Byrd is the word: Indians agree to terms with OF Marlon Byrd
March 17, 2016Cavs players were kind of pissed Kyrie Irving shot the ball so many times
March 17, 2016Ever since the 2011 NFL collective bargaining agreement was signed, commissioner Roger Goodell’s disciplinary power has been a disaster. According to the latest news regarding the NFL and negotiations with the NFL Player’s Association, Roger Goodell’s status as chief disciplinarian of the league might be coming to an end. It’s a welcome relief from the perspective of someone who takes in all the NFL news as it happens. It’s a most welcome relief to the union that has seen its players at the receiving end of some arbitrary judgments over the past five years. In the end, even as its a concession of power by Roger Goodell and the commissioner’s office, it should be a relief to Roger Goodell as well. As we’ve watched the NFL try and exert its disciplinary will over the past few years, it’s felt more like the NFL shouldn’t even bother trying to discipline players at all.
I didn’t think I was going to arrive at this opinion when the NFL was busy meting out punishments to Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson. I didn’t even think I’d arrive at this opinion as Roger Goodell was presiding over the infuriatingly named “deflategate.” It felt kind of right — if not righteous — to have a mechanism for one of the world’s most powerful sports leagues to be able to punish wrongdoing, even when the legal system failed to do so. Who didn’t want to see a domestic abuser or child abuser be punished? But over time, it’s felt less and less satisfying, and even fraudulent to see real world issues equated with a number of games and paychecks.
If the NFL can’t do something effectively, they shouldn’t pretend they can.
Instead of trying to awkwardly place a punitive value on real-world crimes like child abuse and worse, the NFL needs it to be an up-or-down employability question. Peterson’s issue with violent physical punishment of his son isn’t “worth” any number of games other than all of them. Either he can respond to his real world issue and make himself employable to a team going forward, or he will find himself in a position that a team can no longer justify keeping him under contract. As awkward as it was for the Cowboys with Greg Hardy this past year, that’s the way it should be: A team tries to have a player on the team, they receive a certain amount of pressure and a player makes himself worthy of continuing to be employed or he finds himself out of the league.
The consolidation of power into the commissioner’s office wasn’t working. It might be about fairness to players who saw Roger Goodell wield power as both a judge and jury, but even more than that, it wasn’t working for fans, owners or the commissioner himself. Count me among those who is glad to see disciplinary power wane in the commissioner’s office. As I said, I never thought I would have arrived at this conclusion, but there ended up being strange relationship between the punishment handed out and how I felt about the crimes and transgressions committed. It wasn’t that punishments became inappropriate, but football punishments were inappropriate. If the NFL can’t do something effectively, they shouldn’t pretend they can. It should be a victory for everyone to put crime and punishment back in its proper perspective and out of the NFL’s hands.
10 Comments
The whole point of Goodell is to take the heat for the league. The commissioner in every pro sport is a lackey for the owners, and his primary job is to put money in their pockets, especially at the expense of the players. Goodell’s role always was to be the bad guy. I’m not sure why anyone is upset that he ended up doing exactly that.
People generally dislike that he’s unfair in the discipline process. He doesn’t practice business in good faith. He’s botched or lied about many major matters of league policy including but not limited to employee health. He’s diluted the product on television. He also manuevers policies that in the end have pitted people against their municipalities in order to get billionaires tax breaks.
He’s unlikable in many ways. What really is to like about him?
Nothing, and I’m not saying we should like him. But that we’re upset with him means he’s doing his job pretty darn good. We shouldn’t be mad at him as much as the owners. His job is to just do what they tell him to.
Don’t practice business in good faith, lie about league policy, hold cities hostage to make billionaires even richer? You’ve checked off all the boxes of what sports owners have been looking for for decades. I’d quibble about diluting the product, it seems like people are still watching just as much, if not more.
So now he’s a eunuch and all pretenses are over. His only purpose anymore is to make more and more money for the league.
He’s such a poor excuse for a commissioner, much more comfortable with followership than leadership. He might as well save himself further embarrassment and just retire.
I don’t have any problem with a sport punishing those who violate a good conduct agreement with paychecks, or expulsion. It’s a product with an image that a league has a right to attempt to control. Baseball was facing possible extinction until Judge Landis reacted harshly and Babe Ruth came along. The NBA had ferocious P.R. problems with player drug use (and later, fighting) until harsh suspensions were carried out. Those penalties did modify bad behavior.
To me, Goodell’s prob has been his knee jerk reactions designed more to immediately mollify the public than to respond to facts, and the evident hubris when called on it. He first lost credibility with the bounty thing in NO, where he suspended a player who had no part in it based on bad lip reading. He suddenly increased the Rice penalty without any new facts. Add to these types of things the revelation that the leagues medical people actively misled players about head trauma and a picture is painted of a guy no more credible than a Big Tobacco spokesman circa 1978. In this context he is wise to divest such judgments to someone with more credibility, especially while parents are seriously considering whether their kids play this sport.
This is the right move. The commissioners office shouldn’t be involved in discipline. If the league feels the need to discipline players for off field transgressions that’s fine (because at the end of the day, its all about PR), but a better way to do it would be to have a panel, committee, triumvirate, what have you to determine punishment. I’d say a three person panel that includes a player (union) rep, an owner’s rep and an independent member (preferably one with a background in employment law) (politics aside, Condi Rice would make a fine initial choice, imho) This way those three people can discuss issues, and vote on an action. All parties would have a seat at the table and majority rules. Not a perfect system, but also prevents the commissioners office from having to weigh in on issues that, in all likelihood, were not fully researches/contemplated before action was taken. Furthermore, this would mollify the media as well, insofar as if something is “in process” howling monkeys like Skip Bayless can’t screech and fling poo without looking like idiots.
(On a cell, sorry for the formatting)
Josh Gordon has lost most of two seasons, and compared to Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson, his crime vs. punishment is surprising. Brady most likely was guilty of deflate-gate and nothing happens. Politics with Brady, similar to the OJ murder trial, a player (or former player) avoids punishment.
The current system doesn’t seem very fair at all. I want to see bounty gate and deflate gate guys get punished, not get away with it. Playing field must be level.
The THUR night products are bad product. There is no arguing its diluted the product. Ratings might make it profitable but there’s no questioning its a good product.
He could also do some of what he does (driving revenue) without being such a dirtbag. He’s effective in that regard. Does it well? I’d disagree.
Like I said, it’s only a quibble. I agree in not liking the product, but if it still sells wildly, why shouldn’t the NFL draw every last drop of revenue out of it?
But he’s only a dirtbag because the owners want those dollars. Could they live with less money, and being better to the fans? Of course, but when you can get away with anything short of actually slapping fans in the face, and they’ll still fork over there money, what should we expect out of the league?
I am getting a salary of 6900 dollars each week…as Over a year ago I was in a horrible condition , jobless and no bank credit . Thanks to one of my friends who showed me a way where I was able to gather myself and making average of 58 d/h. So it can change your life as it has changed mine.
Look here for details
ki…