Coach Tuesday

Promptly disclose it to Terry and ask for her reporting line to be moved to him (if possible).

No, that's just not how it works and even if a jury wouldn't be swayed by that evidence (which you're just wrong about), any professional organization wouldn't want the added risk. Want another hypothetical? A mid-level female employee is fired for not disclosing a relationship with a male colleague; she claims selective enforcement / gender discrimination and points to the open affair going on between the COO and GC. There are tons of other hypothetical scenarios where this sort of thing presents serious and unacceptable risk to the company. I've been on this board a long time, as you know - I don't ever claim to have any special football expertise (quite the opposite). This is an instance where I do happen to have real-world expertise and I'm telling you, this is just SOP in 2023.

Most of what you’ve written here is just wrong, I don’t have the time or the will to debate it all, but I’m telling you as someone with decades of experience with this stuff that you’ve got it wrong.

You're missing it. Let's say a female executive assistant gets let go. She believes she should not have been let go. She also believes she was treated poorly relative to male peers, or by her male superior. She brings an unlawful termination claim and a sexual harassment claim. She includes allegations in her lawsuit about the "toxic culture" at the company, citing as evidence the fact that the chief risk officers at the company - the two people with the most responsibility for ensuring that the workplace is fair and harassment-free - are openly having an affair, in violation of company policy. "If those two people don't have to comply, who does?" Is the message that permeates the organization. This is the type of risk that every professional organization today tries to avoid. I don't really need to debate this with you, it's SOP in 2023. It is what it is, as Aristotle said.

Have you ever worked for a professional company? You're outing yourself as someone who has never had to sit through a manager-level HR training program (good for you, they suck). The risk that other employees would bring harassment claims and point to that relationship as evidence of a lackadaisical workplace culture (or worse). The risk that she would sue for retaliation if fired. Many others. This is standard practice. Want more risk? The risk that Terry ends up being the subject of an article like this one. You just can't have this stuff going on between your chief risk officers, especially if it wasn't disclosed per company policy, violates company policy, and/or was so out in the open and reckless that it makes everyone uncomfortable.

I’m not saying that - I’m saying it opens up the organization to unnecessary risk, for a slew of reasons. Agree with you about the optics.

I explained it above - their particular roles (GC and COO) makes it highly problematic, especially if it violates a written policy. That said, even though she reported to him, I wouldn’t be casually referring to the General Counsel as an “underling.” They’re both usually c-suite titles. This probably could’ve been handled differently by everyone - they should’ve promptly disclosed the relationship (they may not have wanted to because one or both of them may be married), and then her reporting line should’ve been moved over to Terry directly.

Life ain’t that simple my friend. This. You can’t have your GC - who is your chief risk manager for the entire organization - engage in such risky behavior. Your COO is a close second there in terms of who you’d need to be risk-appropriate. And perhaps if they had disclosed it promptly and properly it would’ve been dealt with differently (though one of them surely would’ve had to leave).

Sutton cannot separate.

Figured it had to be workplace romance - firing the GC and COO on the same day is beyond unusual. Those Harborcenter parties must be something else!

Again: people who start new threads on topics being discussed at length might be worse than people who stand up as soon as the doors open when the airplane reaches the gate.

It is clearly a lack of practice or lack of practicing the correct way on offense. You simply have to contrast it with what the Jags were able to do on multiple third downs - Lawrence faced the rush and threw it to a specific spot on the field he knew his receiver would end up in due to the coverage and play call and it worked over and over again. That is a well-timed, precise, practiced and properly COACHED offense that a lesser QB than Allen was able to execute successfully. We need an overhaul of the entire approach on offense, from the roster allocation strategy to the coaching. I am convinced.

Diggs won a walk-off playoff game with one of the greatest contested catches I’ve ever seen. He can make and has made that play.

Sure.

That drop by Gabe Davis-Scantling-Bey was an absolute killer yesterday.

You idiot.

Starting to feel like a lost season already. Damn.

I will say this - these guys really trust their (original) evaluations.

Go Sabres!

It legit seemed like the Jags knew what plays we were running, and/or the snap counts yesterday.

Yep and Hyde was in his ear repeatedly about it, all game. Kid has not put in the study work and it showed yesterday. Really disappointing.

Ralph would’ve said something.

They have real process problems under McD. Game planning was a joke on offense. Not using the tight ends. Not adjusting to the officiating. Stupid punt return. Travel logistics. This stuff just keeps happening under McD enough times per year that it costs them homefield advantage. Also: Gabe straight up sucks.

Gabe Davis Scantling-Bey