Twitter: Raw Video of Intoxicated Jay Gruden Leaks

[volsmet]

1 minute ago, Koolblue13 said:

Lol

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

14 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Has timing been confirmed in any way on this?  I heard one rumor that it was so old it was from when Jay was in Tampa.  Note: I haven’t watched it.  Nor am I going to.  

 

Because if it was from Tampa, Bruce might have had access to it from back then, and releasing things through burner twitter accounts isn’t that hard. 

 

I’m not suggesting it happened, but if the timing lined up, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to think the Senior football exec might have had access to this video.  

 

As far as I can tell, timing has not been confirmed at all. Doubt it was from 2005 as one of the videos appears to have been captured on Snap Chat, which wasn't around on everyone's flip phones back then lol...I've heard it was from 2 years ago as well as it was very recently. It's wild how easily--and how often--public figures get caught doing something embarrassing or controversial on people's phones all the time, month after month, year after year...yet for some of our fan base it's unlikely that this happened in Jay's case.

 

But just for ****s and giggles, let's say it was from 2005. Where would Bruce gain access to it? Where has it been stored all this time? Did Bruce just keep the video for 15 years because he felt one day in the future he may need to use it against Gruden or Gruden's brother? Wouldn't the person who shot the video comment on it and say "the person on twitter didn't take that video, I did"? Also, burner accounts don't usually have almost 5,000 followers, do they?...and wouldn't it be used to prop up Allen on Twitter? Does anyone know if this burner account has done so? Do burner accounts also have fake photos of the person it's pretending to represent? Cuz this guy has all sorts of photos of himself online. Do burner accounts usually have other people on twitter claim they know the person and have met them in real life?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

9 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

Well, to be fair, you are an adult that struggles to navigate a day without typing lol.

 

 

And that proves your point....how, again? lol...

 

I do love, though, how my lol usage has burrowed itself inside the heads of so many on this site. Who knew it would be so easy...

 

 

 

^^ me lol...

[skinsmania123]

45 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

In other words, you can't.

 

I've asked about 5 people on twitter (6 including you) to explain how they think Dan and Bruce pulled this off...no one has given an explanation yet. The responses have been:

 

"They don't get the benefit of the doubt anymore"

"This is just like with Scot"

"Let's agree to disagree"

"The timing is suspicious"

"How can you not think they did it?"

"You think I'm gonna try to convince you of anything?"

 

Not a single person has said "Easy. First Bruce and Dan just had to....."

 

Mainly because it's not easy to come up with a way that makes a damn bit of sense.

 

 

 

Danny has a history of knee jerk reactions.  Do I need to list them?  Knee jerk reactions are emotional reactions.  Danny is a fan.  Danny is not a non-biased owner.  He is  an emotionally reactive fan, who went from thinking he could buy a Superbowl with high priced FA's, to hiring two pseudo GM's that essentially have done his bidding. Maybe he stepped to the side for little while but he never completely stayed out of the fray.  Maybe during the second Joe Gibbs stint but that was all.       

 

Danny at this point is an abysmal failure as an owner and the organization reflects it. But he can't stop meddling with. it.  He is a petty guy who sits around, who drinks too much (his own words) and hatches half assed little schemes, thing he thinks will work in whatever go round he is in.  He learns nothing from his mistakes.  Every narrative of any sports writer, or agent with knowledge of this organization knows it is drama city.

 

So you want logic @Califan007 - below is the best I got for you on this.  

 

Create a problem.  Which creates a reaction.  Then come in with your solution once you have the reaction. In this case because of the petty and i mean the petty behavior of Dan Snyder and his right hand man GM Bruce - a bromance that has a history of trickling information out into the public demonstrating a problem - usually about someone in their organization they are not happy with, so in this case, why not dredge up an old video, even if it is 5 years old on Gruden? Hey perception is everything.  They need a reaction from the fans, even some press people, to push the narrative that Gruden is unstable.  Drinks too much.  Whatever. You just get it out there.

 

What will be the solution?  Who knows what his solution will be this go round, but it will an inevitable reboot because it is so messy.  We will  hear a lot about change.     

