If Okogie was having a consensual relationship with Rosas' in the office girlfriend he'd still be on the team. Happens all the time with professional athletes.Your argument is that an average WR on an NFL team has more leverage than the Head Coach who also had the final say in all of the personnel decisions? LOL. That's really your argument? The argument should really just end right there. But here we go. . .
(1) If Gruden wanted to cut Ruggs, he would have had the authority to do it. He might have pissed off the ownership but it was part of his contract. There isn't a universe where Ruggs had any method to fire Jon Gruden. None. It's not possible.
(2) As to your point about the "cause" argument, you actually completely missed the point. I wasn't arguing that it would have been expensive to fire Gruden given the circumstances (nor would it be expensive to "fire" Ruggs), I'm using the contract as evidence of the enormous investment the Raiders put into Gruden. They gave him (allegedly) $100 million with the the final say on all personnel decisions. The keys to the "kingdom". Henry Ruggs was an ok receiver. The difference is so vast in terms of leverage within the organization, you have to be the only person on planet earth dumb enough to even begin to argue it. It's a horrible take.
(3) You're doing this really strange stuff of comparing years of contracts. It's weird. You're like a little kid scribbling on paper pretending to work. The point isn't about the years, it's about who has the authority, investment, and power. Just because you're in that position, doesn't mean that you're going to last at a place longer.
- Here is an example, the Wolves GM was just canned for a bunch of different nefarious things. Before canning him, the Wolves conducted an investigation and did a bunch of due diligence because canning your GM is a big deal. Now, had the Wolves had similar issues with Josh Okogie, Okogie would have been shipped out of town without even blinking. Gone. The mere fact that Okogie is still on the Wolves and the GM is not is absolutely not evidence that he had more leverage.
Leverage is about power, value and control. Gruden didn't last much longer with the Raiders for a few stupid emails and pictures than Ruggs did for killing somebody.
I never said that it was expensive to fire Gruden. I said that we don't really know what was in Gruden's contract. We don't know any of the particulars. The devil is always in the details. The fact that he was gone so quickly probably means that he had less power, control and value than the public was led to believe. You shouldn't use the contract as evidence of anything without knowing what's in it. That's 1L stuff, Board Barrister.
Players and owners have the most amount of leverage in any sports franchise. With rare exceptions, coaches and managers have the least. It's not hard to figure out. A coach who is 22-31 is not worth you trying to prove that you know what you are talking about when you don't.