Skip to content

Hue Jackson clarifies comments he was paid to lose with Cleveland Browns

The Browns Board
89 24 3.6k 1
  • Again, if proven true in a court of law and not just a court of Twatter, then Baby Huey goes down too. I know he thinks he has a gotcha moment against Haslam, but the dumbass doesn't realize that he is just a culpable. He should never be allowed to coach anywhere ever again. 

    S SdBacker80 wrote on last edited by
    #14

    @d-bone said:

    Again, if proven true in a court of law and not just a court of Twatter, then Baby Huey goes down too. I know he thinks he has a gotcha moment against Haslam, but the dumbass doesn't realized that he is just a culpable. He should never be allowed to coach anywhere ever again. 

    He went from HC of an NFL team to coaching FCS ball that speaks volumes.

    at this point he could say “he told me but I didn’t want to go along with it”.  Did he?  We will never know …he’s between a rock and a hard place. He’s either terribly incompetent (likely) and here’s another reminder years later or he took the bait….because of course we didn’t win and had the #1 overall pick two straight years.  And if true and went along with it you are right…Grambling should fire him. 

  • Again, if proven true in a court of law and not just a court of Twatter, then Baby Huey goes down too. I know he thinks he has a gotcha moment against Haslam, but the dumbass doesn't realize that he is just a culpable. He should never be allowed to coach anywhere ever again. 

    DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on last edited by
    #15

    @d-bone said:

    Again, if proven true in a court of law and not just a court of Twatter, then Baby Huey goes down too. I know he thinks he has a gotcha moment against Haslam, but the dumbass doesn't realized that he is just a culpable. He should never be allowed to coach anywhere ever again. 

    Exactly.  You can't accept what amounts to a bribe and then later try to act like you did nothing and try and sue?  What a dumb ass.

  • Canton DawgC Canton Dawg wrote on last edited by
    #16

    Hue was without question the worst HC I’ve witnessed in my 50+ years of watching the NFL.

    To this day, he is the only HC I saw that had to call a time out before the opening kick off to avoid a delay of game penalty. ?‍♂️

  • jrb12711J jrb12711 wrote on last edited by
    #17

    Zombo said:

    This is beyond Hue Jackson and how you feel about him.

    This is heavy stuff. The NFL will investigate Roth and Haslem and if they were paying bonuses to lose football games, they are in deep, deep, doo doo.

    Z

    Eh, I have no strong feelings about him one way or the other. He was IMO an awful coach (I’d only put Shurmer and Kitchens as worse) who also inherited an awful roster. I don’t use that bias to fundamentally discredit what he’s saying.

    what I’m saying is that I’d be absolutely shocked if owners openly as these folks are claiming flaunted something like this. I could see the truth being much more in the middle of the reality of a team intentionally tanking and the pressure coaches have in the face of owners clearly wanting to tank job. 

    owners may be a lot of things but they aren’t dumb. It’s one thing to say foul language or comment on women. It’s another thing entirely to outright propose fixing games. I just don’t see it,  but will eat that crow if it comes to it. 

  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by
    #18

    Zombo said:

    If true, Haslem and Ross need to go.

    Plain and simple.

    Zombo

    If Haslam can get away with ripping off trucking businesses for millions upon millions of dollars, he won't get in any trouble for this.

    Always remember the golden rule Zombo - those with the gold, rule.

  • U Unsympathetic wrote on last edited by Unsympathetic
    #19

    Yes, the gold rules.. but the question is which gold.  Haslam has money - but isn't really adding much each year to everyone else's coffers.  Haslam and Ross would be jettisoned immediately if their presence negatively affected annual profits: 

    Paying coaches to lose affects betting&gambling, which the NFL itself estimates will be a billion-dollar-a-year revenue stream before 2030. It's 250M in 2022 alone..

    Known lack of game integrity affects sponsorships.  Sponsorship dollars details - 2021 season total of 1.8 billion. That's "__ is the official diaper of NFL dads" things.

  • M Marvin the Martian wrote on last edited by
    #20

    Why pay him extra to lose?  You simply had to pay him to coach

  • M MDDawg wrote on last edited by
    #21

    Whatever your opinion of Hue, if he can prove there was an incentive to tank games, the NFL will force Haslam to sell the team and similarly for Ross in Miami. This is way more damaging than the discrimination lawsuit especially with the NFL now officially embracing gambling. Selling the team means new front office, coach and FAs will be hesitant to sign here.