 

Problem-Reaction-Solution is used in both small and large organizations.  It is taught in business classes. But not in the petty way or underhanded way Snyder is doing it.  But it works in underhanded ways as well.  You have to get an ugly perception out there. Some say well Gruden is doing that for himself.  Ahhh but he has had a **** load of injuries.  Now he just looks like he has not been fully engaged.   In my opinion this pea brain Snyder has been doing a version of this since he purchased the team for years but is never able to pull of the actual solution because he can't separate logic from emotion, which is why most people can't answer your questions.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

There is no way to tell if Bruce-Dan pulled this off, that part is true.  Do they have anything to gain from this?  Yeah I do think so especially if you follow their track record and how they seem to think. It's how things have rolled on and off during Dan's reign.  When someone is headed out the door, they often get ridiculed-slammed on their way out.  I presume the intention is to make it seem more palatable to the fans.  

 

We had the ugly departures with Zorn, Shanny, Scot.  Shots at Kirk.  Heck if you guys recall when they decided not to hire Gregg to be the HC who was a fan favorite then -- all of a sudden a story leaks that Gregg badmouthed Joe Gibbs in his job interview.    

 

As for Dan-Bruce being reluctant to trash their own hires because they are responsible for their own hires to begin with.  I agree with the logic of it.  You can't divorce yourself from your hires and claim the high ground.  But that's what happens anyway.  The goal seems at times to be hey the wicked witch is now dead and lets rally around the next person we bring in.

 

As for the timing of something like this.  Sadly, I know a lot about the subject because in my field we often have opposition research in our hands and we can take months and in some cases over a year as to when we actually release things.  We usually pick the most optimum time.  Timing is everything. 

 

And if this was Bruce-Dan I'll give them some rare kudos for competence because the timing was perfect.   Perfect timing for the Sunday shows.  It gives the Schefter types just enough time to confirm and dig for more.  If it was released earlier in the week it would have likely been digested and possible dealt with.  Also on Friday you are rarely competing with juicy stories -- its typically a slow news day.   But getting featured on the Sunday shows, followed by a lemon performance against the Pats and then the next day Jay is canned or simply weakened some more -- it's the perfect flow. 

 

That is, if they did it.  I am not saying they did.   I got no dog in that fight.   But at the same time, I don't think it would be out of character for them to do it.  And as for motive.  To me the motive is clear as a bell and fits a pattern that has long been established.  

 

 

 

 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 minutes ago, skinsmania123 said:

Danny has a history of knee jerk reactions.  Do I need to list them?  Knee jerk reactions are emotional reactions.  

Please name the last Snyder knee jerk reaction. Just the last one will do. 

[skinsmania123]

4 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Please name the last Snyder knee jerk reaction. Just the last one will do. 

I would definitely say when they took Haskins.  He was not worthy of a top 10 pick with 15 games under his belt.  He is decent prospect who is very raw.  Danny's son went to school with the kid. I think that was an emotional knee-jerk reaction.  He made that pick. Not anyone else.    I already said the kid with proper development could probably start in a year or year and a half.  But usually guys picked that early you get them in there like Daniel Jones.

[Voice_of_Reason]

8 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

We had the ugly departures with Zorn, Shanny, Scot.  Shots at Kirk.  Heck if you guys recall when they decided not to hire Gregg to be the HC who was a fan favorite then -- all of a sudden a story leaks that Gregg badmouthed Joe Gibbs in his job interview.  

Just to be clear, Bruce did not have anything to do with the Gregg Williams thing because he wasn’t hired for 2 more years.

 

I had a thought that maybe all this sleaze is actual Dan, and Bruce either just carries it out or is a bystander.  

 

If thats true, it’s worse.

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Just to be clear, Bruce did not have anything to do with the Gregg Williams thing because he wasn’t hired for 2 more years.

 

I had a thought that maybe all this sleaze is actual Dan, and Bruce either just carries it out or is a bystander.  

 

If thats true, it’s worse.

 

Sure, did I say Bruce had something to do with Gregg?  I am being Dan centric.   I am aware of the timeline of the team.   Bruce is here now.

 

Dan had the sleaze gene before Bruce got here.  Apparently so did Bruce with a Tampa reporter calling him the Prince of Darkness.    I am not saying either dude is doing this.  I am saying it wouldn't take a wild leap that they did. 

