Thordaddy
Binding you with ancient logic
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
- Messages
- 10,462
- Name
- Rich
And isn't that an indictment of the criminal justice system which should be the focus of this uproar ?
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Stranger
How big is infinity?
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 7,182
- Name
- Hugh
yup, i gotcha
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #83
That's just not true....
GREAT post but I can't see this pic making it's way in to the boobie thread!
Now if someone starts a "south of the border..." thread YOU'RE IN!!
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2014
- Messages
- 20,922
- Name
- Peter
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/09/17/mark-cuban-nfl-roger-goodell-team-owners-failing-to-be-leaders/
Rick Scuteri and Elaine Thompson/AP
Hubris and Hogwash
Mark Cuban was scoffed and sneered at for warning the NFL about the perils of arrogance. His words now look prophetic as the mighty league has been made vulnerable by player misdeeds and the failures of leadership
By Don Banks
Upon further review, maybe Mark Cuban had it right. Not that the NFL is headed for implosion in another 10 years, or that oversaturating the game on TV will prove to be the league’s big misstep looming on the horizon. That kind of doomsday scenario is far from likely.
But as the worst month in NFL history continues to unravel more than unfold, perhaps hubris is the sin Cuban was really talking about, the one that could knock the too-big-to-fail league from its lofty perch. In a big-picture way, that is what the always outspoken owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks was riffing on back in March, when he gave us that colorful barnyard analogy that likened the all-powerful and ever-prosperous NFL to pigs getting fat and hogs getting slaughtered.
His larger point was that a league that gets too confident in its own sense of invincibility and too convinced of its own superiority tends to grow a bit fat and sassy, and could wind up being found guilty of overreaching in pursuit of profits and under-responding in terms of responsibility. It could easily slide toward arrogance and fail to see the potential for its own mistakes.
Sound like any insanely popular, money-making monolith you might know?
Cuban, of course, was scoffed and sneered at for daring to issue such a warning. He was accused of blatant NFL envy and derided as a spotlight-loving opportunist who sought attention via incendiary words and headlines. He couldn’t be serious, could he? The mighty NFL, made vulnerable? Not only could we not remember a time when that was truly the case, we couldn’t even imagine such a scenario going forward.
But we’re starting to now, aren’t we? With Roger Goodell and the league office still reeling from the mishandling of domestic violence cases involving Ray Rice, Greg Hardy, Ray McDonald and Adrian Peterson, you could say the NFL and at least four very embattled franchises are starting to bleed like a stuck pig. Perhaps Cuban’s analogy was more apt than he knew.
Just six months after firing that salvo at the NFL, Cuban’s words look prophetic. And his criticism can no longer be dismissed as the off-key ravings of an eccentric, media-loving NBA owner who loves to hear himself quoted. The NFL brand has been weakened in recent days by off-field controversies that continue to swirl, and any good capitalist will tell you that protecting the brand is the first critical step toward protecting your business. What ever happened to protecting the shield?
A longtime and well-respected agent I know told me the NFL’s initial tone-deaf response to Rice’s domestic violence incident brought to mind the saying, “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” In other words, people or leagues that hold too much power often succumb to arrogance, and arrogance leads them in a lot of directions, most of them bad.
Imbued with the kind of endless big money that often taints everything it touches, they start to believe their judgments are always correct, their wisdom infallible; they become immune to the correcting forces of competition. They live and act as if they are unchallenged, and that never ends well.
You can see just how much of a bulletproof mentality the NFL had fashioned for itself in its pre-Rice reality by the league’s crouching, defensive response to the siege of bad news it has endured. Goodell and his staff have largely been stunned and shocked into a state of virtual silence, offering little if any real leadership and merely reacting to the next spate of negative headlines with a string of statements, the naming of a special investigation of the league’s own investigation, a new panel of women advisers, or a new lobbyist in Washington.
Those kind of damage control moves always seemed to work in the past to defuse whatever crisis the NFL had faced. But this time they ring hollow, the issues having grown to a critical mass that can’t be easily slowed.
In turn, perhaps taking their cue from a flinching league office, the NFL owners whose clubs are involved in these high-profile domestic violence cases have done little but hide behind their coaches and general managers, sending them out to meet the media and defend decisions that were made above their pay grades.
Where are the owners, those masters of the universe who get to hold the shiny trophy aloft on a confetti-strewn Super Bowl stage, but beg off from taking the stage in front of the cameras and the microphones when the lights get too bright and the questions too hot to handle?
I found it utterly small of Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti to send his coach, John Harbaugh, out there alone last week to answer questions about why the team dramatically reversed course and released Rice in the wake of the new elevator surveillance footage. Carolina’s Jerry Richardson cried for us at an awards banquet, but he really didn’t explain his team’s stance on Greg Hardy, leaving coach Ron Rivera to repeatedly face the music.
