andywilson001
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2011
- Messages
- 1,646
- Likes
- 3,304
Atlanta said if he found out Gruden was the coach 100% he wouldnt come back and share it because it wasnt his place. His absence/presence is not indicative of Gruden being coach or not.
I know things can change, but I thought ALL were on board? ALL the ducks were in a row? Everyone was rowing the same direction? Ergen's money trumped Haslam's? Currie is a eunich. Either get on board or get out........
Not sure what to make of Atlanta Vol's post honestly. It throws an absolute wrench in all the information brought up to this point, unless it's a smokescreen of course. lol
I was then informed early today of a meeting that will take place that I am supposed to attend (can't give timeline out) that will be about a very large donation opportunity for some folks in attendance. Now I can't imagine in my right mind that they would approach anyone about a meeting like that unless there was something extremely positive was going to happen.
Well AV confirmed what many of us, including myself, have feared all along that Haslam would screw this up and surprise surprise he has. Probably a dead deal that could have been a done deal if he hadn't stood in the way. This isn't the damn university of Haslam even if he and his damn family want it to be. You would think Currie wouldn't commit career suicide just to appease one man (an old man who maybe won't even be living by the time we do another search since this hire will be crap). I had so much hope this time I hate the Haslams!!
Oh, not melting down. Just casually observing what all has been mentioned in the last 160+k posts and combining that with AV's last post. Just seems to go against that, unless it's misdirection.
I will say I am beginning to become a little fatigued from following this for the last month......and my work has definitely suffered. lol
Just like everyone else(except for the 41% morons down in Chattanooga) , I am simply ready for Butch to be gone and to have a new coach.
You're an attorney. You and I both know you'd name every deep pocket nearby and hope something sticks. You'll have a hard time proving that Jones is culpable in "should have noticed a particular player's condition on the sidelines, or on-field " when his job is to set procedures and manage the game while trusting his OC to see what is specifically happening in-play, and position coaches to manage personnel on the sidelines.
I reiterate. My position is that this isn't a slam-dunk case against Jones, as was asserted, and even though you did so with more confidence than I think you'd actually feel, you just affirmed it's not a slam dunk case against Jones.
