Browns Owner Jimmy Haslam Slams Hue Jackson & It’s An Absolute Curb Stomping

Browns owner Jimmy Haslam wasn’t playing games Thursday when he metaphorically murdered Hue Jackson during an interview with the Knox News. It was Jackson, this week, who insinuated the Browns paid him “a good number” to lose football games when he was the team’s head coach.

It was a direct shot at Haslam, who was suddenly caught up in the Brian Flores racism lawsuit drama. On Thursday, Haslam was ready to fight back against Jackson, who was run out of Cleveland with a 3-36-1 record.

“Hue Jackson has never ever accepted any responsibility for our record during that time period,” Haslam told the outlet. “He’s been masterful at pointing fingers, but has never accepted any blame. I have accepted a ton of blame, and rightfully so.

“There are a lot of things I could’ve done better. Hue has never accepted blame for one thing.”

Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam and head coach Hue Jackson prior to the game between the Cleveland Browns and the Los Angeles Chargers at FirstEnergy Stadium on October 14, 2018 in Cleveland, Ohio. (Photo by Jason Miller/Getty Images)

Jackson claimed via tweets that Haslam “was happy while we kept losing” and “Trust me it was a good number” that he was being paid to lose.

Haslam told the Knox News, “Unequivocally, Hue Jackson was never paid to lose games,” adding that what Jackson is spreading is an “absolute falsehood” and that Haslam definitely wasn’t laughing about losing.

Hue is back in the head coaching ranks. In December, he was named Grambling State’s head coach. His NFL coaching record sits at 11-44-1.

It’s hard to believe Hue even needs a job after all that losing and all that bonus money he was allegedly making from Haslam. The guy must not have invested it.

Written by Joe Kinsey

I'm an Ohio guy, born in Dayton, who roots for Ohio State and can handle you guys destroying the Buckeyes, Urban Meyer and everything associated with Columbus.

6 Comments

Leave a Reply
  1. The guy’s tweet at the bottom of this article is spot on. By going 3-36, Hue Jackson all but admits that he ACCEPTED the owners’s offer to lose. That’s the difference between Jackson and Flores. Jackson accepted the offer to lose, while Flores rejected it.

    It’s one thing, like Flores, to say “the owner tried to pay me to lose” and you win. You end up going 10-6 and 9-7 in spite of that. That record says: “I had integrity, I was offered money to lose, but I did not accept it and, against the odds, I won.”

    But what Hue Jackson clearly doesn’t realize is that saying “I was paid to lose” and then actually losing, having a 3-36 record says: “I was offered money to lose and… I took it.” Maybe he’s just low IQ, but jumping on the bandwagon of “the owner tried to pay me to tank” doesn’t really look good when you did, in fact, tank. Let me break it down for you, Hue. Accepting money to tank = bad. Rejecting = Good. Then you really do look like a snake. You and Flores are not the same.

  2. It’s good to see all the pushback to Flores’ and Jackson’s claims. We may have reached a threshold where people are tired of the constant racism narrative. If both claim these $100,000 payouts, then let’s see the receipts. Surely there are texts/emails, right?

Leave a Reply