Ditto in Minnesota, where general manager Rick Spielman was trotted out in a press conference to sell the Vikings’ unpopular decision to reactivate Peterson, a course quickly abandoned after owners Zygi and Mark Wilf realized the full extent of Tuesday’s public and corporate blowback. (The Wilfs were scheduled to address the media today to explain why they put Peterson on the exempt list.) So far in San Francisco, all we’ve heard from owner Jed York regarding McDonald’s case came in a brief radio interview, while his coach, Jim Harbaugh, has been peppered with questions going on two weeks now.
Statements have been issued, and one-on-one interviews with hand-picked outlets have been arranged, but no real accountability has been on display by the owners. They are the stewards of their franchises, and yet, when it came time to be leaders, they shrunk from that role. In a league that fines coaches and players if they don’t stand up and take the media’s questions, the commissioner and the owners have yet to hold themselves to that same standard—let alone a higher one.
It’s pretty clear the powers that be in the NFL aren’t used to being challenged, don’t like it one bit, and aren’t comfortable in the new reality they face. They are, to use Cuban’s imagery, looking quite “hoggy” in their response to this multifaceted controversy, unable to move nimbly and quickly enough to navigate the necessary steps to get past it. And they’re getting slaughtered in the court of public opinion because of their arrogance.
Sorry, NFL, but you brought this upon yourself. And you can’t say you weren’t warned.
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/09/17/roger-goodell-nfl-domestic-violence/
Mario Tama/Getty Images
It’s Past Time, Commissioner
If the NFL is going to make good on promises to address its domestic violence problem it must act now, and it's time for Roger Goodell to come out of hiding and answer to his critics
By Peter King
NEW YORK—A source with knowledge of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell’s mindset this week said something today that is very bad news for the 2014 playing status of Carolina defensive end Greg Hardy: “Roger has determined that he will be a leader in the domestic-violence space.”
As has been widely speculated, Hardy, found guilty of domestic violence in July by a Charlotte judge, is likely to land—as early as today—on the same “Commissioner’s Exempt List” that provided a solution to the Minnesota Vikings and Adrian Peterson early today. After the Minnesota governor, league mega-sponsor Anheuser-Busch and the league office leaned on the Vikings and Peterson, all parties became convinced that the idea of Peterson playing was untenable with the cloud of child abuse hanging over him.
So he agreed to be placed on the Exempt List, and he will be basically on administrative leave with pay until his case in Texas is heard. He stands accused of whipping his 4-year-old son with a slender tree branch and leaving multiple open wounds. He is due in Montgomery County (Texas) Court on Oct. 8. It’s conceivable the best running back in Vikings history has played his last game with the team.
Carolina is in the same position with Hardy. The judge in the case, Rebecca Thorn-Tin, ruled that she was “entirely convinced Hardy is guilt of assault on a female.” During open court testimony, the woman testified, “[Hardy] looked me in my eyes and told me he was going to kill me.” Under North Carolina law Hardy’s case will now be heard by a jury, which may rule differently from Judge Thorn-Tin. Nevertheless, in the current environment around the league office—where a black cloud has been residing over it for the last 10 days—it’s almost inconceivable the league will let Hardy take the field for Carolina in the near future.
As news broke in Minneapolis about Peterson and percolated in Charlotte with Hardy this morning, a meeting was underway inside the NFL offices in midtown Manhattan, led by new vice president of social responsibility Anna Isaacson. It included the league’s three new senior advisers (Lisa Friel, Jane Randel and Rita Smith) named this week to help the NFL plan, shape and implement new policies in the league’s 31 team cities. In the next week or so the league is expected to have a training program set up for advisers and counselors in the program. Goodell wants the programs in place during this season.
If Goodell is serious about making the NFL a leader in the national fight against domestic violence, time is of the essence. All eyes are on the NFL to make a difference, and to respond after appearing so lax early in the Rice case and after letting Hardy go through training camp with the Panthers and play in Week 1. Critics of the league, and they are growing daily, say that for years it has turned a blind eye to domestic abuse.
The NFL has begun to address concerns that it is soft on domestic violence and child abuse (which is being treated as a form of domestic violence by the league) with the indefinite ban of Ray Rice for assaulting his wife in an Atlantic City elevator, and by working with the Vikings to get Peterson, for now, off the field in Minnesota. That’s why it’s so likely the form will follow in the Hardy case.
Even the most ardent of NFL fans probably hadn’t heard of the Commissioner Exempt List before this morning. According to NFL bylaws, “The Exempt List is a special player status available to clubs only in unusual circumstances. Only the Commissioner has the authority to place a player on the Exempt List; clubs have no such authority, and no exemption, regardless of circumstances, is automatic. The Commissioner also has the authority to determine in advance whether a player’s time on the Exempt List will be finite or will continue until the Commissioner deems the exemption should be lifted and the player returned to the Active List.”
So Goodell will have the power in the Peterson case, and in any future cases, after the cases have been fully adjudicated to determine when, or if, the players can be active again.
