- Joined
- Feb 9, 2014
- Messages
- 20,922
- Name
- Peter
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...efused-to-give-up-power-over-players-in-2011/
DeMaurice Smith: NFL refused to give up power over players in 2011
Posted by Mike Florio on May 30, 2015
Getty Images
When it comes to the power of Commissioner Roger Goodell over NFL players, the NFL Players Association routinely absorbs criticism for failing to take back that power four years ago, during the Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations.
Apart from the question of whether it would have made sense to trade something that helps all players in exchange for something that would protect, as a practical matter, only a few per year is the question of whether the NFL ever would have taken anything in exchange for the ability to have final say over certain matters regarding player conduct. NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith says the NFL simply wasn’t interested in giving up the league’s powers.
“That was a subject of our negotiations, and the owners’ response was what their response is now: They’re not interested in changing the policy,” Smith told Jim Trotter of ESPN.com. “That doesn’t mean, however, that the players should give up on the issue. The owners’ response to the drug policy in 2011 was that they did not want to change, and the players continued to negotiate that until we reached a resolution in 2014.
One of the more powerful arguments for neutral arbitration and for a collectively bargained personal conduct policy is what happened last year. If there was ever an instance that demonstrated a need for a collectively bargained process, it’s a process that the NFL got wrong in [Ray] Rice that led to it being overturned, that it got wrong in [Adrian] Peterson that led to it being overturned.”
The Rice and Peterson outcomes show that the Commissioner’s power has limits, and the NFLPA has enforced those limits successfully in multiple high-profile cases, from the Saints bounty scandal to the Rice case to the Peterson case, and now in the Greg Hardyand Tom Brady suspensions.
Even if the league has no interest in further reducing the power the Commissioner holds, the union can continue to challenge on a case by case basis the way the Commissioner tries to use it.
-----------
why would they be dumb enough to give the union,who thinks the players can do no wrong,the power to punish players?
Read much? The NFLPA isn’t interested in claiming any disciplinary powers. What they want is “neutral arbitration” of penalties that are not negotiated up front in the CBA.
That means, as opposed to having Goodell unilaterally wing it as he goes with punishments that all too frequently are overturned by courts or court appointed arbitrators, the NFL and NFLPA would convene and jointly appoint a permanent arbitration panel.
They already have one for “on field” issues, like multiple illegal hits, etc. What they want is a permanent arbitration panel for the “off field” issues covered by the “conduct detrimental” clause in the NFL bylaws.
Anything is better than letting Goodell dole out punishments to curry favor with certain owners, appease the press, massage public image, or worse bolster the league “parity” mandate.
Those are neither fair nor transparent means of sanctioning your employees in such a high profile business.
-----------
Acting as the NFL’s District Attorney, Roger Goodell appoints a special prosecutor. The prosecutor collects “evidence ” and presents it to DA Goodell. He then morphs into Judge Goodell. Judge Goodell issues summary judgment and arbitrary and capricious sanctions based solely on the “evidence ” assembled by his hand picked special prosecutor.
If you’re unhappy with Judge Goodell’s opinion, you can appeal and hope that Appellate Court Judge Goodell overturns lower court Judge Goodell.
It all seems fair to me.
------------
Goodell can’t screw up the NFL no matter how hard he tries.
Each year owners will make more money.
Unless Tom Brady sues the NFL for defamation and gets $300 million. Then he will be fired.
-------------
First, the union can’t take back a power they never had in the first place. To all those claiming the union simply does not want Goodell to make it up as he goes, that is only partially correct. The union will not certify specific punishments for something as vague as conduct detrimental. They choose to allow the commissioner discretionary authority and then challenge him when he uses it and complain about the process.
After the Rice Fiasco, Goodell tried to specify that discretionary punishment for DV cases but the union chose not to participate. At no time has the union ever condoned any punishment for a player. I think the union is right to challenge the Brady stuff because the evidence is subjective. The Hardy, Peterson, Rice and other similar cases are hardly subjective but they still choose to defend dirt bags. The union should collaborate with the league to identify strict punishments for certain offenses. They should hold their membership accountable.
Every player can avoid discipline by being disciplined on their own. It is not an issue to the vast majority of players because they don’t do stupid stuff. Some cross the line or hang out right next to it. Don’t defend those guys. Make them understand and comply or get out.