[Ghost of]

Who cares why or how,  fire his bleepin ass because a loser is a loser.  Like we needed extra reason to think that mediocre dullard needed to go. 

[volsmet]

29 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

And that proves your point....how, again? lol...

 

I do love, though, how my lol usage has burrowed itself inside the heads of so many on this site. Who knew it would be so easy...

 

 

 

^^ me lol...

 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 minute ago, skinsmania123 said:

I would definitely say when they took Haskins.  He was not worthy of a top 10 pick with 15 games under his belt.  He is decent prospect who is very raw.  Danny's son went to school with the kid. I think that was an emotional knee-jerk reaction.  He made that pick. Not anyone else.    I already said the kid with proper development could probably start in a year or year and a half.  But usually guys picked that early you get them in there like Daniel Jones.

Well, he wasn’t a top 10 pick because he was picked at 15.

 

People were split on all the QBs except what’s-his-nugget who went #1 overall. The Giants were skewered for selecting Jones at 6. 

 

Thats not knee jerk, either.  That’s a FO move that probably was discussed for months.  

 

Would anybody have cared if they got Sweat and Haskins in the opposite order?  Probably not.

 

Also, knee jerk would have been trading up to 2 or 3 to select Haskins.

 

So, care to try again?  I’ll help you out.  The last real knee jerk move Snyder made was in 2000 when he fired Norv in season.  That was knee jerk, and it was stupid.  

 

You could say firing Marty after 2001, if you wanted to.  After that?  Spurrier quit, Gibbs retired, Zorn was allowed to finish out his 2 seasons, Vinny lasted a decade, Shanahan got 4 years, Jay 5.25 and Bruce 9.

 

Dan can be criticized for a lot of things.  But making emotional, knee jerk reactions isn’t one of them. 

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Sure, did I say Bruce had something to do with Gregg?  I am being Dan centric.   I am aware of the timeline of the team.   Bruce is here now.

 

Dan had the sleaze gene before Bruce got here.  Apparently so did Bruce with a Tampa reporter calling him the Prince of Darkness.    I am not saying either dude is doing this.  I am saying it wouldn't take a wild leap that they did. 

You were talking about Bruce earlier in the post and then said “when they decided ...” so I was just clarifying.  I know you knew this but I’ve corrected about 6 posters who blamed Bruce for Zorn and Gregg, and it’s just not true.

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

5 minutes ago, skinsmania123 said:

So you want logic @Califan007 - below is the best I got for you on this. 

 

 

I will give you this, you at least tried lol...you're the only one I have asked who did. (VOR tried as well but he wasn't one of the people I asked)

 

However: "why not dredge up an old video, even if it is 5 years old on Gruden?"

 

This would mean that:

 

- Bruce has kept this video somewhere or at the very least knew where to find it...if he kept it, why? If he found it, where?

- You believe it's a burner account posting this video...see my 'splanation up above as to some of the reasons I think the burner account explanation fails.

- Or, you believe the guy who posted the video did so at the request of Bruce and Dan.

- Bruce feels that firing Jay based on performance, the team being an undisciplined mess, not starting Haskins, losing a noticeable part of the fan base, starting off 0-4, going 1-11 over the last 12 games, and report after report claiming that Gruden will be fired anytime now, would still not be enough in Bruce's mind when in the past it was declared that his ego was enough to motivate a firing.

- Bruce would care what people think of firing Jay, but would not check here on ES to try and gauge fan's sentiment towards Gruden...because if he did he would see loud and clear that the majority are literally counting the days until he's fired, even have a thread dedicated to it.

- Bruce didn't think anyone would know--or more importantly, be able to figure out--the video was from 5 years ago, which could torpedo his plans.

- You believe it's not likely that Jay just got caught smoking and (apparently) drinking outside a bar or club by a Skins fan with an iPhone.

[skinsmania123]

Just now, Voice_of_Reason said:

Well, he wasn’t a top 10 pick because he was picked at 15.

 

People were split on all the QBs except what’s-his-nugget who went #1 overall. The Giants were skewered for selecting Jones at 6. 

 

Thats not knee jerk, either.  That’s a FO move that probably was discussed for months.  

 

Would anybody have cared if they got Sweat and Haskins in the opposite order?  Probably not.

