Las Vegas Raiders WR Henry Ruggs to be charged with DUI resulting in death

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
22,999
Reaction score
3,091
Points
113
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.
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.

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.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
14,957
Reaction score
5,218
Points
113
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.

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.
Your first sentence has no meaning. If Okogie was having a consensual relationship with someone who reports to him (NO ONE REPORTS TO HIM) and then expels another person who reports to him (NO ONE REPORTS TO HIM) because he found out. He'd be cut. Tons of players get waived for simply butting heads with coaches.

"Leverage is about power, value, and control". Yes. Gruden had more power, value and control. He was the HC. He made all of the personnel decisions. Are you really arguing that an average player has more power, value, and control than the HC / GM?

As to the bit about Gruden not lasting much longer than Ruggs, that's precisely the point I believe you're missing. Even someone with clearly more leverage than Ruggs was canned almost as fast for being a "bigot".

I can understand arguing that they both should have been fired and they both were, so there isn't any hypocrisy. I never thought anyone would take the position that Ruggs actually had more control, power, and value to the Raiders than Jon Gruden. But hey, I guess we can agree to disagree.
 

Unregistered User

Wild animal with a keyboard
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
12,684
Reaction score
1,586
Points
113
WTF.... Just about impossible to get behind this damn team and stick with it. Gotta hand it to lifelong Raiders fans. I almost bought a Ruggs jersey for the games too but went with Josh Jacobs instead.
Wow…just fucking wow!

A life taken and you’re happy you didn’t buy the wrong jersey.

And then I read the rest of your comments, and I’m just gob-smacked. Clueless.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
11,611
Reaction score
3,379
Points
113
Wow…just fucking wow!

A life taken and you’re happy you didn’t buy the wrong jersey.

And then I read the rest of your comments, and I’m just gob-smacked. Clueless.
It's important that you took the time to share your feelings about this with the board. We're all better off for it. God Bless You
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
22,999
Reaction score
3,091
Points
113
Your first sentence has no meaning. If Okogie was having a consensual relationship with someone who reports to him (NO ONE REPORTS TO HIM) and then expels another person who reports to him (NO ONE REPORTS TO HIM) because he found out. He'd be cut. Tons of players get waived for simply butting heads with coaches.

"Leverage is about power, value, and control". Yes. Gruden had more power, value and control. He was the HC. He made all of the personnel decisions. Are you really arguing that an average player has more power, value, and control than the HC / GM?

As to the bit about Gruden not lasting much longer than Ruggs, that's precisely the point I believe you're missing. Even someone with clearly more leverage than Ruggs was canned almost as fast for being a "bigot".

I can understand arguing that they both should have been fired and they both were, so there isn't any hypocrisy. I never thought anyone would take the position that Ruggs actually had more control, power, and value to the Raiders than Jon Gruden. But hey, I guess we can agree to disagree.
If Suggs was average (never heard of of him until he drove 156mph), I guess he had more leverage than Gruden because Jon got the boot and he didn't--at least until he killed somebody.

As long as you brought up Okogie (not sure why--NBA contracts are fully guaranteed), Rosas' girlfriend didn't report to him. Additionally, you are trying to flip back and forth between the NBA and the NFL and it's not working. Players who butt heads with coaches in the NBA usually don't get tossed. In the NFL it certainly happens, unless the player has more value than the coach. Ruggs, who didn't produce much, outlasted Gruden. They fired him when he killed somebody. They fired Gruden for stupid emails. If he was 31-22 and had won instead of lost two in a row, they would have figured out a way to keep hm.

The rest of your points are distortions of my comments.
 
Last edited:


Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
14,957
Reaction score
5,218
Points
113
If Suggs was average (never heard of of him until he drove 156mph), I guess he had more leverage than Gruden because Jon got the boot and he didn't--at least until he killed somebody.

