Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

There is a new saying :

The only constants in life are death, taxes and Redskin's Front Office dysfunction.

Honestly the latter keeps us very occupy on here; anyone on here that is truly really worked up about McC being fired probably needs to reevaluate their prioritizes in life.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SirLK26;1168287]Allow me to translate for those of you that dont speak Schneed:

"Yes you caught me bullshitting, it was my speculation that I was trying to pass off as obvious fact. Now Im gonna insult your intelligence in an attempt to not look like a pretentious jack ass." :laughing-[/quote]

No seriously, I find it unfathomably laughable that you think there's any possibility that Allen would have a problem with McC talking to a player about on field behavior if Gruden was OK with it.

Have you ever put any thought into why organizations set up their org charts the way they do? Because it comes across like you don't.

Gruden was absolutely not OK with that. It's not a question.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1168299]No seriously, I find it unfathomably laughable that you think there's any possibility that Allen would have a problem with McC talking to a player about on field behavior if Gruden was OK with it.

Have you ever put any thought into why organizations set up their org charts the way they do? Because it comes across like you don't.

Gruden was absolutely not OK with that. It's not a question.[/quote]

What is your job, Schneed, that you feel you are a subject matter expert? CEO? CFO? GM? I have a feeling that your no higher then like a shift supervisor.

I will preface my statement by saying that I am in a Executive level role and at least 50% of my job is navigating through interpersonal issues. I say that, not to condescend as you have been, but only to give some validity to my statements (unlike your own).

I do understand your point, and I will say that it is most likely that Someone from the coaching staff said something to Allen. That said, as an executive, I know that you can't make judgments on surface information, you need to know the whole story. Here are just a few possibilities, based on similar experiences I have had:

1. Who's the source here? Probably RJF. (I'm not assuming that by any means just exploring possibilities). The stories being told in the article are all surrounding players, and to me sound like they are from a players perspective. The perspective of players (front line employees in general) is especially helpful when exploring something directly related to their jobs, and often more valuable then an executive. When it comes to organizational politics etc, however, their view is very narrow. Everything they know is hearsay. They weren't in the meetings, they don't know confidential information, and they only have to think about a situation from one perspective: their own. I know of many situations where line level employees and especially ex-employees spout off at the mouth about situations that they know nothing about and actually say out right false things if not simply misinterpreted. So one possibility is this report is inaccurate.

2. Yes org charts are helpful, and delineated responsibilities clearly defined are too. But anyone that works in any organization can tell you that the lines are often blurred and when you have a trusting culture it can be incredibly valuable to have some overlap. So sticking to siloed responsibilities for the sake of it is just stupid. Communication is essential when responsibilities overlap, of course, so in this situation, yes Gruden would have to be on board. Who's to say he wasn't? I have seen situations in which higher level executives with egos that need to throw their weight around or are jealous of other's ability to work as a team have sought out unnecessary issues, including stepping out of roles even when it was accepted by everyone else involved. So, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Allen was picking unnecessary fights or was just putting Scot in his place, as it wer, for no other reason then because he could or maybe he was jealous. Is that effective leadership and management? No, you're right about that. No healthy organization runs this way . . . Are the redskins a healthy organization?

3. It could have been the players that complained to Allen, "how many people do I have to answer to and be lectured by here? I'm a grown man. I don't need 4 people telling me the same damn things."

These are all very real possibilities. I have seen these things play out in organizations. So, lets treat this article for what it is, hearsay. It doesn't really clarify much definitively. If you want to speculate, that's cool, we all do it, but don't insult others intelligence because they don't share your views, because honestly, it only makes you look like a moron.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1168299]No seriously, I find it unfathomably laughable that you think there's any possibility that Allen would have a problem with McC talking to a player about on field behavior if Gruden was OK with it.

Have you ever put any thought into why organizations set up their org charts the way they do? Because it comes across like you don't.

Gruden was absolutely not OK with that. It's not a question.[/quote]

Lets be clear, Im not definitively saying you're wrong. Im saying at this point its just speculation. Do you really have so much faith in Allen(the guy that lied to Scot about how much power he'd have when he signed on, falsely accused him of various things, smeared his name in league circles, and is according to some hated across the league)that the only reason he disliked Scots handling of players could be because Jay disliked it? You're absolutely certain that Jay wasnt okay with it and that Bruce couldnt have disliked it himself for some other reason? And this based on an article that mentions Jays name once in a throwaway sentence? Thats some serious tunnel vision

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

I come from an HR background. My experience in organizational structure says that what Schneed has said is true. I am familiar with organizational structure, and flowcharts, etc..