 

Also, knee jerk would have been trading up to 2 or 3 to select Haskins.

 

So, care to try again?  I’ll help you out.  The last real knee jerk move Snyder made was in 2000 when he fired Norv in season.  That was knee jerk, and it was stupid.  

 

You could say firing Marty after 2001, if you wanted to.  After that?  Spurrier quit, Gibbs retired, Zorn was allowed to finish out his 2 seasons, Vinny lasted a decade, Shanahan got 4 years, Jay 5.25 and Bruce 9.

 

Dan can be criticized for a lot of things.  But making emotional, knee jerk reactions isn’t one of them. 

 Okay thanks for the correction.  But 10 or 15 I do not think he was a first round prospect. I should have made that clear.  Not enough time playing in college preparing for the NFL..

 

  Well hey we are both fans. I think Haskins was a third round pick at best.  About where I think Cousin's was when he was drafted.  Third round I believe.

 

Yes Dan makes very knee jerk emotional reactions.  It is just that we disagree on what characterizes that.  You don't think slipping things out into the public domain through your GM or otherwise is not knee-jerk. Okay.  I think it is very emotionally immature and short-sighted.

 

[Rypienskinz]

25 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

There is no way to tell if Bruce-Dan pulled this off, that part is true.  Do they have anything to gain from this?  Yeah I do think so especially if you follow their track record and how they seem to think. It's how things have rolled on and off during Dan's reign.  When someone is headed out the door, they often get ridiculed-slammed on their way out.  I presume the intention is to make it seem more palatable to the fans.  

 

We had the ugly departures with Zorn, Shanny, Scot.  Shots at Kirk.  Heck if you guys recall when they decided not to hire Gregg to be the HC who was a fan favorite then -- all of a sudden a story leaks that Gregg badmouthed Joe Gibbs in his job interview.    

 

As for Dan-Bruce being reluctant to trash their own hires because they are responsible for their own hires to begin with.  I agree with the logic of it.  You can't divorce yourself from your hires and claim the high ground.  But that's what happens anyway.  The goal seems at times to be hey the wicked witch is now dead and lets rally around the next person we bring in.

 

As for the timing of something like this.  Sadly, I know a lot about the subject because in my field we often have opposition research in our hands and we can take months and in some cases over a year as to when we actually release things.  We usually pick the most optimum time.  Timing is everything. 

 

And if this was Bruce-Dan I'll give them some rare kudos for competence because the timing was perfect.   Perfect timing for the Sunday shows.  It gives the Schefter types just enough time to confirm and dig for more.  If it was released earlier in the week it would have likely been digested and possible dealt with.  Also on Friday you are rarely competing with juicy stories -- its typically a slow news day.   But getting featured on the Sunday shows, followed by a lemon performance against the Pats and then the next day Jay is canned or simply weakened some more -- it's the perfect flow. 

 

That is, if they did it.  I am not saying they did.   I got no dog in that fight.   But at the same time, I don't think it would be out of character for them to do it.  And as for motive.  To me the motive is clear as a bell and fits a pattern that has long been established.  

 

 

 

 

 

Tin foil hats. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

You were talking about Bruce earlier in the post and then said “when they decided ...” so I was just clarifying.  I know you knew this but I’ve corrected about 6 posters who blamed Bruce for Zorn and Gregg, and it’s just not true.

 

 

Ok, thanks, got it.   To clarify my point is I think something like this is totally up Dan's alley probably more so than Bruce if i had to guess.   

 

Do I think they did it?  I really don't know.  I could argue it either way.  On one count, I heard that Dan thinks Jay's a cool guy and likes hims.  So would he do something mean spirited to him?  In that context, I'd say no.    On the other hand, I've heard some beat guys say there is some tension between Jay and the FO that's new -- i don't know if that's so or Dan is part of that? 

 

And the other part of it is it's clear that there are some in that building (with Dan being the common denominator) who seem to believe that there is an upside to slamming people who aren't hired or let go.  The #1 suspicious part of it for me is the timing is just about perfectly played -- it feels premeditated if I judged it purely that way. 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 minute ago, skinsmania123 said:

Well hey we are both fans. I think Haskins was a third round pick at best.  About where I think Cousin's was when he was drafted.  Third round I believe.

