Twitter: Raw Video of Intoxicated Jay Gruden Leaks

[Califan007 The Constipated]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I'll give you an example.  Like in Redskins Park, I've worked in organizations with 30-40 people, etc.  We got interns, volunteers, etc.  One common way to do it is in a meeting with lets say 10 college students -- where you go look can one of you guys-gals get one of your friends to do you a solid and put this out?    Especially when it comes to a video.  A video like that could come from anywhere.  So really anyone can put it out and it wouldn't look weird as long as they are from somewhat near that immediate area. 

 

I get bugged about it myself sometimes from a client where they ask me to help.  It doesn't have to be something wild and crazy.  I get asked can my wife put this out on facebook or can I get someone else I know do it  When you hire social media consultants they often volunteer to just figure this stuff out for you. 

 

As for it not being worth considering -- I'd agree if Dan didn't have a reputation of smearing people who are about to leave but alas thats not the case. 

 

What you're describing doesn't sound like a burner account, though...I know you said it didn't have to be a burner account but as you started describing different ways in which it could still possibly be one, I wanted to add more facts into the mix so that everyone knew the reality of it. For the record, I spent a little too much time looking up this guy and different people on twitter he's talked to about this and his photos, etc, etc lol...I didn't want to speak from a position of not knowing and instead just assuming.

 

To me, from reading your experiences in passing on stuff that you hope to get out without any connections to you or the company/group you are working for, do you also tell those people friendly to the cause to invent stories behind the information or videos or photos? Or do you just have them say "look what I found/read/saw" and pass it along? I would imagine a back story to explain how they came into possessing whatever they are disseminating would be necessary, no?  If so, have any of those stories ever blew up in your face? And if so (again lol), how did you get control of it?

[Skinsinparadise]

33 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I have to wonder if other forums for putrid sports franchises get this far in the weeds about things that have nothing to do with the sport.  

 

Maybe there is an upside after all for being a fan of Dan's Redskins.   We're becoming experts on smear campaigns, the nature of loyalty, organizational hierarchies, culture, how to overcome drama, the nature of being a good fan or not, negotiation skills, the power and weaknesses of nostalgia and much more.    As fans we are perhaps becoming sort of like the Renaissance version of football fans in America, our range of knowledge keeps growing  -- thank you, Dan! 

[RWJ]

8 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Maybe there is an upside after all of being a fan of Dan's Redskins.   We're becoming experts on smear campaigns, the nature of loyalty, organizational hierarchies, culture, how to overcome drama, the nature of being a good fan or not, the power and weaknesses of nostalgia and much more.    As fans we are perhaps becoming sort of like the Renaissance version of football fans in American, our range of knowledge keeps growing  -- thank you, Dan! 

I sent you a DM guess you haven't seen it yet.  

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Maybe there is an upside after all for being a fan of Dan's Redskins.   We're becoming experts on smear campaigns, the nature of loyalty, organizational hierarchies, culture, how to overcome drama, the nature of being a good fan or not, negotiation skills, the power and weaknesses of nostalgia and much more.    As fans we are perhaps becoming sort of like the Renaissance version of football fans in American, our range of knowledge keeps growing  -- thank you, Dan! 

SnyderAllen is going to throw big money at someone next year.  It will be interesting to see who.  If Meyer isn't hired by USC it could be him and I wouldn't be surprised to see possibly Ryan Day (Ohio St.) connection to Haskins or Eric Beienemy from KC.  He has connections with Smith as we saw Smith sitting in the box with Dan last week I think it was.

[Stadium-Armory]

Don't care.

 

Just win baby.

[wit33]

The risk versus reward doesn’t quite add up for me. 

 

Fascinating display of psychology, as the fan with previous negative sentiment can rationalize this act and the fan with some positive sentiment in the past can’t. 

 

Bruce and Dan are at the pinnacles of their respective positions— Generally, one willing to engage in dirty tactics the reward is financial or an advance in their career. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

6 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

But you did not prove that it's not that possible. You are deliberately ignoring that this **** happens all the time - and I mean all the time. It's just not that hard. If you want to continue to believe that it cannot just because you cannot see it in your world, then that's fine. Certainly up to you. But it happens a lot. And there are people that specialize in **** exactly like this. They are cowardly cretins but there are enough other cretins out there that they make a very good living by doing stuff like this and making it look innocent or coincidental. Believe it, don;t believe it. Up to you. 

