_2.gif "Time.com 50 Best Websites 2008")
On Tuesday, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell reiterated that he will begin fining teams whose players are suspended for violation of the Personal Conduct Policy.
“We want to continue to emphasize personal conduct and personal responsibility,” Goodell said after Tuesday’s one-day league meeting. ”One way to do it is to hold teams responsible for the conduct of their players.”
But the teams already suffer a competitive consequence via the loss of the player for the number of fames for which he is suspended. If that’s not enough to get the team either to avoid drafting/signing bad dudes or to try to rehabilitate them once they’re in the field, forcing teams to pay a portion of the suspended player’s salary won’t do the trick either.
The only way to create a real incentive for teams to ensure that their players , as previously explained in an item for SportingNews.com, is to strip draft picks when a player with a history of off-field misconduct gets in trouble again.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:20 pm
was Goodell a principle in his former life?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 21st, 2008 at 10:21 pm
The teams cannot control players actions off the field. What good is going to do to fine or even take draft picks away? What needs to done is to develop a mandatory educational program for each level of problems. Every team should have a mandatory minimum program
All players should have a certain educational program to go through before they get in trouble. All teams should have to spend so much money on these programs according to the teams level of problems.
The Browns would have to have it’s players go through extensive education, and the problem players even more.
If there is a fine, it should go to help this education. All players would have to attend a minimal amount of training just to warn them and educate them on what situations to stay out of. Troubled teams would have to spend more money than clean teams. The NFL would have professionals decide the levels and review them every season.
Every team should hire trained professionals just for this, as the Cowboys have done. The professional will decide, without team interference, as to what level of education each player needs. Every player should be reviewed at specific intervals as to what they require.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 2 / 5 with 3 rating(s)
May 21st, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Mike, you’re right about the only way to get the teams onboard would be to strip them of draft picks, but I like what the commish is doing.
He’s showing the teams that he’s not trying to force a policy on them with what would be some really harsh punishments. He’s allowing the owners to try to get the problem under control on their own without affecting the way a team is usually run.
Face it, taking draft picks away from a team because some jerk drinks too much, or swings at a fan, hurts big time. You don’t want to have to start thinking about all that, after all, it is only a game.
Allow the commish to do it this way, next year it will be draft picks as a punishment.
By the way, this doesn’t hurt the owners portrayal of the perception of the players as being horrible folks in regards to the CBA. Don’t think that they haven’t thought about how this helps their cause.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
May 21st, 2008 at 10:52 pm
In my opinion, besides the stripping of draft picks, there need to be fines that count substanially against the salary cap.
Think the Cowboys would have thought twice about signing Pac Man if it ultimately cost them the cap room they needed to sign Barber and Newman? I do.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
May 21st, 2008 at 11:21 pm
This idea is absolutely absurd. That’s like going to a business owner and saying, “Employee A got arrested again, so now your store can no longer be open for business on Saturdays.” Or at a factory, “Employee B got arrested again, so you must cut all production by 10%.”
Playing football for a living is a privilege, and I want to see players punished when they are on the wrong side of the law. However, if you start stripping draft picks from teams who ultimately have no control over other grown men, it’s the fans that will suffer.
Sure, the teams have a responsibility to avoid picking players with a troubled history, but unfortunately it’s not always that easy. How long after a prior incident can you establish a player has put that in the past forever? What happens to a player with a DUI gets into a domestic violence dispute that doesn’t involve alcohol? What do you do to a team with a player like Marvin Harrison, the golden child for so long, who attempts to murder somebody? There are way too many scenarios that don’t appear to have clear cut answers. Not everyone is Pacman or Chris Henry.