Many will ask: Why isn’t Ray McDonald subject to the same sanction? McDonald, the San Francisco defensive end, was accused of assaulting his pregnant fiancée on Aug. 31 in California. McDonald, however, has not had his day in court yet. The Rice evidence has been seen by the world, through the video obtained by TMZ. Though Hardy still could be cleared in the jury trial, a judge heard testimony from both sides in his case and found him guilty. In the Peterson case, he admitted whipping his child. McDonald has admitted nothing, and he has stridently told the 49ers he is not guilty of the charges. Until a court hears evidence, or until McDonald admits guilt, it’s unlikely the league will step in.
That’s the slippery slope of due process. Due process has not played out with finality in the Peterson or Hardy cases, but there’s enough evidence for the league to act. Due process has not played out at all in the McDonald case, so he plays on—and in my opinion he should.
One last point: Where is Goodell in all of this? Why has he not spoken, other than brief CBS and USA Today interviews to the millions of disaffected fans who view his league as increasingly disconnected? The league is in chaos, and America needs to hear from him. I believe he certainly should have spoken by now. I expect him to surface from his Park Avenue office and speak by the end of the week, when he feels he has some substance to discuss in the realm of domestic violence and the state of his battered league.
It’s remarkable what’s happened to the NFL in the last 10 days. “Otherworldly” is how one veteran league employee termed it this week. The only way the NFL can emerge from this with its dignity and social impact intact is to make a difference on the domestic violence front, and with sanctions and an education program that matter.
In the meantime, a good start would be for Goodell to hold an all-comers press conference. No holds barred. Answer everything. It’s past time.
Rick Scuteri and Elaine Thompson/AP
Hubris and Hogwash
Mark Cuban was scoffed and sneered at for warning the NFL about the perils of arrogance. His words now look prophetic as the mighty league has been made vulnerable by player misdeeds and the failures of leadership
By Don Banks
Upon further review, maybe Mark Cuban had it right. Not that the NFL is headed for implosion in another 10 years, or that oversaturating the game on TV will prove to be the league’s big misstep looming on the horizon. That kind of doomsday scenario is far from likely.
But as the worst month in NFL history continues to unravel more than unfold, perhaps hubris is the sin Cuban was really talking about, the one that could knock the too-big-to-fail league from its lofty perch. In a big-picture way, that is what the always outspoken owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks was riffing on back in March, when he gave us that colorful barnyard analogy that likened the all-powerful and ever-prosperous NFL to pigs getting fat and hogs getting slaughtered.
His larger point was that a league that gets too confident in its own sense of invincibility and too convinced of its own superiority tends to grow a bit fat and sassy, and could wind up being found guilty of overreaching in pursuit of profits and under-responding in terms of responsibility. It could easily slide toward arrogance and fail to see the potential for its own mistakes.
Sound like any insanely popular, money-making monolith you might know?
Cuban, of course, was scoffed and sneered at for daring to issue such a warning. He was accused of blatant NFL envy and derided as a spotlight-loving opportunist who sought attention via incendiary words and headlines. He couldn’t be serious, could he? The mighty NFL, made vulnerable? Not only could we not remember a time when that was truly the case, we couldn’t even imagine such a scenario going forward.
But we’re starting to now, aren’t we? With Roger Goodell and the league office still reeling from the mishandling of domestic violence cases involving Ray Rice, Greg Hardy, Ray McDonald and Adrian Peterson, you could say the NFL and at least four very embattled franchises are starting to bleed like a stuck pig. Perhaps Cuban’s analogy was more apt than he knew.
Just six months after firing that salvo at the NFL, Cuban’s words look prophetic. And his criticism can no longer be dismissed as the off-key ravings of an eccentric, media-loving NBA owner who loves to hear himself quoted. The NFL brand has been weakened in recent days by off-field controversies that continue to swirl, and any good capitalist will tell you that protecting the brand is the first critical step toward protecting your business. What ever happened to protecting the shield?
A longtime and well-respected agent I know told me the NFL’s initial tone-deaf response to Rice’s domestic violence incident brought to mind the saying, “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” In other words, people or leagues that hold too much power often succumb to arrogance, and arrogance leads them in a lot of directions, most of them bad.
Imbued with the kind of endless big money that often taints everything it touches, they start to believe their judgments are always correct, their wisdom infallible; they become immune to the correcting forces of competition. They live and act as if they are unchallenged, and that never ends well.
You can see just how much of a bulletproof mentality the NFL had fashioned for itself in its pre-Rice reality by the league’s crouching, defensive response to the siege of bad news it has endured. Goodell and his staff have largely been stunned and shocked into a state of virtual silence, offering little if any real leadership and merely reacting to the next spate of negative headlines with a string of statements, the naming of a special investigation of the league’s own investigation, a new panel of women advisers, or a new lobbyist in Washington.