 

And I purposely made the argue comment the way I did so as not to mean it personally. If it still came off as a personal attack - regardless of if you took it that way - please know it was not my intent. We all enjoy the argument to some extent or we would not be here. But you have to admit you certainly enjoy a bit more than most - and again that is not some personal attack. Just an observation. And while for some issues I would be glad to engage, I don't care enough about this one to continue. 

 

I don't know if they had anything to do with it but it's plausible. But since i can't prove it then I will operate under the assumption they had nothing to do with it. I hate dan and bruce enough already. Don't really need any help to get there. 

 

In this specific case, what you described would not be very possible at all.

 

I'll ask the same questions you apparently did not think were questions:

 

In your #1:

- The anonymous source was the guy who posted it on twitter?

- Or did the anonymous source drop it TO the guy who posted it on twitter?

- if it's an anonymous source dropping the video TO someone, did it also come with the instructions of taking credit for videotaping it?

- Or, did it come with instructions to say he was there when it happened?

- If the anonymous source was the guy who posted it on twitter, is he still anonymous since he's followed by 5,000 people and seemed to indicate that he was either there or he videotaped it?

- Were the multitude of others there that night who also had phones taken into consideration when the decision to drop the video anonymously was made?

- Would there need to be a contingency plan if those other possible videos showed something counter to what Bruce and Dan were hoping to achieve?

- Does that possibility of other videos coming forward even play a role in things in your scenario?

- Does the length of time that Bruce and Dan would have held onto the video weaken this scenario? If not, why not?

- Does Allen randomly collect dirt on everyone he works with in order to smear them with it 5 years or more down the road?

- Has there ever been any rumors or stories about Allen doing this? If not, why should it be assumed he did it here, outside of "anything is possible"?

 

 

The answers to all that **** add an extra layer of uncertainty to the conspiracy...one that still doesn't make sense.

 

Does it make sense that someone could have stumbled onto the video and brought it to Bruce's attention? Yes. Does that automatically mean that every other aspect of the conspiracy theory now holds merit? No.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

29 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

To me, from reading your experiences in passing on stuff that you hope to get out without any connections to you or the company/group you are working for, do you also tell those people friendly to the cause to invent stories behind the information or videos or photos? Or do you just have them say "look what I found/read/saw" and pass it along? I would imagine a back story to explain how they came into possessing whatever they are disseminating would be necessary, no?  If so, have any of those stories ever blew up in your face? And if so (again lol), how did you get control of it?

 

Just to clarify i am not the one doing it in my campaigns.  I just sadly have to sit through almost daily conference calls where I have to listen to components of the campaign that don't always involve me.  And social media is often a hot topic on those calls.  😀  Each consultant gets their turn to speak but we listen to each other in the process of doing so.

 

You wouldn't need a backstory to disseminate a video like that.  That would be like some random dude recording a candidate yell at a waiter or whatever.   It doesn't matter who saw it, they just happened to be there.   The ideal person in a situation like that would just be a random person who happened to be there and its up to whomever is in charge of social media to get the video out and to make the release look organic.   Making it look innocent is as big of a deal as actually getting it out. 

 

I wouldn't focus so much on the person who sent it out.    Because the way it can go down is someone that works at Redskins Park or knows Bruce or whomever is just tasked to find someone they know who would be willing to do it for them.  This stuff happens a lot in my profession.   The reason why it's so prevalent these days is the operative way to smear someone now is via social media because it festers and builds.   This thread itself is an example of it.    And the art of doing it is to make it look perfectly explainable.  

 

Non of the stories blew in my face personally because I wasn't the guy orchestrating it.  😀   But yeah I've seen some backfire.  Burner accounts ironically are the biggest culprits of things backfiring.  People source back tweets-facebook posts from burner accounts and then connect the dots to a specific high ranking person in the campaign.   Accounts that are recently established are considered very suspicious.   The press likes to expose that stuff. 