As long as you brought up Okogie (not sure why--NBA contracts are fully guaranteed), Rosas' girlfriend didn't report to him. Additionally, you are trying to flip back and forth between the NBA and the NFL and it's not working. Players who butt heads with coaches in the NBA usually don't get tossed. In the NFL it certainly happens, unless the player has more value than the coach. Ruggs, who didn't produce much, outlasted Gruden. They fired him when he killed somebody. They fired Gruden for stupid emails. If he was 31-22 and had won instead of lost two in a row, they would have figured out a way to keep hm.

The rest of your points are distortions of my comments.
There are peanut vendors for the Raiders who are still working there, I don't think you would argue that they have more leverage than Ruggs or Gruden - - they outlasted both of them.

Ruggs "outlasted" Gruden because he killed someone after Gruden was fired. The offenses which led to their firings did not happen at the same time.

Gruden's record had nothing to do with his firing. There wasn't a person on the planet (other than you) that was factoring in his first year when looking at how he was doing. I'd say the consensus on him prior to this whole ordeal was luke warm but he was still the GM and Head Coach of a team that was drastically improved under his watch.

I'm really not trying to distort your arguments. You believe Henry Ruggs had more leverage than Jon Gruden. That means that you think an average WR on an NFL team has more leverage than a HC / GM. I disagree.
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
22,999
Reaction score
3,091
Points
113
There are peanut vendors for the Raiders who are still working there, I don't think you would argue that they have more leverage than Ruggs or Gruden - - they outlasted both of them.

Ruggs "outlasted" Gruden because he killed someone after Gruden was fired. The offenses which led to their firings did not happen at the same time.

Gruden's record had nothing to do with his firing. There wasn't a person on the planet (other than you) that was factoring in his first year when looking at how he was doing. I'd say the consensus on him prior to this whole ordeal was luke warm but he was still the GM and Head Coach of a team that was drastically improved under his watch.

I'm really not trying to distort your arguments. You believe Henry Ruggs had more leverage than Jon Gruden. That means that you think an average WR on an NFL team has more leverage than a HC / GM. I disagree.
I think an average WR on an NFL team has more leverage than an average to below average NFL HC. In this case, I'm correct. You can't cherry pick Gruden's record and you can't compare him to a peanut vendor.

Ruggs, an average to below average performer, was not deemed expendable by the organization until he killed somebody. Gruden, an average to below average performer, was deemed expendable over stupid ten year old emails.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
14,957
Reaction score
5,218
Points
113
I think an average WR on an NFL team has more leverage than an average to below average NFL HC. In this case, I'm correct. You can't cherry pick Gruden's record and you can't compare him to a peanut vendor.

Ruggs, an average to below average performer, was not deemed expendable by the organization until he killed somebody. Gruden, an average to below average performer, was deemed expendable over stupid ten year old emails.
NFL HC and GM. That's cool, we agree to disagree then.
 

atsgopher

Active member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
858
Reaction score
249
Points
43
3:40am. WTF was he thinking.... Just a terrible terrible mistake. He should face the maximum.

If we were really serious about impaired driving, our sentences would be 10 times more severe than they currently are.
I got a think that the piecemeal fashion we’ve do e over the year has seriously lacked real courage.

How does one put someone, who has been drinking, into a position, where they need to make a rational decision about their skills? Should be zero boos. Zero confusion. Especially now with the advent of ride sharing.
 



stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
27,361
Reaction score
8,597
Points
113
Wow…just fucking wow!

A life taken and you’re happy you didn’t buy the wrong jersey.

And then I read the rest of your comments, and I’m just gob-smacked. Clueless.

