John Gruden intends to “burn the [NFL’s] constantly home

address to The new ESPN story

About the emails that led to the firing of Raiders coach Jon Gruden, it focuses on the connection between Gruden’s words coming to light a decade earlier and Commanders owner Daniel Snyder’s decision to sell the team. But, frankly, anyone paying attention to the story knew Snyder had avoided the worst-case scenario until Gruden’s emails were leaked. This specific development attracted the attention of Congress, which launched an investigation that ultimately led to Snyder having no real choice but to cash out.

The real news, based on careful consumption and ingestion of the lengthy article, comes from the still unresolved question of who leaked Gruden’s emails—and from Gruden’s passionate quest to use the Nevada civil justice system to “burn the house down.”

All along, Gruden insisted, the league office leaked the emails. If/when Gruden’s lawsuit against the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell progresses beyond the question of whether Gruden should submit to the league’s secret and fraudulent Kangaroo Arbitration Court that Goodell ultimately controls, Gruden will have a chance to make discovery and track down the truth.

And frankly, the process of discovery will certainly follow the truth. Unless emails are sent to Wall Street Journal and the The New York Times Through burnt phones and/or other completely covert and untraceable mechanisms, a digital forensics expert working for Gruden’s attorney will find the trail of electronic breadcrumbs that led to the emails being sent to the media.

After reading the full ESPN story, here’s my working theory. And this is just my own thought, as gleaned from ESPN reporting, not statements of fact. (In other words, don’t sue me, Dan.) First, it’s possible that Snyder directed the disclosure of Gruden’s emails to Goodell as a bumbling peace offer, knowing that Goodell and Gruden had a history of animosity and that Goodell would appreciate the opportunity to redeem the league From Gruden forever. Second, it is possible that once Goodell saw the emails and realized they could be used to force Gruden out, Goodell proceeded to try to use the emails to pressure Raiders owner Mark Davis to get rid of Gruden.

Along the way, there were two potential spin-offs. First, the timing of the initial leak (which included a racist trope directed at NFL Players Association executive DeMaurice Smith) helped Smith win a narrow vote to keep his job. (According to the ESPN article, Smith privately bragged that he was responsible for the email leak.) Second, the incident gave Goodell and the league an opportunity to get the impression that she was acting quickly and firmly when faced with evidence of a racist comment by the head coach.

The most intriguing fact regarding the possibility of Al-Douri leaking emails comes from the two-step process of putting the information in the media. After the arrival of the first email (regarding Smith) with Wall Street Journal On Friday afternoon, Goodell and Davis were contacted by Jeff Bash, the NFL’s general counsel.

“You have to do something,” Goodell told Davis on ESPN’s report.

“what are you going to do?” Bash said.

“There are more emails coming,” Goodell said. “Something should be done.”

When nothing was done after the first email was issued, more emails arrived with The New York Times On Monday, three days later. And it was those emails that forced Groden out.

Circumstantial evidence indicates that the university orchestrated the leaks in order to convince Davis to act. When he expressed his reluctance to act after the first leak, Goodell said more emails were coming. When Davis did not heed the warning, more email came. (There is arguably an unexplored blackmail angle at play here, given the chain of events and statements Goodell is said to have made to Davis.)

Also, this paragraph from the ESPN article tends to support the idea that the leaks came from Goodell or at his direction: “Over the years, Goodell has responded to leaks from within the league’s office by rounding up his senior staff and saying that the league will search its phones and computers for contacts with reporters.” But after Gruden’s leaks, league sources said, Goodell didn’t have that kind of meeting; it’s not clear why.”

In the end, the ESPN article doesn’t reveal who leaked the emails, but provides an easy road map to potential suspects for Gruden’s lawyers — to the point where they didn’t already know where to start looking for emails, text messages, and so on.

Also interesting is what’s left of the 650,000 emails, a small handful of which have been culled and weaponized against Gruden. If the case proceeds in open court, these emails may become public. Gruden reportedly said that former Washington executive Bruce Allen, the recipient of Gruden’s emails, told Gruden that the 650,000 documents “incriminate everyone in the league.”

If Gruden blocks the league’s efforts to force its claims into arbitration, Gruden will gain enormous leverage. The rules of discovery applicable to his civil suit could give him the right to “burn down the house” power.

This, in turn, could put him in line for a massive financial settlement — or perhaps even understand with a wink nod that Goodell will spend part of his personal political capital to get Gruden another job as an NFL head coach. (And yes, Goodell would probably have the power to make that happen, if he wanted to do it.)

Currently, Gruden stands on the sidelines of a return to relevance, consulting with the Saints as they adapt former Gruden pupil Derek Carr to New Orleans. We’re told the Saints have not received any reaction from the league office over their connection to Groden.

Perhaps the League Bureau refrained from disciplining the Saints because it worried about where all this could go. If the league office wasn’t worried about where all this could be headed, perhaps it should be.