 

It's making burner accounts dicier unless they are long established and are hard to pin down.  It's better to get a real person without an obvious tie to the campaign to do it and just own it.    And if you have enough people working on the campaign -- its not very hard to find a low level person who no one outside of the room would even know, get their college buddy or whomever do it for them.  And why would they go through that trouble?  It's because it makes them valuable to the client. 

 

If for whatever reason you ever need a digital media/social media consultant and listen to a pitch -- I've heard many pitches because some of them ask me to help them get on campaigns and or offer to trade business, etc. -- they got everything I am talking about here and more down to an art form.  

18 minutes ago, RWJ said:

I sent you a DM guess you haven't seen it yet.  

 

 

Just caught it, sorry, responded. 

 

18 minutes ago, RWJ said:

I sent you a DM guess you haven't seen it yet.  

SnyderAllen is going to throw big money at someone next year.  It will be interesting to see who.  If Meyer isn't hired by USC it could be him and I wouldn't be surprised to see possibly Ryan Day (Ohio St.) connection to Haskins or Eric Beienemy from KC.  He has connections with Smith as we saw Smith sitting in the box with Dan last week I think it was.

 

For head coaches, I think the biggest splash would be Lincoln Riley.   I suspect it will be O'Connell.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Just to clarify i am not the one doing it in my campaigns.  I just sadly have to sit through almost daily conference calls where I have to listen to components of the campaign that don't always involve me.  And social media is often a hot topic on those calls.  😀  Each consultant gets their turn to speak but we listen to each other in the process of doing so.

 

You wouldn't need a backstory to disseminate a video like that.  That would be like some random dude recording a candidate yell at a waiter or whatever.   It doesn't matter who saw it, they just happened to be there.   The ideal person in a situation like that would just be a random person who happened to be there and its up to whomever is in charge of social media to get the video out and to make the release look organic.   Making it look innocent is as big of a deal as actually getting it out. 

 

I wouldn't focus so much on the person who sent it out.    Because the way it can go down is someone that works at Redskins Park or knows Bruce or whomever is just tasked to find someone they know who would be willing to do it for them.  This stuff happens a lot in my profession.   The reason why it's so prevalent these days is the operative way to smear someone now is via social media because it festers and builds.   This thread itself is an example of it.    And the art of doing it is to make it look perfectly explainable.  

 

Non of the stories blew in my face personally because I wasn't the guy orchestrating it.  😀   But yeah I've seen some backfire.  Burner accounts ironically are the biggest culprits of things backfiring.  People source back tweets-facebook posts from burner accounts and then connect the dots to a specific high ranking person in the campaign.   Accounts that are recently established are considered very suspicious.   The press likes to expose that stuff. 

 

It's making burner accounts dicier unless they are long established and are hard to pin down.  It's better to get a real person without an obvious tie to the campaign to do it and just own it.    And if you have enough people working on the campaign -- its not very hard to find a low level person who no one outside of the room would even know, get their college buddy or whomever do it for them.  And why would they go through that trouble?  It's because it makes them valuable to the client. 

 

If for whatever reason you ever need a digital media/social media consultant and listen to a pitch -- I've heard many pitches because some of them ask me to help them get on campaigns and or offer to trade business, etc. -- they got all am talking about here down to an art form. 

11

 

It sounds like the persons posting the videos in your description above have the backstory of they were the ones who videotaped it? (when they were not)...Is that right?

 

Also, is it somewhat normal to make your account private so that nobody else gets to see the video (or read the info or see the pics), or would they keep it open to maximize how many people see it?

 

This guy who posted the Jay video apparently has a detailed backstory behind it, although I'm basing it off of how different twitter followers reacted to whatever he said directly to them. It also appears that this guy is downplaying Gruden's actions. That's what made me think, ok, if he's only been asked to disseminate this video, did they also tell him to say all this stuff? "If anyone asks, just say you were there that night. And say it wasn't a big deal in your eyes."...

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

19 minutes ago, wit33 said:

The risk versus reward doesn’t quite add up for me. 

 

Fascinating display of psychology, as the fan with previous negative sentiment can rationalize this act and the fan with some positive sentiment in the past can’t. 

 

Bruce and Dan are at the pinnacles of their respective positions— Generally, one willing to engage in dirty tactics the reward is financial or an advance in from a career standpoint. 