It shouldn't surprise you based on the source.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
11,611
Reaction score
3,379
Points
113
It shouldn't surprise you based on the source.
You need to check your liberal woke rage at the door. This board is largely devoid of vitriol and personal attacks, and that's a good thing. People are civil towards each other here despite disagreeing on a variety of issues. Everyone here knows where the source of anger and fury is for you and UU, nobody is stupid. You and UU can do better. Honestly.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
27,361
Reaction score
8,597
Points
113
You need to check your liberal woke rage at the door. This board is largely devoid of vitriol and personal attacks, and that's a good thing. People are civil towards each other here despite disagreeing on a variety of issues. Everyone here knows where the source of anger and fury is for you and UU, nobody is stupid. You and UU can do better. Honestly.

You're right. I shouldn't have chimed in at all. Doesn't mean that UU is all that wrong.

And how did you even see my post? Could have sworn I was on ignore.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
11,611
Reaction score
3,379
Points
113
You're right. I shouldn't have chimed in at all. Doesn't mean that UU is all that wrong.

And how did you even see my post? Could have sworn I was on ignore.
Nobody is on Ignore on this board for me. Everyone here has civil discussions with everyone. That initial post was to one single comment that was made about a jersey, which was followed by a significant amount of observations about the senseless loss of life, some thoughts about DUI, punishment, and how knows what else. I can't help it if someone is so fired up with angst about a difference of opinion politically that they will jump on any possible chance to attack, regardless of the topic or forum.

I appreciate your response. It's been a hard week in town here. Listening to a podcast on the way to work yesterday about the Ruggs situation brought me on the verge of tears, again. A number of lives ruined, and no good answers or explanations.
 



Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,642
Reaction score
5,580
Points
113
I think that's precisely his point. It's often a bigger deal to big a bigot than it is to do what Henry Ruggs did.

Gruden had considerably more leverage than Henry Ruggs. It's not even close. You have to be a pretty elite level player to have more leverage than the HC.
I think Ruggs comes out of this significantly worse off than Gruden.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
14,957
Reaction score
5,218
Points
113
I think Ruggs comes out of this significantly worse off than Gruden.
Of course he will. He did something a billion times worse.

The NFL's faux outrage lasted longer with Gruden than it does Ruggs.

If a CEO kills someone, he will do more time in prison than if the janitor is caught speeding. That doesn't mean the janitor had more power. LOL.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,642
Reaction score
5,580
Points
113
The NFL's faux outrage lasted longer with Gruden than it does Ruggs.
Ruggs is no longer part of the NFL and the scandal didn't touch other parts of the league like Grudens did. News stories need intrigue.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
14,957
Reaction score
5,218
Points
113
Ruggs is no longer part of the NFL and the scandal didn't touch other parts of the league like Grudens did. News stories need intrigue.
I think this is my point.

The fact that there is more intrigue in the fact that Gruden and a buddy shared emails that aren't PC than an NFL player killing someone while driving 160 MPH, drunk, with a gun.

The same week people were talking about Gruden getting fired, they showed clips of OJ Simpson walking around at the Buffalo game.

It's weird.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,642
Reaction score
5,580
Points
113
I think this is my point.

The fact that there is more intrigue in the fact that Gruden and a buddy shared emails that aren't PC than an NFL player killing someone while driving 160 MPH, drunk, with a gun.

The same week people were talking about Gruden getting fired, they showed clips of OJ Simpson walking around at the Buffalo game.

It's weird.
I get it, but how many times or ways can you say Ruggs did something bad?

Its like the Gabby Petio or whatever story, its only a story when there are questions. It was out of the news instantly when the questions were answered despite dominating for weeks.

The Gruden story has all kinds of intrigue of to who, when and who else has dirt in those emails. Lot's of talking points, which is what the media needs to fill airtime

If Gruden story was cut and dry it would have gotten much less coverage.
 



#2Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
7,507
Reaction score
1,797
Points
113
I see Rugg's attorney was blaming the fire department for the girl's death.
 

Spaulding!No!

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Messages
3,569
Reaction score
1,471
Points
113
I’ve been an attorney for a long time. You need to drive - you have to drive. The state has to let you drive.
 





Top Bottom