Those kind of damage control moves always seemed to work in the past to defuse whatever crisis the NFL had faced. But this time they ring hollow, the issues having grown to a critical mass that can’t be easily slowed.
In turn, perhaps taking their cue from a flinching league office, the NFL owners whose clubs are involved in these high-profile domestic violence cases have done little but hide behind their coaches and general managers, sending them out to meet the media and defend decisions that were made above their pay grades.
Where are the owners, those masters of the universe who get to hold the shiny trophy aloft on a confetti-strewn Super Bowl stage, but beg off from taking the stage in front of the cameras and the microphones when the lights get too bright and the questions too hot to handle?
I found it utterly small of Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti to send his coach, John Harbaugh, out there alone last week to answer questions about why the team dramatically reversed course and released Rice in the wake of the new elevator surveillance footage. Carolina’s Jerry Richardson cried for us at an awards banquet, but he really didn’t explain his team’s stance on Greg Hardy, leaving coach Ron Rivera to repeatedly face the music.
Ditto in Minnesota, where general manager Rick Spielman was trotted out in a press conference to sell the Vikings’ unpopular decision to reactivate Peterson, a course quickly abandoned after owners Zygi and Mark Wilf realized the full extent of Tuesday’s public and corporate blowback. (The Wilfs were scheduled to address the media today to explain why they put Peterson on the exempt list.) So far in San Francisco, all we’ve heard from owner Jed York regarding McDonald’s case came in a brief radio interview, while his coach, Jim Harbaugh, has been peppered with questions going on two weeks now.
Statements have been issued, and one-on-one interviews with hand-picked outlets have been arranged, but no real accountability has been on display by the owners. They are the stewards of their franchises, and yet, when it came time to be leaders, they shrunk from that role. In a league that fines coaches and players if they don’t stand up and take the media’s questions, the commissioner and the owners have yet to hold themselves to that same standard—let alone a higher one.
It’s pretty clear the powers that be in the NFL aren’t used to being challenged, don’t like it one bit, and aren’t comfortable in the new reality they face. They are, to use Cuban’s imagery, looking quite “hoggy” in their response to this multifaceted controversy, unable to move nimbly and quickly enough to navigate the necessary steps to get past it. And they’re getting slaughtered in the court of public opinion because of their arrogance.
Sorry, NFL, but you brought this upon yourself. And you can’t say you weren’t warned.
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/09/17/roger-goodell-nfl-domestic-violence/
Mario Tama/Getty Images
It’s Past Time, Commissioner
If the NFL is going to make good on promises to address its domestic violence problem it must act now, and it's time for Roger Goodell to come out of hiding and answer to his critics
By Peter King
NEW YORK—A source with knowledge of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell’s mindset this week said something today that is very bad news for the 2014 playing status of Carolina defensive end Greg Hardy: “Roger has determined that he will be a leader in the domestic-violence space.”
As has been widely speculated, Hardy, found guilty of domestic violence in July by a Charlotte judge, is likely to land—as early as today—on the same “Commissioner’s Exempt List” that provided a solution to the Minnesota Vikings and Adrian Peterson early today. After the Minnesota governor, league mega-sponsor Anheuser-Busch and the league office leaned on the Vikings and Peterson, all parties became convinced that the idea of Peterson playing was untenable with the cloud of child abuse hanging over him.
So he agreed to be placed on the Exempt List, and he will be basically on administrative leave with pay until his case in Texas is heard. He stands accused of whipping his 4-year-old son with a slender tree branch and leaving multiple open wounds. He is due in Montgomery County (Texas) Court on Oct. 8. It’s conceivable the best running back in Vikings history has played his last game with the team.
Carolina is in the same position with Hardy. The judge in the case, Rebecca Thorn-Tin, ruled that she was “entirely convinced Hardy is guilt of assault on a female.” During open court testimony, the woman testified, “[Hardy] looked me in my eyes and told me he was going to kill me.” Under North Carolina law Hardy’s case will now be heard by a jury, which may rule differently from Judge Thorn-Tin. Nevertheless, in the current environment around the league office—where a black cloud has been residing over it for the last 10 days—it’s almost inconceivable the league will let Hardy take the field for Carolina in the near future.
As news broke in Minneapolis about Peterson and percolated in Charlotte with Hardy this morning, a meeting was underway inside the NFL offices in midtown Manhattan, led by new vice president of social responsibility Anna Isaacson. It included the league’s three new senior advisers (Lisa Friel, Jane Randel and Rita Smith) named this week to help the NFL plan, shape and implement new policies in the league’s 31 team cities. In the next week or so the league is expected to have a training program set up for advisers and counselors in the program. Goodell wants the programs in place during this season.
If Goodell is serious about making the NFL a leader in the national fight against domestic violence, time is of the essence. All eyes are on the NFL to make a difference, and to respond after appearing so lax early in the Rice case and after letting Hardy go through training camp with the Panthers and play in Week 1. Critics of the league, and they are growing daily, say that for years it has turned a blind eye to domestic abuse.