DeMaurice Smith: NFL refused to give up power over players in 2011
Posted by Mike Florio on May 30, 2015
When it comes to the power of Commissioner Roger Goodell over NFL players, the NFL Players Association routinely absorbs criticism for failing to take back that power four years ago, during the Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations.
Apart from the question of whether it would have made sense to trade something that helps all players in exchange for something that would protect, as a practical matter, only a few per year is the question of whether the NFL ever would have taken anything in exchange for the ability to have final say over certain matters regarding player conduct. NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith says the NFL simply wasn’t interested in giving up the league’s powers.
“That was a subject of our negotiations, and the owners’ response was what their response is now: They’re not interested in changing the policy,” Smith told Jim Trotter of ESPN.com. “That doesn’t mean, however, that the players should give up on the issue. The owners’ response to the drug policy in 2011 was that they did not want to change, and the players continued to negotiate that until we reached a resolution in 2014.
One of the more powerful arguments for neutral arbitration and for a collectively bargained personal conduct policy is what happened last year. If there was ever an instance that demonstrated a need for a collectively bargained process, it’s a process that the NFL got wrong in [Ray] Rice that led to it being overturned, that it got wrong in [Adrian] Peterson that led to it being overturned.”
The Rice and Peterson outcomes show that the Commissioner’s power has limits, and the NFLPA has enforced those limits successfully in multiple high-profile cases, from the Saints bounty scandal to the Rice case to the Peterson case, and now in the Greg Hardyand Tom Brady suspensions.
Even if the league has no interest in further reducing the power the Commissioner holds, the union can continue to challenge on a case by case basis the way the Commissioner tries to use it.
-----------
why would they be dumb enough to give the union,who thinks the players can do no wrong,the power to punish players?
Read much? The NFLPA isn’t interested in claiming any disciplinary powers. What they want is “neutral arbitration” of penalties that are not negotiated up front in the CBA.
That means, as opposed to having Goodell unilaterally wing it as he goes with punishments that all too frequently are overturned by courts or court appointed arbitrators, the NFL and NFLPA would convene and jointly appoint a permanent arbitration panel.
They already have one for “on field” issues, like multiple illegal hits, etc. What they want is a permanent arbitration panel for the “off field” issues covered by the “conduct detrimental” clause in the NFL bylaws.
Anything is better than letting Goodell dole out punishments to curry favor with certain owners, appease the press, massage public image, or worse bolster the league “parity” mandate.
Those are neither fair nor transparent means of sanctioning your employees in such a high profile business.
-----------
Acting as the NFL’s District Attorney, Roger Goodell appoints a special prosecutor. The prosecutor collects “evidence ” and presents it to DA Goodell. He then morphs into Judge Goodell. Judge Goodell issues summary judgment and arbitrary and capricious sanctions based solely on the “evidence ” assembled by his hand picked special prosecutor.
If you’re unhappy with Judge Goodell’s opinion, you can appeal and hope that Appellate Court Judge Goodell overturns lower court Judge Goodell.
It all seems fair to me.
------------
Goodell can’t screw up the NFL no matter how hard he tries.
Each year owners will make more money.
Unless Tom Brady sues the NFL for defamation and gets $300 million. Then he will be fired.
-------------
First, the union can’t take back a power they never had in the first place. To all those claiming the union simply does not want Goodell to make it up as he goes, that is only partially correct. The union will not certify specific punishments for something as vague as conduct detrimental. They choose to allow the commissioner discretionary authority and then challenge him when he uses it and complain about the process.
After the Rice Fiasco, Goodell tried to specify that discretionary punishment for DV cases but the union chose not to participate. At no time has the union ever condoned any punishment for a player. I think the union is right to challenge the Brady stuff because the evidence is subjective. The Hardy, Peterson, Rice and other similar cases are hardly subjective but they still choose to defend dirt bags. The union should collaborate with the league to identify strict punishments for certain offenses. They should hold their membership accountable.
Every player can avoid discipline by being disciplined on their own. It is not an issue to the vast majority of players because they don’t do stupid stuff. Some cross the line or hang out right next to it. Don’t defend those guys. Make them understand and comply or get out.
