John Gruden Firing

[DDTSGM]

This might be more appropriate in the political subforum. I'll let the 'mods are great but the servers aren't for shit' guys decide.

Prelude: I taught Hate-Bias Crimes to new recruits at our academy. Part and parcel of that instruction was that it wasn't illegal to harbor bad thoughts about folks, what was illegal was to act on those thoughts.

With that thought in mind, I don't know what to think of John Gruden's firing.

I never cared for Gruden at any point in his career, but nonetheless, being fired for emails that were meant for no other eyes than the receiving party's doesn't seem kosher. I don't watch the NFL beyond Chief's games with my wife, so I'm not a big fan, but I was watching the halftime show when Gruden's former broadcast partner, Mike Tirico, said that he had spent several days a week for numerous years with John Gruden and that he wasn't a racist. Seems that if Gruden's thoughts were indeed those of a racist, he never acted/displayed them to Tirico.

https://larrybrownsports.com/footbal...-matter/585273

And when you look at the content of the messages themselves, they seem more the rantings of an immature 13 year-old (which is why I never cared for Gruden in the first place) than an Imperial Wizard.

It was up to the recipients of those emails to reply to Gruden - what makes you think I would welcome such a characterization?' - or make an more public issue of the email at the time. I don't believe any did.

As some of you know, I have a bi-racial daughter, and have done foster care for black kids. I've confronted racist remarks or actions on several occasions over the years, both as a parent and as a police officer.

Given that, I hope what is the fair play guy in my character requires me to say that I think Gruden is getting a bum deal.

Man, I hate it when I feel compelled to stick up for folks I don't agree with, or even care for.

[blues]

Sticking up for the rights of those we don't agree with or care for is what puts shine on the badge, imho, Dan...on or off the job...and into retirement.

I've tried to live by that standard all of my life...and am fully aware that but for the grace of God, there go I. I have made more than my share of off-color remarks by any standard of measure and I don't believe it reflects anything more than being a product of my time, environment and overall culture...sexist, racist, whatever. I have no hatred in my heart for any group...but I do harbor bad feelings for individuals.

I couldn't stand up to the scrutiny and trial by internet, despite the fact that I've stood up in court and took the side of defendants, regardless of race or ethnicity, who were, in my view, getting a raw deal by the U.S. Attorney's Office.

So, which is the real me? The guy who stood up? Or the guy who made an off-color remark, joke, or epithet?

He may be a douche, I don't know...but I don't think there's a single one of us who has been an adult for some time that can pass what the SJW's want to impose as the litmus test to determine the basis of our character.

[TheNewbie]

Even the Church isn’t this unforgiving. The religion of secular Leftism is the most dangerous of all.

[blues]

"A rabbi, a priest and a swami walk into a bar...oh, wait...is this being recorded?"

[jh9]

For those of us not playing the home game:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...maurice-smith/

“Dumboriss [sic] Smith has lips the size of michellin [sic] tires,” Gruden wrote in the email, per the report.

First few links were being coy about what these emails contain. One is "an expletive". The other was quoted above. I was expecting a bunch of n-bombs, but that's still not a great look. 2011 was well into the realm of "google/facebook/etc keep your data forever" and "you know maybe casual racism can get you fired".

Apocryphal quotes by Cardinal Richelieu notwithstanding, if you point a microscope at anyone you'll find something objectionable. But rageposting about a black dude's lip size should have probably seemed like something to maybe not put out there in writing...even in 2011. There's demanding perfection and then there's simple accountability. That it's retroactive can suck if you're on the receiving end of it. It's probably pretty satisfying for someone who's had to deal with that bullshit for a lifetime.

The ethics of putting someone under a microscope retroactively are not a solved problem and probably won't be for awhile. I doubt we'll see anything like a "statute of limitations" for being tried in the court of public opinion. Which is unfortunate, because it exists in the legal world for what I think most people would agree is a good reason. Until then, all it takes is for someone to hold a grudge as long as Google holds your email: indefinitely.

I think the real question is, if he had been fired in 2011 for saying that would anyone here have batted an eye? If not, then why now?

[peterb]

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/10/12/jo...r-nfl-business

SI’s take is that Gruden is getting the focus so Dan Snyder doesn’t.

Regardless of how anyone else thinks about it, he’s probably lost the trust of his players. Once that happens there’s no way he can be an effective coach. That’s enough reason to send him down the road.

[blues]

Regardless of how anyone else thinks about it, he’s probably lost the trust of his players. Once that happens there’s no way he can be an effective coach. That’s enough reason to send him down the road.

I don't disagree...and look forward to the day that the same standard is enforced for all...white, black, male, female, trans, gay, bi whatever. I'm sure I'm missing a few categories.

[eb07]

Cancel culture. Woke America.

[jetfire]

Important notes: the email hit Thursday or Friday, Gruden apologized and coached the Sunday's game. Then more emails came to light, several of which were extremely critical of Roger Goodell, the current NFL commissioner. Suddenly, there's external pressure on the Raiders to force Gruden to resign, lest they lose things like a scheduled SB bid for their home stadium, as an example.

Emperor Goodell does not allow dissent.

[jh9]

Important notes: the email hit Thursday or Friday, Gruden apologized and coached the Sunday's game. Then more emails came to light, several of which were extremely critical of Roger Goodell, the current NFL commissioner. Suddenly, there's external pressure on the Raiders to force Gruden to resign, lest they lose things like a scheduled SB bid for their home stadium, as an example.

Emperor Goodell does not allow dissent.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/10/12/jo...r-nfl-business

SI’s take is that Gruden is getting the focus so Dan Snyder doesn’t.

Regardless of how anyone else thinks about it, he’s probably lost the trust of his players. Once that happens there’s no way he can be an effective coach. That’s enough reason to send him down the road.

The simplest explanation is usually the best. He gave someone a hammer 10 years ago. Thursday, he gave them a reason to use it.