The NFL has begun to address concerns that it is soft on domestic violence and child abuse (which is being treated as a form of domestic violence by the league) with the indefinite ban of Ray Rice for assaulting his wife in an Atlantic City elevator, and by working with the Vikings to get Peterson, for now, off the field in Minnesota. That’s why it’s so likely the form will follow in the Hardy case.
Even the most ardent of NFL fans probably hadn’t heard of the Commissioner Exempt List before this morning. According to NFL bylaws, “The Exempt List is a special player status available to clubs only in unusual circumstances. Only the Commissioner has the authority to place a player on the Exempt List; clubs have no such authority, and no exemption, regardless of circumstances, is automatic. The Commissioner also has the authority to determine in advance whether a player’s time on the Exempt List will be finite or will continue until the Commissioner deems the exemption should be lifted and the player returned to the Active List.”
So Goodell will have the power in the Peterson case, and in any future cases, after the cases have been fully adjudicated to determine when, or if, the players can be active again.
Many will ask: Why isn’t Ray McDonald subject to the same sanction? McDonald, the San Francisco defensive end, was accused of assaulting his pregnant fiancée on Aug. 31 in California. McDonald, however, has not had his day in court yet. The Rice evidence has been seen by the world, through the video obtained by TMZ. Though Hardy still could be cleared in the jury trial, a judge heard testimony from both sides in his case and found him guilty. In the Peterson case, he admitted whipping his child. McDonald has admitted nothing, and he has stridently told the 49ers he is not guilty of the charges. Until a court hears evidence, or until McDonald admits guilt, it’s unlikely the league will step in.
That’s the slippery slope of due process. Due process has not played out with finality in the Peterson or Hardy cases, but there’s enough evidence for the league to act. Due process has not played out at all in the McDonald case, so he plays on—and in my opinion he should.
One last point: Where is Goodell in all of this? Why has he not spoken, other than brief CBS and USA Today interviews to the millions of disaffected fans who view his league as increasingly disconnected? The league is in chaos, and America needs to hear from him. I believe he certainly should have spoken by now. I expect him to surface from his Park Avenue office and speak by the end of the week, when he feels he has some substance to discuss in the realm of domestic violence and the state of his battered league.
It’s remarkable what’s happened to the NFL in the last 10 days. “Otherworldly” is how one veteran league employee termed it this week. The only way the NFL can emerge from this with its dignity and social impact intact is to make a difference on the domestic violence front, and with sanctions and an education program that matter.
In the meantime, a good start would be for Goodell to hold an all-comers press conference. No holds barred. Answer everything. It’s past time.
Stranger
How big is infinity?
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 7,182
- Name
- Hugh
Well, the NFL was certainly complicit, but there has been a tremendous amount of help from lots of sources. People are going to have to read between the lines on this one.
dhaab
Rookie
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2012
- Messages
- 158
Sure it is, but we're on a NFL message board, so I'm not going into that here. My point is the NFL is just like any giant corporation in this country and they'll pay whatever money is needed for this stuff to go away.
Thordaddy
Binding you with ancient logic
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
- Messages
- 10,462
- Name
- Rich
And that is a gross generalization
Mackeyser
Supernovas are where gold forms; the only place.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2013
- Messages
- 14,456
- Name
- Mack
That's how I was with the Lakers for years...then I just... stopped watching all together...
And you couldn't find a bigger Laker fan than I was growing up...
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2014
- Messages
- 20,922
- Name
- Peter
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/09/19/adrian-peterson-domestic-violence-nfl-league-discipline/
League Discipline and Legal Reality
By Stephanie Stradley, @StephStradley
As it reels from one decision to the next, the NFL and its teams are finding out just how hard it is to come up with a consistent and coherent policy of punishment for players beyond the justice system
I am a lawyer in Texas and an unabashed follower of the Houston Texans. I was asked to write this for The MMQB because of the strong response to a post on my personal blog, “What is sensible discipline for NFL player misconduct?” To try to move the discussion forward, I wanted here to specifically address how the league and the public should be thinking about player discipline. These issues are not easily reduced to a sound bite, a press conference, a 140-character tweet or debate-rage TV.
No one feels good about the reactive, inconsistent way in which the NFL and its teams have dealt with player discipline in recent days, or even recent years. But should we be surprised that the league’s disciplinary decisions have felt random and haphazard? It’s hard enough for criminal justice professionals, who look at a variety of factors beyond simply the nature of the offense, to determine appropriate punishment. For sports leagues that are embracing the role of moral arbiters on an ad hoc basis, it is nearly impossible to come up with one-size-fits-all disciplinary scheme without sacrificing a measure of integrity or fairness.