There’s no way Haskins got to the third round.  MAYBE second, but more likely bottom first.  He has all the physical tools and somebody was going to want the 5th year option on him.  

 

He had had a hell of a better resume and was a lot better prospect than Cousins.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

24 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

There is no way to tell if Bruce-Dan pulled this off, that part is true.  Do they have anything to gain from this?  Yeah I do think so especially if you follow their track record and how they seem to think. It's how things have rolled on and off during Dan's reign.  When someone is headed out the door, they often get ridiculed-slammed on their way out.  I presume the intention is to make it seem more palatable to the fans.

 

...(edit)

 

That is, if they did it.  I am not saying they did.   I got no dog in that fight.   But at the same time, I don't think it would be out of character for them to do it.  And as for motive.  To me the motive is clear as a bell and fits a pattern that has long been established.  

 

3

 

 

But again: how? How did Bruce and Dan carry it out?

 

Were they doing research on Jay to find dirt on him, and somehow found these videos? If they're concerned about firing Jay being palatable to the fans, wouldn't a 20 minute perusal of extremeskins show them they have nothing to worry about in that regard? Did they partner up with this twitter guy and conspire on when to release it? Is it a fake burner account and it's really Bruce typing these posts out? What if the guy told Bruce to **** off and then spilled the beans on his plans?

[tibbidoe]

2 hours ago, TK said:

#marketing

 

I'm unhappy with the team's performance / current direction, AND I don't drink very much, but I really want one of those. lol

[Skinsinparadise]

20 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

But again: how? How did Bruce and Dan carry it out?

 

Were they doing research on Jay to find dirt on him, and somehow found these videos? If they're concerned about firing Jay being palatable to the fans, wouldn't a 20 minute perusal of extremeskins show them they have nothing to worry about in that regard? Did they partner up with this twitter guy and conspire on when to release it? Is it a fake burner account and it's really Bruce typing these posts out? What if the guy told Bruce to **** off and then spilled the beans on his plans?

 

I think you questioning the motive has by a mile a stronger argument than questioning the execution of it.   

 

You talked about what you do for a living on this thread.  What I do is political direct mail.  My job is to do both positive and negative messages for a client/opponent.  I deal with opposition research all the time.  I've won 25 national awards -- sadly a chunk of those awards was for working with negative/contrast mail. 

 

I am in a business where I use opposition research routinely.  You'd be shocked at how many people just give my clients information about the opposition and volunteer to get it out.   We get access to a lot on information.  I got to leave for dinner in a few minutes so I don't have time to get into the whole process.  But I'll just say its perfectly plausible Dan-Bruce got hold of that video just via someone sharing it with someone they know.  Stuff gets around as to public figures.   

 

As to your point that it could have happened organically.  Sure.  I am just saying it's not slam dunk that's how it happened.  And yeah as for leaking dirt -- its often burner accounts or people who are friendly to the cause are strongly encouraged to do it.    Often the client doesn't even get involved directly but its instead done by intermediaries dealing with whomever is doing the leaking.   

 

As for the motive?   I don't know.   Not everyone blames Jay as enemy #1.  Plenty package him with Bruce or even separate Bruce and or Dan as the issue.  Jay is popular with some of the national media.  Off the top of my head Breer, Garafalo among others have said that Bruce-Dan are the problem not Jay.    Creating a narrative that Jay had to go I think would help how this is portrayed by ESPN, NFL Network, etc.   More on point, Dan has a history of it. 

 

And my point is I am not saying this happened.  I don't really have a strong opinion about whether they did it or not.    I can see either argument. 

[Cooleyfan1993]

Oh good lord. 10 pages on this ****? 😂😂😂

 

**** this franchise 😂😂 

[Burgold]

Not going to talk about the video, but will say, this is one more reason why Bruce Allen should be fired (if it's shown or known by anyone on the team that he had anything to do with leaking this.)

 

There are plenty of reasons to be upset with Jay that have to do with coaching. We don't need outside ammo and the leaking of this is just classless and ugly.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think you questioning the motive has by a mile a stronger argument than questioning the execution of it.  

 

 

Actually, I'm saying that even if they had the motive/desire/lack of character to want to smear Jay, this specific and particular way of doing it makes absolutely zero sense and strains credibility.