It seems to me that Scott M overstepped his role by getting directly involved with the players. I have a feeling that it was not a one time incident, but rather several things that Scott did on his own, that i think Allen / Gruden were not aware / ok with.

In terms of Organizational flow - If Scott M reported to Allen, then nothing that he does in his day to day operations should be done without Allen either knowing about it or being okay with it. Anything outside that line of what Bruce / Jay are ok with him doing is grounds for reprimanding, and if that kind of thing continues, it is grounds for termination.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;1168305]I come from an HR background. My experience in organizational structure says that what Schneed has said is true. I am familiar with organizational structure, and flowcharts, etc..

It seems to me that Scott M overstepped his role by getting directly involved with the players. I have a feeling that it was not a one time incident, but rather several things that Scott did on his own, that i think Allen / Gruden were not aware / ok with.

In terms of Organizational flow - If Scott M reported to Allen, then nothing that he does in his day to day operations should be done without Allen either knowing about it or being okay with it. Anything outside that line of what Bruce / Jay are ok with him doing is grounds for reprimanding, and if that kind of thing continues, it is grounds for termination.[/quote]

Okay, lets assume you're right and Jay didn't like it. Follow that further back, why was Scot brought here in the first place when the people doing the hiring surely knew the GM and head coach would have such fundamental differences on how a team should be run?

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SirLK26;1168306]Okay, lets assume you're right and Jay didn't like it. Follow that further back, why was Scot brought here in the first place when the people doing the hiring surely knew the GM and head coach would have such fundamental differences on how a team should be run?[/quote]

Nobody said Allen was good at his job.

Regardless, McC tried to coach the player. Pulling a player aside to discuss on field conduct is coaching. That's not what he was hired for.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Think about this..We all love the redskins and yet here we are arguing over who did what..point is as long as you have 2 people you have the possibility of conflict..its part of life..New england,and other top teams also have issues we just don't hear about it..those teams handle it in house and don't have employees/players leaking this to media.. remember Brown putting Coach Tomlins locker room speech out on media?? that sounds like Skins stuff but funny how that got shut down real quick.for whatever reason the beat writers for the Skins actually hate the team and take every opportunity to make this team look bad..it could be hate towards Snyder but we never catch a break.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=WillH;1168303]What is your job, Schneed, that you feel you are a subject matter expert? CEO? CFO? GM? I have a feeling that your no higher then like a shift supervisor.

I will preface my statement by saying that I am in a Executive level role and at least 50% of my job is navigating through interpersonal issues. I say that, not to condescend as you have been, but only to give some validity to my statements (unlike your own).

I do understand your point, and I will say that it is most likely that Someone from the coaching staff said something to Allen. That said, as an executive, I know that you can't make judgments on surface information, you need to know the whole story. Here are just a few possibilities, based on similar experiences I have had:

1. Who's the source here? Probably RJF. (I'm not assuming that by any means just exploring possibilities). The stories being told in the article are all surrounding players, and to me sound like they are from a players perspective. The perspective of players (front line employees in general) is especially helpful when exploring something directly related to their jobs, and often more valuable then an executive. When it comes to organizational politics etc, however, their view is very narrow. Everything they know is hearsay. They weren't in the meetings, they don't know confidential information, and they only have to think about a situation from one perspective: their own. I know of many situations where line level employees and especially ex-employees spout off at the mouth about situations that they know nothing about and actually say out right false things if not simply misinterpreted. So one possibility is this report is inaccurate.

2. Yes org charts are helpful, and delineated responsibilities clearly defined are too. But anyone that works in any organization can tell you that the lines are often blurred and when you have a trusting culture it can be incredibly valuable to have some overlap. So sticking to siloed responsibilities for the sake of it is just stupid. Communication is essential when responsibilities overlap, of course, so in this situation, yes Gruden would have to be on board. Who's to say he wasn't? I have seen situations in which higher level executives with egos that need to throw their weight around or are jealous of other's ability to work as a team have sought out unnecessary issues, including stepping out of roles even when it was accepted by everyone else involved. So, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Allen was picking unnecessary fights or was just putting Scot in his place, as it wer, for no other reason then because he could or maybe he was jealous. Is that effective leadership and management? No, you're right about that. No healthy organization runs this way . . . Are the redskins a healthy organization?

3. It could have been the players that complained to Allen, "how many people do I have to answer to and be lectured by here? I'm a grown man. I don't need 4 people telling me the same damn things."