3

 

This is actually a really good point.

 

The risk is being caught and the ramifications--legal and financial--could be severe.

 

The reward would be--at best--a minor bump in approval of firing Jay. The fanbase as a whole is fine with him being released last week.

 

 

[goskins10]

I knew they were questions I told you I was not answering them. But jsut to make a point, here you go. Answers. Even though you keep asking from the standpoint of my stating it happened X way when I said it is possible. But without having proof how would i know specially how it happened? As @Skinsinparadise said here are many permutations all of which are possible and easily pulled off. It's all speculation and i never said otherwise - which is why again for the 5th time I never said it DID happen. Just that's it's possible. 

 

This is my last post on this. I really have better things to do. Not being ugly. Just am done with it. Already spent too much time on this. time to get a drink and watch some Netflix! 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

In this specific case, what you described would not be very possible at all.

 

I'll ask the same questions you apparently did not think were questions:

 

In your #1:

- The anonymous source was the guy who posted it on twitter? - Doesn't matter. Could be either. 

- Or did the anonymous source drop it TO the guy who posted it on twitter? - I don't know. Again it could be done either way. I could care less exactly since I have no proof. I am talking about the possibility not defending that it happened that way. So it's an immaterial question. 

- if it's an anonymous source dropping the video TO someone, did it also come with the instructions of taking credit for videotaping it? - Could have and typically does if it's an outside source. But since I have no proof I cannot provide an exact answer because again - I am talking about the possibility not posing that I know it happened that way. 

- Or, did it come with instructions to say he was there when it happened? Same as above. 

- If the anonymous source was the guy who posted it on twitter, is he still anonymous since he's followed by 5,000 people and seemed to indicate that he was either there or he videotaped it? - Seemed to indicate? Do you have proof this is accurate? Is there video of him making the video? And you can get 5000 followers in the blink of an eye. Could even have their own network to set up these dummy accounts with that many or more followers. Has a specific person taken credit for it yet? If not, why not? And even if they did couldn't that be part of the cover up? Are you really willing to just ignore the possibilities and assume it's just random? 

- Were the multitude of others there that night who also had phones taken into consideration when the decision to drop the video anonymously was made? - You would have to ask them. Do you know of any other videos? Did you see anyone else recording? I watched the video I did not but then again I was not looking for it. But if you can't see someone, then how do you know there are others? And what does that even matter? Do you think they are going to say, hey that's Toby's recording (made up name)! Does that mean Toby dropped or was it pulled from his Facebook by one of these companies. 

- Would there need to be a contingency plan if those other possible videos showed something counter to what Bruce and Dan were hoping to achieve? - I have no idea. Again, i did not order this nor do I know if it even happened that way. Again, we were talking about the possibility. But more importantly, what would that be? Him not smoking? That is not going to undo the video of him smoking. Him not sitting with a woman? That will not mean he did not. What exactly would you expect the video to refute? And how do you know what they were trying to accomplish? Could just be to show him having fun outside when he should be working. What other video could change that? 

- Does that possibility of other videos coming forward even play a role in things in your scenario? - Don't know. You would need to be specific about what you think an alternative video is going to disprove. So far I see him smoking something and sitting and talking to someone. Maybe prove it was not a joint? Not sure many people care about that. I do not.  

- Does the length of time that Bruce and Dan would have held onto the video weaken this scenario? If not, why not? - Why would it? If so why? Meaningless question.

- Does Allen randomly collect dirt on everyone he works with in order to smear them with it 5 years or more down the road? Do you have proof he does not? If not, then it's possible - and that's all we are talking here. Possible. 

- Has there ever been any rumors or stories about Allen doing this? If not, why should it be assumed he did it here, outside of "anything is possible"? - Is this a real question? Has he not had attributed to him many other leaks and smears? There is no proof but there is enough again for it to be possible - at least 50/50. 

 

 

The answers to all that **** add an extra layer of uncertainty to the conspiracy...one that still doesn't make sense.

 

Does it make sense that someone could have stumbled onto the video and brought it to Bruce's attention? Yes. Does that automatically mean that every other aspect of the conspiracy theory now holds merit? No.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am done here. 

[Skinsinparadise]

20 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

It sounds like the persons posting the videos in your description above have the backstory of they were the ones who videotaped it? (when they were not)...Is that right?

 

Also, is it somewhat normal to make your account private so that nobody else gets to see the video (or read the info or see the pics), or would they keep it open to maximize how many people see it?

 

This guy who posted the Jay video apparently has a detailed backstory behind it, although I'm basing it off of how different twitter followers reacted to whatever he said directly to them. It also appears that this guy is downplaying Gruden's actions. That's what made me think, ok, if he's only been asked to disseminate this video, did they also tell him to say all this stuff? "If anyone asks, just say you were there that night. And say it wasn't a big deal in your eyes."...

 

 

 

I haven't read his tweets.  I don't know what to make of the private account -- I can make arguments for that either way.  Do you know what time the tweet was made on Friday?  

 

The guy downplaying Gruden's actions if anything makes it seem more suspicious.  The main things you'd want if this is orchestrated is you want the person releasing it to look like they got no malice and for it to come off as innocent as possible. 

 

As for the motives, I get both sides point of view on that.  My take it we can't really know one way or another.  Lets say Bruce-Dan-Jay got into a blow up on Friday about something and they know Jay is on the way out so maybe that precipitated it.  Or maybe they love Jay and went drinking on Friday and are lamenting the situation they are in.  And they would never do that to him.   We don't know.  And if I am going purely on rumor-hearsay its sort of a mixed message about the FO and Jay from what i can tell.  Some say Dan loves Jay.  Some say there is now tension.  

 

I like to say sometimes on the rumor stuff its easier for me to more confidently land on a position when I hear most converge on the same story especially if conservative style reporters like Keim agree on the story.  Much tougher when the narrative is mixed.  And right now at least from what I've listened to and read I am getting a mixed story on Jay and the FO so frankly I don't know what to believe. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Let me sum up all this conversation: 

 

It could be anybody and we’ll never know who or why.

[catmandu]

On to Cincinnati.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

9 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

I am done here. 

 

 

I don't think you understood my post, to be honest.

 

You presented an imagined scenario. I asked questions to see how thoroughly you thought through this imagined scenario before declaring it "easy as pie". Because I saw a lot of holes--still do even after reading your answers. You quickly went from answering them to reiterating that you never said you thought this is what happened--which I never said you did and don't give a damn either way lol--to just asking me questions instead of answering mine.

 

So go watch Dark on Netflix lol (I only said Dark because that was on my agenda this evening, but like I said, I enjoy debating).

[Redskins Reparations]

Is it time for this thread to be merged with the Conspiracy Thread?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

5 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Let me sum up all this conversation: 

 

It could be anybody and we’ll never know who or why.

 

Actually, it might be rather easy to get the info needed and I've been tempted to do so...but I despise getting caught up in **** on twitter lol...I still might, what the hell, right?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

18 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I haven't read his tweets.  I don't know what to make of the private account -- I can make arguments for that either way.  Do you know what time the tweet was made on Friday?  

 

The guy downplaying Gruden's actions if anything makes it seem more suspicious.  The main things you'd want if this is orchestrated is you want the person releasing it to look like they got no malice and for it to come off as innocent as possible. 

 

As for the motives, I get both sides point of view on that.  My take it we can't really know one way or another.  Lets say Bruce-Dan-Jay got into a blow up on Friday about something and they know Jay is on the way out so maybe that precipitated it.  Or maybe they love Jay and went drinking on Friday and are lamenting the situation they are in.  And they would never do that to him.   We don't know.  And if I am going purely on rumor-hearsay its sort of a mixed message about the FO and Jay from what i can tell.  Some say Dan loves Jay.  Some say there is now tension.  

 

I like to say sometimes on the rumor stuff its easier for me to more confidently land on a position when I hear most converge on the same story especially if conservative style reporters like Keim agree on the story.  Much tougher when the narrative is mixed.  And right now at least from what I've listened to and read I am getting a mixed story on Jay and the FO so frankly I don't know what to believe. 

 

I wasn't asking you about his specific account or tweets...I was trying to get info on how this stuff works behind the scenes since you've been exposed to your fair share of the muck. I did use the specifics of this issue to see if you've seen anything similar and how it usually goes. It's interesting to hear your take on some of this stuff (beyond the video) simply because you look for and react to different things than most of us.

 

And like I said, I got an idea of what he was saying by how people were responding to him...his tweets are "protected" which means I can't read them. But if you see a convo like this:

 

Person 1: "how was your day?"

 

Person 2: (protected tweet)

 

Person 1: "That's too bad. I hate the rush hour traffic here, too."

 

...you tend to reach the conclusion that the protected tweet was about hating the traffic.

 

 

 

[RandyHolt]

They wanted the players to see that Jay was just like them. The tagging is the most telling thing, video aside.

 

The odd thing is, that the players probably already knew him pretty darn well.

 

Imagine if that was Joe Gibbs! 

 

THAT would have opened the players eyes.

Wide. I bet they are more focused tomorrow. This, plus Colt who always has one good game between IR stints.... ML + Over Parlay FTW 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

12 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

They wanted the players to see that Jay was just like them. The tagging is the most telling thing, video aside.

 

The odd thing is, that the players probably already knew him pretty darn well.

 

Imagine if that was Joe Gibbs! 

 

THAT would have opened the players eyes.

Wide. I bet they are more focused tomorrow. This, plus Colt who always has one good game between IR stints.... ML + Over Parlay FTW 

 

Oh, ****, I forgot about the tagging of players (!!)...To me, that is something a fan would do...it's not something Bruce and Dan would do. I can't see why they would want that to happen.

 

(insert standard "I wouldn't put anything past them" reaction lol...)

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

28 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Actually, it might be rather easy to get the info needed and I've been tempted to do so...but I despise getting caught up in **** on twitter lol...I still might, what the hell, right?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

I’m just skimming but my initial thoughts are 1) you guys are wacko and 2) Whatever helps Jay get through the pain of having to coach one more game.

[Rypienskinz]

I can go to bed tonight potentially not having to listen to Jay Gruden speak as the Head Coach of this team again. Hail!

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

 

I don't think you understood my post, to be honest.

 

You presented an imagined scenario. I asked questions to see how thoroughly you thought through this imagined scenario before declaring it "easy as pie". Because I saw a lot of holes--still do even after reading your answers. You quickly went from answering them to reiterating that you never said you thought this is what happened--which I never said you did and don't give a damn either way lol--to just asking me questions instead of answering mine.

 

So go watch Dark on Netflix lol (I only said Dark because that was on my agenda this evening, but like I said, I enjoy debating).

 

Ok, one last to clarify. I understood exactly your line of questioning .Your entire contention is that there is so little chance dan and/or bruce had anything to do with something like this it's near zero and your questions are an attempt to put holes in the idea that it could happen. 

 

And my point is two fold -

1. I do not need to know all those details to know there a reasonable chance - that people in dan and bruce's position could pull something like this off. 

2. The answer to your questions were indeed questions to point out that while you can pose questions suggesting it's difficult for something like to happen I can ask questions that show it's difficult for you to prove it did not happen - which BTW was my point to begin with.

 

You want me to provide all these details on exactly how it could happen when the permutations are endless. So my response is I want you to provide details on how it's nearly impossible for them to do it. Neither can be proven. They are all moot questions as we have no data. 

 

The facts are they could do it, but we do not have enough data to say that they did do it. 

 

And i will pick my own shows thank you!!  OK that was totally a joke! LOL  Dark looks like a good show but I am already knee deep in too many to start. Maybe when I get caught up - will be working on the last season of Blacklist tonight. And I still have Travelers, Continuum and a slew of others to get caught up on. Waiting for the release of season 2 The Umbrella Academy too! 

 

I thought when you said Dark you meant Dark Matter. Loved that show. Hated that they canceled it. Let it open ended. 

 

 

 

 

 

[dyst]

Clown show, top to bottom. It’s not even Jay’s fault. The virus gets into everyone who comes here.

[RWJ]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Just caught it, sorry, responded. 

 

 

For head coaches, I think the biggest splash would be Lincoln Riley.   I suspect it will be O'Connell.  

He is a big name but I think Haskins being handpicked by Snyder, IMO will prompt him to possibly pursue Meyer as HC if he's not the HC at USC or Ryan Day.  Both had big effects with/on Haskins.  Just a thought.