 

It would be like if I had cheated on my wife of 10 years several times, and then one day she accused me of cheating on her last night...with Salma Hayek.

 

My response would be "1) She's married to a billionaire, 2) she lives in Spain, 3) I haven't left the state in 3 years, 4) where the hell would I have met Salma Hayek?"

 

Now, whether or not she has a valid reason for ever thinking I may have cheated again, the scenario she spelled out of me flying to Spain to have sex with Salma Hayek makes no sense whatsoever lol...and saying "yeah, but you've done this in the past and you came home late last night and you said she was attractive" doesn't trump the rest.

[skinsmania123]

45 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

However: "why not dredge up an old video, even if it is 5 years old on Gruden?"

 

This would mean that:

 

- Bruce has kept this video somewhere or at the very least knew where to find it...if he kept it, why? If he found it, where?

 

USB or flash drive would keep it, especially since that was available five years ago.  You can always upload in present time to a twitter account. You could of course create an account or have someone upload it for you through their account.

 

- Or, you believe the guy who posted the video did so at the request of Bruce and Dan.

 

I don't think they would ask him directly.  But anything is possible given the track record of these guys.

I

Quote

 

- Bruce feels that firing Jay based on performance, the team being an undisciplined mess, not starting Haskins, losing a noticeable part of the fan base, starting off 0-4, going 1-11 over the last 12 games, and report after report claiming that Gruden will be fired anytime now, would still not be enough in Bruce's mind when in the past it was declared that his ego was enough to motivate a firing.

 Gruden was his idea to hire and he needs to divest himself from that hiring a bit. This is  "piling on" and the focus  goes completely on Gruden - the same stuff they did with Shanny and SM when they leaked stuff to really make them look bad when they could of just fired both of them and kept things internal.   They also did the same thing to Cousin's.  Point is your right they could of just fired Gruden but history shows they do not operate like a normal organization.

Quote

- Bruce would care what people think of firing Jay, but would not check here on ES to try and gauge fan's sentiment towards Gruden...because if he did he would see loud and clear that the majority are literally counting the days until he's fired, even have a thread dedicated to it.

I think it is mixed. The sentiment seems to be yes, lets move on from Gruden, but then you read poor guy has been saddled with countless injuries, in a piss poor facility,  the organization is a mess, who could succeed in this mess, and it is all a shame because his players really like him, etc.

Quote

- Bruce didn't think anyone would know--or more importantly, be able to figure out--the video was from 5 years ago, which could torpedo his plans.

That is not the point.  Creating or influencing perception about someone is all that matters.  Sitting on the sidewalk drunk with a hottie while you are married?  Priceless perception.  

Quote

- You believe it's not likely that Jay just got caught smoking and (apparently) drinking outside a bar or club by a Skins fan with an iPhone.

That is very much the case.  A couple of people took videos.  It is just how it is being used now.   That is the point.

 

40 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

There’s no way Haskins got to the third round.  MAYBE second, but more likely bottom first.  He has all the physical tools and somebody was going to want the 5th year option on him.  

 

He had had a hell of a better resume and was a lot better prospect than Cousins.  

We will see if I am right about Haskins but I think he is really going to struggle.  I think he has skills that need to be honed.  This organization is going to ruin him and folks will say, "he was a bust." Bank it.

[veteranskinsfan]

Califan- A lot of us would not mind sleeping with Salma Hayek even for just one long night.  Now back to Gruden videos.  One of the videos shows Gruden with this panicked look once he sees the person with his phone taking the video as if at that moment he realized the video could be used against him.   Now it has been almost 24 hours since the videos were released and no comment from the front office or from Gruden.   Seems weird that we have heard nothing.  Maybe Gruden will comment about it in his postgame remarks on Sunday.   The timing of it sparks debates but the intent of it is crystal clear.   Make Gruden look worse than his coaching performances look.   Now I am starting to change my mind about Williams holding out.   There is so much bad stuff that we do not even know about as fans going on with this organization.   Profootballtalk.com is saying the videos are one year old.  Not two years old and not five years old so hopefully someone will clarify the age of the videos at some point.   Some people believe the woman on the street is Gruden's wife so that would be no big deal either if true.