Scruggs Suspended Indefinitely
Title says all, figured after his arrest. Wonder if some of the newer analyst may step in as DL coach.
The call is Sherrone’s to make, but this is Scrugg’s third run in with this issue. And those are only the times he’s been caught. Who knows when else this has happened? My guess is he’s done this plenty of times and just didn’t get pulled over.
If this was a first time, maybe you put him on some kind of PIP, institute a zero tolerance plan going forward, but he’s not a first time offender. At face value, this feels like a situation where you need to cut ties. Your program is already under intense scrutiny from Sign-Gate. You don’t need anyone continuing to question your integrity as a program. As JUB says, do not turn a one day story into a two day story.
Let him go, help him find counseling, help him focus on what he needs to focus on, and go back to your Rolodex. Who was your runner up for the DL position? Call them up and ask if they’re still interested. SOMEONE will be happy to leave their current job right now to coach some of the best DL talent in America.
March 16th, 2024 at 11:02 PM ^
What would people guess is the ratio between the number of times you drive drunk without getting caught to the number of times you get caught?
I don't know the answer, I'm just thinking it over. I'm guessing 50-100?
Speaking solely from personal experience, I drank from the ages of 15-40, and drove A LOT while I was drinking. Backroading was one of my favorite things to do.
Number of times "caught": once by a cop, once when I wrecked a car but fled the scene. It depends on a number of factors, like where you are doing your drinking and driving, but like I said below: he obviously feels comfortable drinking and driving, he's been charged three times, and the odds that he's only done it three times are infinitesimal.
March 17th, 2024 at 12:10 AM ^
So I see Michigan has not taken any steps toward better vetting. You don't hire someone with two prior DUI convictions. This isn't a Steve Sarkesian situation where he did it once, learned his lesson, and turned into a fine coach. This guy already had that chance ten years ago and he blew it. He should not be coaching at Michigan, Wisconsin, or anywhere else. Fire him now.
Well for starters, he was only convicted of one DUI. He pled not guilty to a second and accepted a reckless driving charge.
The DUI he was convicted of occurred over a decade ago while he was in college. How long do you think a dumb decision a college kid makes should be held against him in the employment world? Keeping in mind how notorious college kids are for doing dumb shit.
Hi. Recovering alcoholic here to offer my thoughts on the situation. I speak as someone who's totaled a car drunk, been pulled over drunk, and been to jail drunk.
For all those saying "We don't know what he blew," it doesn't matter. It's his third recorded offense. Unless he has the worst luck in the history of the universe and ONLY drove over the limit those three times, there's a tremendous chance that he's done this many, many times, and feels comfortable with it. Maybe alcohol metabolizes slower in his body and he doesn't get drunk, maybe he makes terrible choices when drinking. Either way, it's a pattern.
I personally don't think he should be fired for this. Disciplined, sure. Maybe they will get him the help he needs, he will take that help, and it will change him. I know change seems doubtful but I met a guy in AA who got 2 DUIs in 7 days. He's been sober for over a decade.
For all those saying "We don't know what he blew," it doesn't matter.
Okay but it DOES matter. Nobody is saying he shouldn’t be punished. He should. He broke the law and it’s a repeated offense for him. But there’s a vast difference in what that punishment should be based on what he blew and the circumstances surrounding his arrest.
He should not receive the same punishment for blowing a .09 and complying with officers as he should for blowing a .24 and being belligerent and uncooperative. Not to mention the unreliability of breathalyzer tests to begin with. That’s why “we don’t know what he blew” is being brought up.
March 17th, 2024 at 10:08 AM ^
I am sympathetic to this argument. How many hundreds of thousands of Americans have two beers at dinner on a Friday night and then drive home with a 0.08-ish BAC? I figure it's more commonplace and "normal" than most would care to admit. Is it a morally acceptable practice? I'm not sure, but I would guess that it happens safely far more often than not.
Alas, if Scruggs was out late, that's probably not what happened here. He likely had more than a light buzz on. Scruggs had to be pulled over somehow, which suggests that he was driving erratically. If that's the case, then he definitely was exercising very poor judgment, and has done something that could justifiably cost him his job.
I'm torn on his history, personally. It suggests that he's done some dumb shit and might have some demons. However, like you said, the last offenses were when he was a college kid and then a very young professional. He's had a clean record for a decade.
I personally would extend his suspension and put together a pretty hefty rehab threshold for him to meet -- weeks away from the team in which his sole mandate is to receive counseling. Selfishly, I just want to see Moore's staff come together as planned. If Scruggs and Moore can have a heart-to-heart and work out a plan for recovery, why not ride it out? If Moore is not about this, and boots the guy, I would also respect that. I trust that Moore will make the best decision for his program (though I am not really sure if the decision will be entirely up to the HC).
March 17th, 2024 at 12:07 PM ^
I think a lot of people clutching their pearls right now don’t really understand how easy it is to reach a .08 and how functional many people still are. I’d wager many of us have reached that threshold and had no clue. It is a very low threshold and many people aren’t affected by alcohol at that low of a level.
Alas, if Scruggs was out late, that's probably not what happened here. He likely had more than a light buzz on
But that’s speculation, and it isn’t really fair for us to sit here and call for a guys job on speculation. That’s why I’ve been sitting here saying we need to wait for the details.
Scruggs had to be pulled over somehow, which suggests that he was driving erratically.
He was also out driving at 3am on a bar holiday weekend in a college town. Safe to say a completely sober driver would have caught the attention of the police. I’ve been pulled over twice in Ann Arbor simply for being out around 2:30 on a weekend. Could he have been driving erratically? Yup, but it’s completely speculation at this point.
March 18th, 2024 at 12:21 AM ^
I can't speak for anyone else, but I am saying it doesn't matter because alcohol is pretty clearly an issue for him. As I said, you don't get two charges unless A) you're fantastically unlucky, or B) it's a a thing. The odds are HEAVILY on B).
The question of concern: how can this work in Sherrone’s favor?. The legal/moral/medical issue isn’t particularly interesting. If contractually Sherrone can fire Scruggs, this is a golden opportunity to put his mark on the program and show who is boss. The long term benefits of showing resolve and setting standards vastly outweighs any near term hiccup in spring practice, recruiting calls, etc.
March 17th, 2024 at 10:22 AM ^
I agree whole-heartedly with this. I also think Sherrone can send a strong message if he retains Scruggs (with a series of rehab conditions to be met). He can show compassion and a willingness to work with his people at an individualized level. He can demonstrate how his program has the values of a family. Either way, he has an opportunity to be a strong leader.
March 17th, 2024 at 10:41 AM ^
This is his third DUI. In a country where 10,000 people die annually in drunk driving accidents the compassionate act would be to fire him and get him some help.
March 17th, 2024 at 11:07 AM ^
Blows my mind that people drive drunk. Just call an Uber or Lyft or friend. No one will judge you
There is honestly NO ONE who has zero adverse affects unless you are restricting adverse affects to “ran someone over.”
March 17th, 2024 at 12:14 PM ^
That’s not true at all. People metabolize alcohol at different rates and alcohol tolerance plays a part as well. For someone who regularly drinks alcohol, their body becomes accustomed to having alcohol in the system and it would take more alcohol to affect the system.
What that DOESN’T do is alter the BAC levels. .08 is the legal limit regardless of the effects it has on that particular individual. But not every individual will experience the same effects at that level and plenty of people function the exact same after 2-3 beers as they do without alcohol. Hell, some alcoholics get to the point where they actually need alcohol in their system or they get uncontrollable shakes.