I started a separate thread to discuss the 2026 NFL DRAFT. If you’re interested, or even if you’re not, here it is:
Pretty sure he had some PR expert draft that up. Because you are 100% right.
The thick plottens with new pictures of the two canoodling in a bar 6 years ago. And now Vrabel is going to miss day 3 of the draft for counseling.
On a personal note I had to look up how to spell canoodling since I’ve never had to write it before.
I’m sure Vrabel’s job is safe, but you have to wonder if the Pats had gone 8-9 last season if Kraft would be giving Mike Tomlin a call tonight.
Mr Thai Massage Parlor? Nah, this screams “slow sports news day”
You’re probably right. It’s true that for coaches and players alike, success tends to smooth things over. A lot of things get overlooked as long as you’re winning.
Vrabel took a struggling team to the Super Bowl; it was 4-13 the previous two years in a row, and in his first year as HC he got them into the big game. It would take a lot more than an off-the-field scandal (with no illegal behavior alleged) to jeopardize his job.
Then again… Even if they were 8-9, that’s still a large enough improvement he might have still been kept on.
If he disclosed information that hurt the team it would be different. As far as I can tell any story she may have reported from information he gave her could only help the team. So nothing illegal, apparently nothing that broke league rules and no leaks that hurt the team. From a personal ethics point of view it stinks. He certainly can’t take the high ground when talking to players about off field conduct.
That’s the only potential problem that I can see, and I heard the same thing opined on sports radio this morning. Especially when you are bringing in college kids in the draft, it’s difficult to tell those kids they need to behave when you are publicly misbehaving.
I think that makes it critical for him to at least give the appearance that he is doing something to fix the issue and atone. Because then he can turn it around and say, “If you make mistakes we will expect you to make it right and do better going forward.”
I guess it’s sort of a separate issue but the idea that he’s in charge of ‘kids’ shows how much we take advantage of the players.
The youngest rookies are over 20 and the oldest can potentially be in their late 20s. They’re considered adults otherwise, so if they truly are so impressionable, we’ve done them a serious disservice infantilizing them in the name of making them good at playing a game for our personal pleasure and to the financial benefit of team owners and staff.
I haven’t seen any stats but it seems like the age of rookies is going up because of NIL. In the past they wanted to leave school as soon as possible to avoid injury before getting a payday. Now many players are making more money in college than they would on a rookie contract.
Then, even more reason not to act like they’re some fresh faced babes experiencing the real world for the first time
Not true. 20-year-olds get drafted all the time. And as an extreme example, as recently as 2007, the Texans drafted DT Amobi Okoye who was 19. While most rookies are over 20, it’s not unusual for someone to be drafted who isn’t old enough to legally drink yet. I believe every draft includes at least a handful of athletes that age.
Whether or not they count as “kids” or not depends on your perspective. Since I have a daughter about that age, I do think of them as kids. And I’m not “infantilizing” them with that title. Heck, I was routinely called a “kid” in my 30s at work by people who are much older, and I’m almost 50 and still sometimes get called that by people older than me. And it doesn’t bother me; to them I certainly must seem like a kid. (Also, I look a bit young for my age despite having a white beard and hair slowly turning white.)
It’s a relative term not mutually exclusive with adulthood. Even in the dictionary, it is often just used to mean “someone younger than me”, such as an old person talking about their elderly “kid” brother or sister.
I’m not sure that the life of a professional athlete counts as the “real world”/
I think this entire line of discussion is absurd.
We don’t call for teachers, electricians, software engineers, chefs or any other profession to be fired when they cheat on their spouses. You can have personal feelings about it, but it has nothing at all to do with the job. And the coaches don’t punish players for where they put their dicks. Plenty of NFL players are whoring around, cheating on their wives, doing all kinds of crazy shit. So long as they show up ready to play, the coaches and the teams don’t care. That’s your private life. If Vrabel has to discipline a player for some off-field nonsense it will be fine, because it won’t be about infidelity, it’ll be a DUI, violence, drugs, or some other criminal shit.
Taking it a step further, I don’t really care that much about the “integrity” angle for either Russini or Vrabel. I doubt that they were trading sex for access or anything, they were just fucking. I’d be mad if I were the spouse (unless they had an open relationship which you can’t dismiss) but it has nothing to do with the job. There’s a decades (centuries?) old tradition of reporters befriending the people. they cover in exchange for access. I’m sure there are dozens of stories about coaches and reporters being drinking buddies. Going to strip clubs together, having dinner together, developing deep personal friendships. And in most of those cases, they are probably getting inside information. I don’t particularly think that it being a man-woman situation makes it any worse. If they were literally trading sex for stories, that’s a different animal, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.
Well…Bill Clinton got impeached for it (or, more specifically, for lying about it). Though he didn’t get fired.
Politicians are a special case because of voters. Plus, the stupid Clinton witch hunt was probably the formative event for me that made be a big old lefty.