolved amicably and left the fans feeling ok with it. I don't think it's a terrible thing that Allen and McCloughan couldn't find a way to make things work, shit happens, but the way the team handled it was horrible and pretty classless.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Well said. I'm with Matty. It's not that we're not appalled, it's maybe that we're used to being appalled, and more focused on what comes next.

I am not happy but I keep more of an even keel. We haven't lost any games yet because of this mess. If we go 9-7 it will be hard for me to come down on Bruce. That's really maybe the crux of why I'm not going off the rails.

The idea of losing Kirk though would be upsetting though because it's hard to see getting back to 8-8.