  • 5150k95 5150k9 wrote on last edited by
    #22

    Hue is Correct. He was paid by the Haslem's to lose...Its called "HIS SALARY" which he kept getting for 3 miserable years that Hue was losing as an awful coach. So I guess he's not wrong in theory. 

  • C calfoxwc wrote on last edited by
    #23

    I suppose "Haslam paid hue to be a failure with every team he's ever been with."

    "if that is true, Haslam is in trouble".

    sad.

  • Canton DawgC Canton Dawg wrote on last edited by
    #24

    I wonder how much Hue was paid to lose in Oakland?

  • I wonder how much Hue was paid to lose in Oakland?

    Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by
    #25

    @canton-dawg said:

    I wonder how much Hue was paid to lose in Oakland?

    When he went 8-8 in his one season as head coach? 

  • I wonder how much Hue was paid to lose in Oakland?

    nickersN nickers wrote on last edited by
    #26

    @canton-dawg said:

    I wonder how much Hue was paid to lose in Oakland?

    The fact he even got paid at all by anyone is a crime...

  • Dislike Hue all you want -- but if he's got the receipts, Haslam needs to be a defendant in this case.  Not sure forcing a sale of the team would be a realistic end goal - or even if that would do much.

    Flores is completely right when he says the only thing they pay attention to is power.

    If Hue does in fact have the goods, I'm 110% behind him joining the lawsuit in this case.  Him not being either a good coach or a likeable person is immaterial.. the bonus for losing needs to be addressed and the only remedy is through the court.  Calling it first: Some casino will join on the side of Flores b/c fixing games affects gambling....

    @bob806 said:

    You just cannot litigate humanity, or kindness.

    I really do disagree completely with this assertion -- the question isn't a general definition of humanity/kindness because that's [intentionally?] amorphous.  NFL free agency has a long and litigious history -- and now it's just accepted as The Norm when for many decades it absolutely wasn't.

    Perhaps it's news to you that for some, a sincere evaluation of them based purely on their talent outside of any preconceived notions about that person simply doesn't happen without a lawsuit..  Flores' job was to win football games, not date Ross's daughter.  And he is actually substantially more skilled at winning than Ross expected him to be.

    Bob806B Bob806 wrote on last edited by
    #27

    @unsympathetic said:

    I really do disagree completely with this assertion -- the question isn't a general definition of humanity/kindness because that's [intentionally?] amorphous.  NFL free agency has a long and litigious history -- and now it's just accepted as The Norm when for many decades it absolutely wasn't.

    Perhaps it's news to you that for some, a sincere evaluation of them based purely on their talent outside of any preconceived notions about that person simply doesn't happen without a lawsuit..  Flores' job was to win football games, not date Ross's daughter.  And he is actually substantially more skilled at winning than Ross expected him to be.

    So I'm not trying to be insulting here, but you grossly misinterpreted my statement.

    A court ruling isn't going to magically make people accepting of race, religion, etc. That comes from within an individual. 

    If someone takes me to court over my hatred of the Ratbirds & Steelers, I'm not going to magically turn and embrace them.....it's part of who I am, I just could never get on board with it.

    I understand the cause- minority candidates are tired of being passed over. When Flores was fired I was shocked. I suppose this lawsuit could perhaps lead to some type of Affirmative Action situation where a judge rules an ___% of NFL Head Coaches must be minorities.....is that what we want? 

  • @unsympathetic said:

    I really do disagree completely with this assertion -- the question isn't a general definition of humanity/kindness because that's [intentionally?] amorphous.  NFL free agency has a long and litigious history -- and now it's just accepted as The Norm when for many decades it absolutely wasn't.

    Perhaps it's news to you that for some, a sincere evaluation of them based purely on their talent outside of any preconceived notions about that person simply doesn't happen without a lawsuit..  Flores' job was to win football games, not date Ross's daughter.  And he is actually substantially more skilled at winning than Ross expected him to be.

    So I'm not trying to be insulting here, but you grossly misinterpreted my statement.

    A court ruling isn't going to magically make people accepting of race, religion, etc. That comes from within an individual. 

    If someone takes me to court over my hatred of the Ratbirds & Steelers, I'm not going to magically turn and embrace them.....it's part of who I am, I just could never get on board with it.

    I understand the cause- minority candidates are tired of being passed over. When Flores was fired I was shocked. I suppose this lawsuit could perhaps lead to some type of Affirmative Action situation where a judge rules an ___% of NFL Head Coaches must be minorities.....is that what we want? 

    nickersN nickers wrote on last edited by nickers
    #28

    @bob806 said:

    So I'm not trying to be insulting here, but you grossly misinterpreted my statement.