Every reasonable person agrees that domestic violence and child abuse are wrong. But while there has been plenty of discussion of these issues on an emotional and sometimes personal level, I don’t think enough people have been asking the question: What are the appropriate punishments for various allegations of bad acts by athletes? I think to some degree people are afraid to address this aspect of the issue, because they don’t want to be perceived as soft, enabling or somehow pro-abuse.
Nevertheless, we should be having a real and pragmatic discussion of what a discipline scheme should be, and we shouldn’t pretend the answers are easy and obvious. One thing I do know is that fans should have serious concerns about the unintended consequences that may come from the reactive policies that are being floated now.
For instance, Raiders owner Mark Davis suggests a league-wide rulethat “if somebody’s accused or arrested in a domestic-violence case, they should be suspended with pay.” Similarly, it looks as if teams may be increasingly interested in having players with pending criminal matters put on the Commissioner’s Exempt List.
For Adrian Peterson, this means he will be required to remain away from all team activities while he “takes care of his legal proceedings.”
Peterson has a court date of October 7 in Montgomery County, Texas, but typically that is merely procedural. He will likely be required to appear in court many times when nothing of substance happens. In truth there is not much involved with “taking care of his legal proceedings.” Mostly what arrested people do to prepare for legal proceedings is wait for trial.
The idea of a “speedy trial” doesn’t mean what most people think when they hear the word “speedy.” Trial priority tends to be given to defendants who cannot make bond or have non-bondable offenses that keep them in jail. Judges control their dockets, and even the most able attorney can have difficulty getting an early trial date. In Montgomery County the dockets can be very slow, with a one-year wait being relatively “speedy.” It is not unusual for a case to take two years before going to trial.
Theoretically a player could accept a plea deal to resolve his legal matter quickly rather than wait for trial, but that assumes that he receives a reasonable plea offer. In high-profile cases DAs sometimes are afraid to offer defendants deals that other people receive for similar circumstances, because they don’t want to be criticized. They prefer to leave it to the jury to decide punishment.
In addition, defendants aren’t supposed to plead guilty when they are innocent of the offense. It would put players in a bad situation if they felt the need to do so in order to restart their typically-short NFL careers.
Though there are a lot of people who believe that an arrest or an indictment means you are guilty of something, this is emphatically not true. A system that suspends or cuts players upon arrest penalizes them for a legal process that is slow, uncontrollable and sometimes just mistaken. It also puts high-paid, high-profile players at risk of extortion and false accusations.
From a competitive standpoint, a suspend-upon-arrest rule could target players to get them off the field, for whatever motivation. While far-fetched, it’s not entirely implausible.
In the Peterson case, the Texas Rangers (the independent Texas law enforcement body, not the baseball team) are investigating who may have illegally released private information, including the photographs of the injuries to Peterson’s son. Not only could this release compromise Peterson’s ability to get a fair trial, but it is also a violation of the child’s protected privacy rights.
We don’t know who released the information, or for what purpose. It is extremely unusual for that much detail in a child abuse case to be leaked at all, but especially so quickly after an indictment. If the very detailed information had not been released when it was, Peterson might still be playing. While the nature of the allegations against Peterson doesn’t engender sympathy for him, as a general rule, suspending a player upon arrest is fraught with peril for the player and the league.
Outrageous acts can spur governments, companies and organizations into odd, poorly thought out reactions. As a minor NFL example, the Boston Marathon bombings resulted in the NFL banning women from carrying into stadiums purses larger than the size of their hand, unless it is a see-through plastic purse or Ziploc bag that shows all of a woman’s valuables.
There are few women in positions of influence at NFL headquarters, and I’d be surprised if there was much female input into such a ridiculous, unusual policy. It is discomforting to see Americans carrying their possessions in Ziploc bags at sports venues. This policy isn’t likely to be rolled back, because once a strict rule is in place, organizations are loathe to change it for fear of looking weak.
NFL owners and the league office should take some time and care to really think through the issues of appropriate discipline. What is the purpose and goal of NFL discipline beyond what the legal system provides? How much punishment is enough? What financial and career penalties are sufficient to do whatever they are intending? Are sports leagues equipped to investigate their players’ off-field misdeeds? Should a more neutral person, not from the league or a team, be judging these things? If leagues keep ratcheting up discipline, could it lead to bad, unintended consequences?
These are nuanced, practical and life-altering questions that should be a part of the dialogue on NFL discipline. If these questions don’t matter, if anger and PR and mob rule are the only way to determine discipline, then perhaps Nancy Grace should be the new NFL commissioner.
Stephanie Stradley is a Houston-based attorney. She writes about the Houston Texans for the Houston Chronicle online, and on many subjects at her personal blog at StradleyLaw.com. She’s on Twitter @StephStradley.