All you can do is kick them out. The team’s punishment is the loss of a player. The player’s punishment is he is suspended or expelled from the NFL. Eventually, guys will learn if they want to play, they need to stay out of trouble.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
May 21st, 2008 at 11:34 pm
I am calling BS to the draft picks. The Pats have been proven to have cheated for years and they lost one pick. Granted a number 1 but it did not hurt b/c they had an extra. If they did not, Goodell might have only taken a later pick. We will never know. But to equate or even put it in the same box as cheating makes absolutely no sense. How about rewarding teams that rehabilitate a player like Moss. If there is a punishment, maybe a reward would be in order? Just fine them. Don’t punish the fans anymore than have to be ridiculed that their team is in the headlines negatively.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:43 am
Realistically, stripping draft picks won’t happen. I expected the players union to speak up after the spygate penalty comes down, because it effectively took money from the rookies. Certainly if there had been a full investigation of all teams, and it were somehow found that multiple teams had taped, all facing first round or multiple pick penalties, then they WOULD have spoken up. Upshaw has always had a hard time seeing the big picture.
Perhaps it is a real problem if they start taking high picks, which are the only picks that would cause a real change, if anything.
What is the answer though? Can we change the problem with punitive actions? I don’t think so. The problem is caused when you start giving kids (yes, they are kids after all, or rather very young men) lots of money where they probably didn’t have nearly that kind of income before. They meet trouble at every corner, as the leeches come out of the woodwork to get “their share.” Temptation is everywhere. How do you fix that?
Personally, I think that when players commit violent acts, and are found guilty, they should be banned for a year. Subsequent acts should be met with a lifetime ban. Playing football in the NFL, and making the kind of money they make, should be considered a privilege, not a right. Shape up, and conform to the standards laid out for you, or find employment elsewhere. You won’t have problems with habitual violent troublemakers if you HAVE no violent troublemakers.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:57 am
I have to agree with fan62 on this issue. Making a team liable for it’s players may sound good in theory, but if you were to draw out the logic behind it, you’d see a diagram that screams “the ends justify the means” and has no other real moral right to it…
Which basically means we’re talking about implementing a moral wrong to fix a moral wrong… Lovely.
The fact of the matter is, if the player’s on field conduct isn’t affected, the team should not be required to do anything because the player does not actually represent the team (at least not in terms of the contract). He just works for them, like any other employee-employer relationship, though there are obvious differences.
And honestly, what are we really pissed off about here? Are we afraid all the “bad guys” in the NFL are going to destroy society? No. Are crime rates rising because Pac Man Jones is making headlines? No. The fact is, the majority of society wants this issue addressed for one of two reasons:
1.) They are just sick of hearing about players getting into trouble. Simple, cold, but often true. Also, legitimate. When you read NFL news, you want to see team transactions, analysis, and actual news. Not strip club disturbances, battery charges, and anything involving drugs or alcohol. Which leads me to my 2nd reason why we want players to get their act together:
2.) They are considered role models. This may not be what they signed up for, but it is a package deal, and it’s actually a more secured guarantee than their contract. We hold them accountable for their actions and we look for someone to police them. The first answer that comes to mind: the team that employs them. The real people responsible: the high schools and colleges that catered to their every want and need in the name of stats and recognition. Unfortunately, without shifting public attention to those responsible bodies, there is little to no chance of action being taken against them. There’s also little to no chance of shifting public attention.
Which means the best solution probably lies with the NFL, through either the teams or the organization itself. Personally, I believe fan62 has a much better concept in mind than the concept of interfering with the team’s management abilities (aka less draft picks), though I do applaud Florio for conceptualizing a plan to deal with the “problem players” rather than writing another pointless article stating that it is a problem.
There are simply better solutions out there. Ones that, when called into question, have more moral backing then “the ends justify the means.”
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 1:04 am
My idea is similar to fcmlefty’s. If a team signs a player who has already violated the Personal Conduct Policy, then if that player is suspended his salary still counts against the cap for the duration of his suspension. There should be some kind of statute of limitations so that a player who does something stupid once as a rookie isn’t tainted for the rest of his career.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:04 am
I think Kulp hit the nail on the head here. Disciplining teams for individual players’ actions is more than slightly irrational. Yes, criminals shouldn’t be paid millions a year to play a game. Yes, teams take risks drafting players who have had off-field incidents of whatever variety in the past. But here is the bottom line:
Player character cannot be determined by one incident. Numerous high -profile individuals as well as regular joes have been arrested/indicted/imprisoned. This does not mean the individual is a horrible person, or that the company employing said person is horrible by extension. Mistakes are made, and blame rests solely with the player for any illegal activities in which they choose to participate. Harrison is a perfect example - a guy who has been the immaculate NFL player/teammate for years is now under the gun for his involvement in a nightclub altercation. Now, I realize there were extenuating circumstances that have not fully been revealed, and that Harrison owns the club where the incident occurred. But honestly, can anyone predict when a grown man will get into a squabble at a club? If they can, then yes, teams should employ these individuals, and their clubs stripped of draft picks when their players do their nefarious deeds. But, here on Planet Earth, it’s not possible to predict when another free-thinking individual will break the law, or to what extent they will break it. When that becomes possible, sure, strip some draft picks.