    A court ruling isn't going to magically make people accepting of race, religion, etc. That comes from within an individual. 

    If someone takes me to court over my hatred of the Ratbirds & Steelers, I'm not going to magically turn and embrace them.....it's part of who I am, I just could never get on board with it.

    I understand the cause- minority candidates are tired of being passed over. When Flores was fired I was shocked. I suppose this lawsuit could perhaps lead to some type of Affirmative Action situation where a judge rules an ___% of NFL Head Coaches must be minorities.....is that what we want? 

    No we want the most qualified person available for said position without skin color being a factor one way or the other...

  • U Unsympathetic wrote on last edited by Unsympathetic
    #29

    Culley's treatment is actually a part of this lawsuit as well -- Texans fired Culley after Culley had the temerity to get 4 wins this season starting a 4th rounder at QB and a roster of UDFA's and Money Mitch.. Because they wanted to replace him with Josh McCown.. he with no coaching experience at any level and many actual qualified coaches available.  But hey, he's white!

  • @canton-dawg said:

    I wonder how much Hue was paid to lose in Oakland?

    When he went 8-8 in his one season as head coach? 

    Canton DawgC Canton Dawg wrote on last edited by
    #30

    @dutch-oven said:

    When he went 8-8 in his one season as head coach? 

    I guess it depends if Davis paid him to lose?

  • @unsympathetic said:

    I really do disagree completely with this assertion -- the question isn't a general definition of humanity/kindness because that's [intentionally?] amorphous.  NFL free agency has a long and litigious history -- and now it's just accepted as The Norm when for many decades it absolutely wasn't.

    Perhaps it's news to you that for some, a sincere evaluation of them based purely on their talent outside of any preconceived notions about that person simply doesn't happen without a lawsuit..  Flores' job was to win football games, not date Ross's daughter.  And he is actually substantially more skilled at winning than Ross expected him to be.

    So I'm not trying to be insulting here, but you grossly misinterpreted my statement.

    A court ruling isn't going to magically make people accepting of race, religion, etc. That comes from within an individual. 

    If someone takes me to court over my hatred of the Ratbirds & Steelers, I'm not going to magically turn and embrace them.....it's part of who I am, I just could never get on board with it.

    I understand the cause- minority candidates are tired of being passed over. When Flores was fired I was shocked. I suppose this lawsuit could perhaps lead to some type of Affirmative Action situation where a judge rules an ___% of NFL Head Coaches must be minorities.....is that what we want? 

    U Unsympathetic wrote on last edited by Unsympathetic
    #31

    @bob806 said:

    So I'm not trying to be insulting here, but you grossly misinterpreted my statement.

    A court ruling isn't going to magically make people accepting of race, religion, etc. That comes from within an individual. 

    If someone takes me to court over my hatred of the Ratbirds & Steelers, I'm not going to magically turn and embrace them.....it's part of who I am, I just could never get on board with it.

    I understand the cause- minority candidates are tired of being passed over. When Flores was fired I was shocked. I suppose this lawsuit could perhaps lead to some type of Affirmative Action situation where a judge rules an ___% of NFL Head Coaches must be minorities.....is that what we want? 

    You'd be helped by reading the lawsuit -- your "statement" is addressed on the cover page before the claims are enumerated.

    Morals cannot be legislated -- but behavior can be regulated.

    I'm not trying to be insulting here, but it sure reads to me like you came to this thread with the intent to spread factual inaccuracies about the lawsuit.

    This case is not about morality -- YOU are attempting to shift the discussion by inventing a completely fake version of both Flores' claim and his proposed remedy.. which is of course the classic dodge of someone who knows they're guilty but doesn't want to admit it.

    Flores has facts, and has listed them as his claims.  If the jury buys his logic, he wins and the NFL loses.  And.. those claims are pretty numerous and well-sourced, and the NFL knows it. This entire thing will actually boil down to collection of yes-or-no questions: Was this law violated, yes or no? And repeat for each law.  Plenty of case history to go by to determine if the laws have been violated -- this isn't random.

    If you either understood "the cause" or had read the actual lawsuit you would know that the list that is proposed to address the grievances is actually quite well thought-out and complete.  Listed at the end.  You may not agree with all, but it's definitely not "Just Affirmative Action" .. because just like Flores did when he coached, he thought this through much more than random white guys trying to insult him did.

    As well, the laws cited that he's asserting have been violated are :

    Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (“Section 1981”), the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, (“NJLAD”), the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 290 et seq. (“NYSHRL”) and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-101 et seq. (“NYCHRL”).

    The proposed list of redress of grievances :

    1] Increase the influence of Black individuals in hiring and termination decisions for General Manager, Head Coach and Offensive and Defensive Coordinator positions;
    a. Ensure diversity of ownership by creating and funding a committee dedicated to sourcing Black investors to take majority ownership stakes in NFL Teams;
    b. Ensure diversity of decision-making by permitting select Black players and coaches to participate in the interviewing process for General Manager, Head Coach and Offensive and Defensive Coordinator positions;
    2] Increase the objectivity of hiring and termination decisions for General Manager, Head Coach and Offensive and Defensive Coordinator positions;
    a. Require NFL Teams to reduce to writing the rationale for hiring and termination decisions, including a full explanation of the basis for any subjective influences (e.g., trust, personality, interview performance, etc.);
    b. Require NFL Teams to consider side-by-side comparisons of objective criteria, such as past performance, experience and objective qualifications;
    3] Increase the number of Black Offensive and Defensive Coordinators;
    a. Create and fund a training program for lower-level Black coaches who demonstrate an aptitude for coaching and an interest in advancing to a Coordinator position;
    4] Incentivize the hiring and retention of Black General Managers, Head Coaches and Offensive and Defensive Coordinators through monetary, draft and/or other compensation such as additional salary cap space; and
    5] Complete transparency with respect to pay for all General Managers, Head Coaches and Offensive and Defensive Coordinators.

  • jrb12711J jrb12711 wrote on last edited by
    #32

    I listened to Hue on Sportscenter this morning (from his interview last night). I think the reality of the situation is not that there was implicit bonuses tied with losing games intentionally.

    More closely, the reality of the situation is Sashi Brown and his crew came in and loudly, proudly, and without remorse set the team up for tank mode. Hue was surprised (his words) at this and was perhaps understandably taken aback at this obvious plan to suck for draft capital. I can completely understand Hue being disgruntled about that in general, and feel like he was the 'fall guy' for a team that was NEVER going to win more than 3-4 games. 

    This also brings up a fair conversation piece on if black coaches are more significantly set up for failure like the Browns were in 2016-2017. Culley, for example, this season was in a very similar boat and IMO exceeded reasonable expectations. It's definitely a very important conversation and may have merit in the lawsuit. 

    With all that being said, that is much different than Haslam directly giving bonuses for throwing football games. Obviously, if there's proof of that let's burn it to the ground.

  • I listened to Hue on Sportscenter this morning (from his interview last night). I think the reality of the situation is not that there was implicit bonuses tied with losing games intentionally.

    More closely, the reality of the situation is Sashi Brown and his crew came in and loudly, proudly, and without remorse set the team up for tank mode. Hue was surprised (his words) at this and was perhaps understandably taken aback at this obvious plan to suck for draft capital. I can completely understand Hue being disgruntled about that in general, and feel like he was the 'fall guy' for a team that was NEVER going to win more than 3-4 games. 

    This also brings up a fair conversation piece on if black coaches are more significantly set up for failure like the Browns were in 2016-2017. Culley, for example, this season was in a very similar boat and IMO exceeded reasonable expectations. It's definitely a very important conversation and may have merit in the lawsuit. 

    With all that being said, that is much different than Haslam directly giving bonuses for throwing football games. Obviously, if there's proof of that let's burn it to the ground.

    Canton DawgC Canton Dawg wrote on last edited by
    #33

    @jrb12711 said:

    I listened to Hue on Sportscenter this morning (from his interview last night). I think the reality of the situation is not that there was implicit bonuses tied with losing games intentionally.

    More closely, the reality of the situation is Sashi Brown and his crew came in and loudly, proudly, and without remorse set the team up for tank mode. Hue was surprised (his words) at this and was perhaps understandably taken aback at this obvious plan to suck for draft capital. I can completely understand Hue being disgruntled about that in general, and feel like he was the 'fall guy' for a team that was NEVER going to win more than 3-4 games. 

    This also brings up a fair conversation piece on if black coaches are more significantly set up for failure like the Browns were in 2016-2017. Culley, for example, this season was in a very similar boat and IMO exceeded reasonable expectations. It's definitely a very important conversation and may have merit in the lawsuit. 

    With all that being said, that is much different than Haslam directly giving bonuses for throwing football games. Obviously, if there's proof of that let's burn it to the ground.

    The only flaw I find in Hue’s statement that he was set up for failure, is the fact that Gregg Williams took over Hue’s team and went 5-3.

    Either Williams didn’t get the memo that he was supposed to tank, or he didn’t need Haslam’s money.