These are all very real possibilities. I have seen these things play out in organizations. So, lets treat this article for what it is, hearsay. It doesn't really clarify much definitively. If you want to speculate, that's cool, we all do it, but don't insult others intelligence because they don't share your views, because honestly, it only makes you look like a moron.[/quote]

Your feeling is wrong.

Honestly I couldn't get through your whole post. Too long. But I caught snippets.

If you think Gruden would have been OK with McC pulling a player aside then you don't know Jay very well. I'm not saying I've met him, to be clear I am saying I have a way better read on him than you do.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=rocnrik;1168310]Think about this..We all love the redskins and yet here we are arguing over who did what..point is as long as you have 2 people you have the possibility of conflict..its part of life..New england,and other top teams also have issues we just don't hear about it..those teams handle it in house and don't have employees/players leaking this to media.. remember Brown putting Coach Tomlins locker room speech out on media?? that sounds like Skins stuff but funny how that got shut down real quick.for whatever reason the beat writers for the Skins actually hate the team and take every opportunity to make this team look bad..it could be hate towards Snyder but we never catch a break.[/quote]

I don't think media has an agenda so much, I think more so it's just that winning cures all ills. It becomes easier to dismiss the Brown Tomlin thing when the team consistently makes the playoffs.

We have been a losing organization by and large for 20+ years. It opens the door to a lot of garbage writing and garbage thinking concluding that every step you take has been a mistake. So now every error is magnified because we lack the credibility of winning pedigree to counter the argument.

All the more reason to sign Cousins. Nothing like a legitimate QB to turn you into a consistently competitive team.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

I agree with Schneed....go back to Gruden's comments at the end of the year ....

"we've had two first rounds picks since I've been here...one of them hasn't played a down and the other is a Guard"

Nope, no problem there!

I believe Bruce is the tie breaker...Gruden got extended & McLoughan is gone.
The Tie has been broken.

"Saint Scot" will be fine & I'm sure he was well paid for his services.

Time to move on people.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;1168305]I come from an HR background. My experience in organizational structure says that what Schneed has said is true. I am familiar with organizational structure, and flowcharts, etc..

It seems to me that Scott M overstepped his role by getting directly involved with the players. I have a feeling that it was not a one time incident, but rather several things that Scott did on his own, that i think Allen / Gruden were not aware / ok with.

In terms of Organizational flow - If Scott M reported to Allen, then nothing that he does in his day to day operations should be done without Allen either knowing about it or being okay with it. Anything outside that line of what Bruce / Jay are ok with him doing is grounds for reprimanding, and if that kind of thing continues, it is grounds for termination.[/quote]

I don't disagree that Gruden being the one to dislike him stepping out of bounds is one logical conclusion, and let's say, based on this article, the only logical conclusion. Without knowing the source of this information, do you really believe it true when Schneed calls someone a moron for reserving judgment?

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=WillH;1168314]I don't disagree that Gruden being the one to dislike him stepping out of bounds is one logical conclusion, and let's say, based on this article, the only logical conclusion. Without knowing the source of this information, do you really believe it true when Schneed calls someone a moron for reserving judgment?[/quote]

For someone to reserve judgment, I would say you either don't know how leadership works, or you don't understand Jay Gruden's personality type.

Either your thinking is limited or your knowledge of your team/coach is limited.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1168315]For someone to reserve judgment, I would say you either don't know how leadership works, or you don't understand Jay Gruden's personality type.

Either your thinking is limited or your knowledge of your team/coach is limited.[/quote]

I don't claim to have some close understanding of our coaches personality types. That is impressive that you do, may I ask how?

I find reserving judgement until I know the full story from all sides is a vital part of leadership. That you don't is more reason to not give credence to your perspective honestly.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Bangee7;1168313]I agree with Schneed....go back to Gruden's comments at the end of the year ....

"we've had two first rounds picks since I've been here...one of them hasn't played a down and the other is a Guard"

Nope, no problem there!

I believe Bruce is the tie breaker...Gruden got extended & McLoughan is gone.
The Tie has been broken.

"Saint Scot" will be fine & I'm sure he was well paid for his services.

Time to move on people.[/quote]

Exactly. And I saw that press conference as it was streamed by the team. He didn't just say those words, he said it with a slight hand flip, shrug, and eye roll. It was painfully obvious that he has a beef with the way McC did his job.

Using that comment, can you draw the definitive conclusion that Gruden was pissed about McC speaking to a player about on field conduct? Not on that comment alone, but it's yet another sign of many that Gruden has a strong vision, has a clear understanding of roles, and has a strong understanding of what it takes to win. He's not patient - he doesn't want to hear that a guard picked high is the way to win in the NFL.

When you put it all together, if you know anything about reading people and their personality types, it's easy to see that if you get in Jay Gruden's kitchen he's going to chase you out like a junkyard dog.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Bangee7;1168313]I agree with Schneed....go back to Gruden's comments at the end of the year ....

"we've had two first rounds picks since I've been here...one of them hasn't played a down and the other is a Guard"

Nope, no problem there!

I believe Bruce is the tie breaker...Gruden got extended & McLoughan is gone.
The Tie has been broken.

"Saint Scot" will be fine & I'm sure he was well paid for his services.

Time to move on people.[/quote]

I forgot about that. I feel like he's said something else earlier in the season that raised eyebrows.

And Cousins did yell in Scots face.

He really may have just not been a good fit.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=WillH;1168316]I don't claim to have some close understanding of our coaches personality types. That is impressive that you do, may I ask how?

I find reserving judgement until I know the full story from all sides is a vital part of leadership. That you don't is more reason to not give credence to your perspective honestly.[/quote]

When you hire somebody and you've determined that the resume is sufficient that you think it's worth your time to interview an applicant, do you gain access to the whole story on that person, or do you get an hour to size them up and a few reference phone calls?

You have to read them, assess personality, disposition, fit, and make a call. I'm exceptionally talented at it.

Dismiss it if you want but I've got a read on Gruden. Very confident in my assessment.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1168317]Exactly. And I saw that press conference as it was streamed by the team. He didn't just say those words, he said it with a slight hand flip, shrug, and eye roll. It was painfully obvious that he has a beef with the way McC did his job.

Using that comment, can you draw the definitive conclusion that Gruden was pissed about McC speaking to a player about on field conduct? Not on that comment alone, but it's yet another sign of many that Gruden has a strong vision, has a clear understanding of roles, and has a strong understanding of what it takes to win. He's not patient - he doesn't want to hear that a guard picked highbis the way to win in the NFL.

When you put it all together, if you know anything about reading people and their personality types, it's easy to see that if you get in Jay Gruden's kitchen he's going to chase you out like a junkyard dog.[/quote]

This is the last I'll say, but this is really what I am reacting too. Bangers input was informative and intriguing. He didn't act like a dick and talk down to people.
This post of yours was going well and then you throw in "if you know anything about..." I mean is that really necessary? Be helpful and give valuable arguments that contribute to the collective understanding. Your opinion can be valid without you being critical and insulting or patting yourself on the back.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=WillH;1168320]This is the last I'll say, but this is really what I am reacting too. Bangers input was informative and intriguing. He didn't act like a dick and talk down to people.
This post of yours was going well and then you throw in "if you know anything about..." I mean is that really necessary? Be helpful and give valuable arguments that contribute to the collective understanding. Your opinion can be valid without you being critical and insulting or patting yourself on the back.[/quote]

My opinion is always valid. Sorry you're not a fan of my delivery. Your thinking is strong and you should post more.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1168321]My opinion is always valid. Sorry you're not a fan of my delivery. Your thinking is strong and you should post more.[/quote]

Fair enough. Thanks!

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SirLK26;1168306]Okay, lets assume you're right and Jay didn't like it. Follow that further back, why was Scot brought here in the first place when the people doing the hiring surely knew the GM and head coach would have such fundamental differences on how a team should be run?[/quote]

The only answer that I can possibly give is that in any hiring process, there are positive and negative attributes / traits to every candidate interviewed.

My first guess would be that there was obviously more "good attributes" about Scot (Draft strategy, player evaluation, etc...), than there was bad (His seattle "see something-do something" mentality". And perhaps they thought that Scot would operate within the bounds of his authority.

The person you hire has to fit the job description / duties. You can't make the job fit the person. I think in the end, to Bruce Allen and company, Scot did not fit what they wanted. And nobody ever said that Bruce Allen was particularly good at his job. What he is good at is being a Dan Snyder yes man, which is something that I feel Dan has always needed even going back to the Vinny Days. Every owner in any business wants someone like that to a certain degree.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Bangee7;1168313]I agree with Schneed....go back to Gruden's comments at the end of the year ....

"we've had two first rounds picks since I've been here...one of them hasn't played a down and the other is a Guard"

Nope, no problem there!

I believe Bruce is the tie breaker...Gruden got extended & McLoughan is gone.
The Tie has been broken.

"Saint Scot" will be fine & I'm sure he was well paid for his services.

Time to move on people.[/quote]




This.

What seemed like a throw away line at the end of the season is the only real evidence of a problem I have seen. And, in spite of some of the acrimony, this has been a fun and interesting off season thread to follow. I do come out of all this believing that Scot was not the saint and savior some might have thought he was, while Gruden may well be a better and certainly stronger coach than many believed he would be. Funny how that works.

But George Allen's favorite son is still the dope we thought he was. But who knows, he may well be a needed buffer from Dan Snyder. And that's important as well. Hope we hire the right man to be our next quasi GM.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Bangee7;1168313]I agree with Schneed....go back to Gruden's comments at the end of the year ....

"we've had two first rounds picks since I've been here...one of them hasn't played a down and the other is a Guard"

Nope, no problem there!

I believe Bruce is the tie breaker...Gruden got extended & McLoughan is gone.
The Tie has been broken.

"Saint Scot" will be fine & I'm sure he was well paid for his services.

Time to move on people.[/quote]

From the same press conference FWIW:


"I feel fine. I feel good about it. I think we make Redskin decisions around here of what's best for this football team. I don't think it's Scot, I don't think it's Bruce [Allen], I don't think it's just me. I think together we make decisions and I feel really good about that. I think he listens to my input and I listen to his. Ultimately, who has the final say really doesn't matter because we're all on the same page for the most part. Any time you have a lot of people making decisions, it's very important to be on the same page and be together. When the decisions are made, it doesn't matter who makes them - we're all in and have got to do the best we can with them."

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

I still say and I said it at the time as well: When KC went up to McC and ruffled his hair after the GB game there was something more to that then just casual banter.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mredskins;1168332]I still say and I said it at the time as well: When KC went up to McC and ruffled his hair after the GB game there was something more to that then just casual banter.[/quote]

You make an interesting point. There is never any shortage of articles writing about our ineptitude or how bad things are. Lots of articles said specifically that Scott M was the one who wanted to sign Cousins, while Snyder and Allen was staunchly against it.

Then there was that report last week that said one of the final straws was McCloughan wanting to trade Cousins.

WHAT IF it was all BS and Allen wanted to sign Cousins since last summer but they just couldn't get the numbers right? Then sometime after Cousins catches wind of Scott M wanting to trade him, so he angrily goes up to Scott M after the Green Bay game and we have the whole "how you like me now" moment. My wife also said while watching the game that Cousins was obviously pissed and it definitely wasn't playful banter...

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mredskins;1168332]I still say and I said it at the time as well: When KC went up to McC and ruffled his hair after the GB game there was something more to that then just casual banter.[/quote]

According to Mike Jones, McC views Kirks ceiling as somewhere less than elite. Of course Kirk doesnt like that, was feeling a little emotional after that great game he'd just had and wanted to rub it in

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SirLK26;1168342]According to Mike Jones, McC views Kirks ceiling as somewhere less than elite. Of course Kirk doesnt like that, was feeling a little emotional after that great game he'd just had and wanted to rub it in[/quote]

The point is there is a mixed message of McC and KC. It has been portray that McC has been in KC's corner the whole time and BA/DS have been the ones not sold on him but when "I" put it all together in my head "I" believe they as a group (BA DS McC) were not the biggest believers in KC.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

As I have understood it: Snyder was still pissed about the RG3 situation and not ready in any way to commit to Kirk; Allen echoed Snyder's thoughts; Gruden thought they should lock in Cousins and move on to other things with a QB in place, but he wasn't going to push it hard and McC wanted to lock in Kirk to give him flexibility. Meaning maybe you have a QB to build your team around or maybe you have a QB at a "relatively" low price that can be moved more easily.

All these incidents reported in Breer's piece didn't seem like so big a deal when I first heard about them in recent weeks. But at the core of it I think is just that Scot had no real say, or at least felt like he didn't. Couldn't add his own guys to the front office and couldn't instill his "football culture"

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Bangee7;1168313]I agree with Schneed....go back to Gruden's comments at the end of the year ....

"we've had two first rounds picks since I've been here...one of them hasn't played a down and the other is a Guard"

Nope, no problem there!

I believe Bruce is the tie breaker...Gruden got extended & McLoughan is gone.
The Tie has been broken.

"Saint Scot" will be fine & I'm sure he was well paid for his services.

Time to move on people.[/quote]

I'm surprised that some people in the sports media haven't made a big deal out of this. I guess it is easier for the masses to blame everything on Snyder or Allen, however, I still feel that this was some type of power struggle between Gruden and McCloughan where Jay got the upper hand.

This reminds me of that time in San Diego, when there was a power struggle between Marty Sch. and AJ Smith, where the ownership sided with Smith and canned Marty.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mredskins;1168343]The point is there is a mixed message of McC and KC. It has been portray that McC has been in KC's corner the whole time and BA/DS have been the ones not sold on him but when "I" put it all together in my head "I" believe they as a group (BA DS McC) were not the biggest believers in KC.[/quote]

I dont know about Dan but as far as Bruce, Scot, and Jay go here's the way I understand it: Bruce absolutely did not want to pay Kirk, Scot wanted to but had limits based on how he viewed Kirks ceiling, and Jay just wanted Kirk locked up no matter the cost. This was in 2015 according to Mike Jones(sorry to keep going back to him but that interview on 980 was gold)...

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Bangee7;1168313]I agree with Schneed....go back to Gruden's comments at the end of the year ....

"we've had two first rounds picks since I've been here...one of them hasn't played a down and the other is a Guard"

Nope, no problem there!

I believe Bruce is the tie breaker...Gruden got extended & McLoughan is gone.
The Tie has been broken.

"Saint Scot" will be fine & I'm sure he was well paid for his services.

Time to move on people.[/quote]

Those comments were very telling. But I agree, it's time to move on, and that includes the Redskins too. When Larry Michael goes on his stupid show and starts comparing draft picks that shows me how petty the Redskins front office really is. Just childish bullshit.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

A. I like Gruden, but him complaining about picking Scherff is plain stupid, if that's in fact what that comment actually was. He is a great player, a pro bowler. You win games with good football players.

B. The situation in the front office seemed like Gruden, Allen, and SM were playing musical chairs and Snyder was the DJ. When the music stopped there was no chair for SM.

C. My preference would have been to keep Gruden and SM and get rid of Allen. But it is what it is. We have a good draft and Doctson is healthy we should be really competitive next year.

D. This thread the last few pages looks like drunk Allen and SM mud wrestling. Geez louise. We're all on the same side here.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=Ruhskins;1168345]I'm surprised that some people in the sports media haven't made a big deal out of this. I guess it is easier for the masses to blame everything on Snyder or Allen, however, I still feel that this was some type of power struggle between Gruden and McCloughan where Jay got the upper hand.

This reminds me of that time in San Diego, when there was a power struggle between Marty Sch. and AJ Smith, where the ownership sided with Smith and canned Marty.[/quote]

I think when you look around the NFL, it should sort of serve as a cautionary tale anytime that ownership directly gets involved and takes decisions away from the "Football people" like Coaches, GM's, etc.. I think it usually doesn't end up for the best, unfortunately.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Gruden ready wasn't the issue and didn't have a problem with Scot. It was Allen

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1168385]Gruden ready wasn't the issue and didn't have a problem with Scot. It was Allen[/quote]

A weasels gonna weasel.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

Geez move on already! The deed has been done. The only lesson to be learned is that nothing has really changed at Redskins Park.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=FlyerSkin;1168387]Geez move on already! The deed has been done. The only lesson to be learned is that nothing has really changed at Redskins Park.[/quote]

Change, improvement, and personal growth are overrated anyways. It's all about consistency, even if it's shitty consistency. That's the front office motto.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1168388]Change, improvement, and personal growth are overrated anyways. It's all about consistency, even if it's shitty consistency. That's the front office motto.[/quote]

Chaos reigns supreme at Redskins Park, it is Snyder's philosophy. The chaos stems from the fact that if people try to build a winner the right way and step on th ownership's toes they are gone. So you are right, there is a consistency there. It is getting old.

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1168385]Gruden ready wasn't the issue and didn't have a problem with Scot. It was Allen[/quote]

What the? I thought Gruden had a blood feud with McC trying to coach up his players?

Re: Trouble in Redskins Park?
 

[quote=mooby;1168390]What the? I thought Gruden had a blood feud with McC trying to coach up his players?[/quote]

Lol...

Folks, it's clear as day. Bruce and Dan are the continuing issue and nothing really hasn't changed since day one. Dan will continue meddle, Bruce will continue to be a power hunger troll...these 2 are tied at the hip.

Only hope is that Jay can lead this team the best he can and we can get a long term deal with cousins.