Washington Redskins: Bruce Allen
www.redskins.com/.../bruce-allen/8b8b7f97-4020-...
**Note the dates of hire AND titles he was hired for.
dont care about the titles . shanny had control of the football operations
Washington Redskins: Bruce Allen
www.redskins.com/.../bruce-allen/8b8b7f97-4020-...
**Note the dates of hire AND titles he was hired for.
dont care about the titles . shanny had control of the football operations
You claimed this team is a mess off the field as well... and Bruce is the GM since 2009. So who do we blame for that stuff?
Starting to consider all options at this time since I am tired of rooting for a loser team almost every year. If - and only if - the Redskins could persuade a younger GM who worked for a successful organization to take control of this team I would be for it with one extra condition - also get rid of Gruden.
To date - Gruden has shown absolutely nothing to indicate that he is a competent head coach. It is not simply a matter of his record - everything about him as a coach is terrible. On a regular basis they are terrible at things that are indicative of coaching - penalties, turnovers, clock mgmt, miss assignments, locker room issues, etc, etc. At this pt the only thing that makes you believe that he could coach is his last name.
I agree that you should not fire a coach after one year & believe most likely he will be back. However - do you simply retain a coach on that basis? If you knew for a fact that your head coach was awful would you retain him regardless simply because of the "you can't fire a coach after one year" unwritten rule?
I am trying to find hope in Gruden or anyone else with this organization, but I am losing faith. Help me out here. Skinsdad - are your beliefs simply based on blind faith or do you actually see any promise with this team? Don't you sometimes think that hey my predictions/hopes/etc are the same ones that I stated 3, 5 or even 8 years ago? What leads anyone to believe that this organization will ever figure it out when you basically have the devil for an owner? Looking for a way to again find hope for this team.
I can't argue a word of this. He has shown nothing to date. But since we all agree that next year is a lost cause regardless I think you can do more harm than good by having another one and done coach. Now if the rift between management's preference to stick with Griff and the coach's desire to move on becomes a huge problem, now that's another story
Or why cant it be something more realistic like all dan really cares about is the head liner type players. He wasnt going to involve himself in the signing of a 3rd string QB or the drafting of a 6th round safety. thus Allen likely wasnt going to get involved, so odds are those truly were all on Mike good or bad. But the likelihood of Dan ( and thus Bruce) being heavily involved and in fact the driving force behind the RG3 trade sounds alot more realistic than saying a coach of 30+ years throws his ingrained habits straight the frak out the window and makes the kind of move that is totally against Character for a player that goes totally against anything he has ever wanted in a QB.
look you cant pick and choose bad things for person "X" and ignore the good things
for the record i dont think shanny is at fault here he did some good things but advocating that allen gets the full 3 years to actually do his job shouldnt be a huge issue
if shanny didnt exercise his contract rights that is on him
i believe all 3 wanted the guy and that they most likely missed on him and i may start a thread with my interpretation of what went down
i did that before didnt i ?
Im still wondering why people are so hell bent on absolving Dan and Bruce for the clusterfuck that is the current roster and in specific the trade and drafting of Griffin.
Are you serious? The jury is out on Allen & it is hard to tell for certain where his responsibilities lie both for the past offseason & the ones prior to that. That is something none of us know for sure.
However - in regards to Snyder - who is absolving this POS of anything? Do you actually know anyone (who is not related nor paid well by the guy) who likes him & doesn't consider him the root cause for just about everything that is wrong with the Redskins?
You need to get off your RG3 kick - there is plenty wrong with this organization that goes well beyond simply the QB position & that trade.
Are you serious? The jury is out on Allen & it is hard to tell for certain where his responsibilities lie both for the past offseason & the ones prior to that. That is something none of us know for sure.
However - in regards to Snyder - who is absolving this POS of anything? Do you actually know anyone (who is not related nor paid well by the guy) who likes him & doesn't consider him the root cause for just about everything that is wrong with the Redskins?
You need to get off your RG3 kick - there is plenty wrong with this organization that goes well beyond simply the QB position & that trade.
Gotta say I agree here. Dan Snyder is the root of all problems with this franchise. Was he behind the RG3 trade? Probably in some form. But lets remember who was in charge. Shanahan. And he was in full power mode at that time. The guy has a strong personality and I seriously doubt he could have been pressured into RG3 if he didn't agree with it on some level. Bruce had very little power or influence at that time. I guess I still don't understand why we need to manufacture issues for Bruce. There are real concerns about his abilities as GM without trying to rewrite history and blame talent acquisition on him during the Shanahan tenure. Every player taken or signed during Mike's stretch here was all him. There were some good and a bunch not so good, but Mike had final say on every one. The guy is just too much of a control freak to believe it was any other way.
Believing anything else leaves open two possibilities no one really wants to accept.
1. Bruce is just a puppet for Dan
2. It just feels more comforting to blame it all on the guy who is gone. Because if Mike wasnt really as in control as many hope, then it means the root of the problem not only still exists, but it has grown deeper and managed to hide in plain sight.
Why are those the only 2 possibilities? Why couldn't it be true that Mike had final say on all talent acquisition, Bruce was (and probably still is) just a puppet for Dan, and Dan is the root of all problems because of the overriding negative culture and meddling he has instituted? Not everything (in fact usually nothing) is black and white. Its usually a blend. There is no one that is blameless in the debacle called the shanahan era. Don't see how you can try and pin it on one guy. My only point, and I believe this is echoed by others, is that while shanhan was here, he had final say on all talent. Bruce had very little influence. Dan probably tried, and may have to some extent, to meddle in Shanahan's affairs. But I seriously doubt he ever convinced Mike to do something he was against.
As has been reported, its not really true that Bruce had very little influence. Its been reported that Bruce not only preferred to make the trade for RGIII, that Shanny was initially opposed to paying that price, but that Bruce persisted in "influencing" Shanny to make the trade for RGIII. If those reports are to be believed, and only the Ostrich's among us would simply blow the reports off entirely, then Bruce not only had significant influence on Shanny, he actually got his way over Shanny's objections on the biggest transaction the club has made in the last several decades.