League Discipline and Legal Reality
By Stephanie Stradley, @StephStradley
As it reels from one decision to the next, the NFL and its teams are finding out just how hard it is to come up with a consistent and coherent policy of punishment for players beyond the justice system
I am a lawyer in Texas and an unabashed follower of the Houston Texans. I was asked to write this for The MMQB because of the strong response to a post on my personal blog, “What is sensible discipline for NFL player misconduct?” To try to move the discussion forward, I wanted here to specifically address how the league and the public should be thinking about player discipline. These issues are not easily reduced to a sound bite, a press conference, a 140-character tweet or debate-rage TV.
No one feels good about the reactive, inconsistent way in which the NFL and its teams have dealt with player discipline in recent days, or even recent years. But should we be surprised that the league’s disciplinary decisions have felt random and haphazard? It’s hard enough for criminal justice professionals, who look at a variety of factors beyond simply the nature of the offense, to determine appropriate punishment. For sports leagues that are embracing the role of moral arbiters on an ad hoc basis, it is nearly impossible to come up with one-size-fits-all disciplinary scheme without sacrificing a measure of integrity or fairness.
Every reasonable person agrees that domestic violence and child abuse are wrong. But while there has been plenty of discussion of these issues on an emotional and sometimes personal level, I don’t think enough people have been asking the question: What are the appropriate punishments for various allegations of bad acts by athletes? I think to some degree people are afraid to address this aspect of the issue, because they don’t want to be perceived as soft, enabling or somehow pro-abuse.
Nevertheless, we should be having a real and pragmatic discussion of what a discipline scheme should be, and we shouldn’t pretend the answers are easy and obvious. One thing I do know is that fans should have serious concerns about the unintended consequences that may come from the reactive policies that are being floated now.
For instance, Raiders owner Mark Davis suggests a league-wide rulethat “if somebody’s accused or arrested in a domestic-violence case, they should be suspended with pay.” Similarly, it looks as if teams may be increasingly interested in having players with pending criminal matters put on the Commissioner’s Exempt List.
For Adrian Peterson, this means he will be required to remain away from all team activities while he “takes care of his legal proceedings.”
Peterson has a court date of October 7 in Montgomery County, Texas, but typically that is merely procedural. He will likely be required to appear in court many times when nothing of substance happens. In truth there is not much involved with “taking care of his legal proceedings.” Mostly what arrested people do to prepare for legal proceedings is wait for trial.
The idea of a “speedy trial” doesn’t mean what most people think when they hear the word “speedy.” Trial priority tends to be given to defendants who cannot make bond or have non-bondable offenses that keep them in jail. Judges control their dockets, and even the most able attorney can have difficulty getting an early trial date. In Montgomery County the dockets can be very slow, with a one-year wait being relatively “speedy.” It is not unusual for a case to take two years before going to trial.
Theoretically a player could accept a plea deal to resolve his legal matter quickly rather than wait for trial, but that assumes that he receives a reasonable plea offer. In high-profile cases DAs sometimes are afraid to offer defendants deals that other people receive for similar circumstances, because they don’t want to be criticized. They prefer to leave it to the jury to decide punishment.
In addition, defendants aren’t supposed to plead guilty when they are innocent of the offense. It would put players in a bad situation if they felt the need to do so in order to restart their typically-short NFL careers.
Though there are a lot of people who believe that an arrest or an indictment means you are guilty of something, this is emphatically not true. A system that suspends or cuts players upon arrest penalizes them for a legal process that is slow, uncontrollable and sometimes just mistaken. It also puts high-paid, high-profile players at risk of extortion and false accusations.
From a competitive standpoint, a suspend-upon-arrest rule could target players to get them off the field, for whatever motivation. While far-fetched, it’s not entirely implausible.
In the Peterson case, the Texas Rangers (the independent Texas law enforcement body, not the baseball team) are investigating who may have illegally released private information, including the photographs of the injuries to Peterson’s son. Not only could this release compromise Peterson’s ability to get a fair trial, but it is also a violation of the child’s protected privacy rights.
We don’t know who released the information, or for what purpose. It is extremely unusual for that much detail in a child abuse case to be leaked at all, but especially so quickly after an indictment. If the very detailed information had not been released when it was, Peterson might still be playing. While the nature of the allegations against Peterson doesn’t engender sympathy for him, as a general rule, suspending a player upon arrest is fraught with peril for the player and the league.
Outrageous acts can spur governments, companies and organizations into odd, poorly thought out reactions. As a minor NFL example, the Boston Marathon bombings resulted in the NFL banning women from carrying into stadiums purses larger than the size of their hand, unless it is a see-through plastic purse or Ziploc bag that shows all of a woman’s valuables.
There are few women in positions of influence at NFL headquarters, and I’d be surprised if there was much female input into such a ridiculous, unusual policy. It is discomforting to see Americans carrying their possessions in Ziploc bags at sports venues. This policy isn’t likely to be rolled back, because once a strict rule is in place, organizations are loathe to change it for fear of looking weak.
NFL owners and the league office should take some time and care to really think through the issues of appropriate discipline. What is the purpose and goal of NFL discipline beyond what the legal system provides? How much punishment is enough? What financial and career penalties are sufficient to do whatever they are intending? Are sports leagues equipped to investigate their players’ off-field misdeeds? Should a more neutral person, not from the league or a team, be judging these things? If leagues keep ratcheting up discipline, could it lead to bad, unintended consequences?
These are nuanced, practical and life-altering questions that should be a part of the dialogue on NFL discipline. If these questions don’t matter, if anger and PR and mob rule are the only way to determine discipline, then perhaps Nancy Grace should be the new NFL commissioner.
Stephanie Stradley is a Houston-based attorney. She writes about the Houston Texans for the Houston Chronicle online, and on many subjects at her personal blog at StradleyLaw.com. She’s on Twitter @StephStradley.
LesBaker
Mr. Savant
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 17,460
- Name
- Les
I'm still reeling that all of this was started from the Rice video.
I heard Al Micheals on Mike and Mike this morning? Did anyone else?
He made some interesting points. One was that the NFL isn't going to cure societies ills, and the rate of violent crime within the league is lower than it is among the general population. I've known that for a long time. But he thinks it's fair to hold players to a higher standard and I think that's fair. He went on to say what happens to someone at a regular job who commits domestic violence and how much responsibility should an employer have. Another good point, but of course players aren't employees technically.
If the Rice video didn't surface then I don't think this all blows up the way it did because the media doesn't have the "blood" to lead with. Frankly they have made a big mess of this and the NFL has compounded it by not getting in front of things and by letting the media set the tone. People are more outraged by actually seeing Rice commit this act versus hearing it described. I've found that odd since the whole story broke.......he said he punched her out, we knew, but the video gave the media the green light to blow this up and create page views and hold viewers.
Every website on the planet was posting the video on their domain and doing everything they could to get on the first page of a Google search to drive traffic.
The NFL has totally botched this, which simply fans the flames for the media who are now marching experts in to discuss child abuse and domestic violence and of course experts who are telling the world what the NFL should have done to prevent the media firestorm.
I am SO over all of this LOL.
I heard Al Micheals on Mike and Mike this morning? Did anyone else?
He made some interesting points. One was that the NFL isn't going to cure societies ills, and the rate of violent crime within the league is lower than it is among the general population. I've known that for a long time. But he thinks it's fair to hold players to a higher standard and I think that's fair. He went on to say what happens to someone at a regular job who commits domestic violence and how much responsibility should an employer have. Another good point, but of course players aren't employees technically.
If the Rice video didn't surface then I don't think this all blows up the way it did because the media doesn't have the "blood" to lead with. Frankly they have made a big mess of this and the NFL has compounded it by not getting in front of things and by letting the media set the tone. People are more outraged by actually seeing Rice commit this act versus hearing it described. I've found that odd since the whole story broke.......he said he punched her out, we knew, but the video gave the media the green light to blow this up and create page views and hold viewers.
Every website on the planet was posting the video on their domain and doing everything they could to get on the first page of a Google search to drive traffic.
The NFL has totally botched this, which simply fans the flames for the media who are now marching experts in to discuss child abuse and domestic violence and of course experts who are telling the world what the NFL should have done to prevent the media firestorm.
I am SO over all of this LOL.
Angry Ram
Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2010
- Messages
- 18,000
Perfectly put.
Stranger
How big is infinity?
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 7,182
- Name
- Hugh
What a total jackass Al Michaels is.
Stranger
How big is infinity?
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 7,182
- Name
- Hugh
Probably 30% of the $65T annual global domestic product is spent on marketing, which alters the way targeted minds view the world. You think this is the public's fault? Have you watched the TV ads during an NFL game?
Mackeyser
Supernovas are where gold forms; the only place.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2013
- Messages
- 14,456
- Name
- Mack
I quit the NFL the nanosecond that happens.
Well, they're not salaried employees, no employees of the NFL, but rest assured that they are employees of their respective ballclubs under each state's employment law and the CBA. Granted contract workers do share some similarities with salaried employees as well as having some differences, but they are still employees whereas temporary workers and independent contractors are quite typically not classified as employees.
That's actually a pretty important distinction in this discussion because if Ray Rice weren't technically an employee of the Ravens, they could always make the case that it's not an NFL problem, it's a Ray Rice problem.
That doesn't answer the Jerry Jones or Jim Irsay questions, but...ya know...
LesBaker
Mr. Savant
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 17,460
- Name
- Les
He is correct like it or not.
LesBaker
Mr. Savant
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 17,460
- Name
- Les
Not even close to that percentage is set aside for marketing you're way off base
Stranger
How big is infinity?
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 7,182
- Name
- Hugh
Why, of course he is. He must be, for you posted it, right?
In reality, what Al dodges is the impact that sports have on the public through advertising. But that point requires some stretching of ones thought-pattern, which can't happen when one lives in a Newtonian deterministic postivistic man-made world.