In the meantime, it’s individual accountability, baby.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:23 am
Three words Mike. Never. Gonna. Happen.
Too many teams willing to take a chance on awesome players with checkered pasts. The owners would deep fry Goodell’s jibbly bits if he tried to yank their draft picks.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 4:30 am
What Roger Gooddell is attempting by announcing that teams will be punished for the off-the-field performance of their players is a gutless and cowardly publicity stunt designed to make the league look good at the expense of the owners. The players are represented by a league-wide union. Because of this, all punishments meted out to players for on-field or off-field incidents MUST come from the league office. PERIOD. It’s the only way to ensure uniform treatment of all players regardless of team and maintain competitive balance across the league. For Gooddell to somehow shift the onus of maintaining control of players off the field activities to the team is nothing short of an abrogation of his responsibilities. Neither Gooddell, nor the union, would ever accept a team imposing a fine on a player for a late hit on the field. That’s the league’s responsibility. It is also the league’s responsibility to punish players for off-the-field incidents. The team’s have no responsibility in this regard, nor should they. If they draft a player who later gets suspended for 4 games, a season or permanently banished from the league, that’s punishment enough for the team. Gooddell needs to stop grandstanding in front of the media and act like a goddamn commissioner for a change.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 6:49 am
other than force bad actors to be suspended, cut, dont know what other penalties should apply to teams. the #1 discipline they can impart is to suspend or cut players. cut them loose and let the league suspend them.
if bound to issue fines, fine players big money thru suspensions and forfeiture of game checks. team fines must be larger if the intent is to get attention. like a % of the cap. these little $5-10k fines mean nothing. less wasteful players than pac drop that much in one visit to a t&a bar.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:17 am
#1: if a team signs a guy who gets in trouble repeatedly they should have his contract count against the cap for the entire duration of the contract, NOT just the suspension! (see Chris Henry and Pac Man)
1A. A team will not be allowed to cut the player to save cap room either, the only way to relieve this is via trade!
#2. PICKS WONT MATTER neither will fines: They are fining multi-millionaires pennies on the dollar.
2A: after 3-5 offenses there is a lifetime ban. I dont want to hear the tree-huggin give them a chance to rehab crap. It is simple to stay out police trouble……….MOST people do it their entire lives, so I am really sick of hearing about the down trodden and poor people in prison, and the STUPID athlete who puts themselves in a position where they will get into trouble! (DUI’s always kill me, you are a MILLIONAIRE get a limo, not status enough I guess if you can drive Ferrari or Bentley home intoxicated and brag about it in the locker room)!
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:04 am
take a look at your days without an arrest meter and tell me if any team would have any draft picks left.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:30 am
“The only way to create a real incentive for teams to ensure that their players , as previously explained in an item for SportingNews.com, is to strip draft picks when a player with a history of off-field misconduct gets in trouble again.”
WRONG
Hitting teams in the salary cap can be just as effective. If you fine a repeat offender, and his fines also count against the salary cap that would be an extremely effective deterrent to the teams. Who would sign Henry or Thurman if they knew that if they screw up one more time that it could cost them $1m or more against their cap?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 22nd, 2008 at 10:54 am
I think Goodell should fine himself for violation
of the personal conduct policy during spy gate.
Destroying evidence? Refusal to investigate league
wide cheating? Too bad the players don’t get to
investigate themselves.
I say let the law handle it, they are citizens like us but are
bigger targets. Second, there are two kinds of people. Caught and Not caught.
Third, you’re gonna end up with lesser talent on the field.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated