Bosses or county relief.Originally Posted by MadtownPacker
Bosses may just be an email away, but so is ICE.
Bosses or county relief.
Bosses may just be an email away, but so is ICE.
So players can rape, do drugs, be involved in shootings etc... But the NFL and the public are outraged at someone for a domestic spat. Now the whole deal over when the NFL had possession of the video. Give me a fucking break, it's not like this is the first thing the NFL has ever covered up.
Remember "The White House"??
wist
It kind of makes me sick to my stomach reading Ray Lewis' attempt to contrast his situation and Rice's:
In another one I read he kept harping on the fact that it was someones daughter. someone's sister; and if anyone did that to his daughter or sister there would be trouble. Well, what about it being someones son or brother, and the fact that his life was taken?? Lewis was accepted back with open arms."There is no comparison. This is nothing about me, personally, me speaking with the owner of the Ravens today, Steve Biscotti, just moments ago," Lewis said. "And just listening to the reason why Ray Rice will never play for the Ravens again, he put his daughter — he put anybody that's connected to him that's a female — he put them in that position. When you do that you have to take a step back. When you're an owner and anybody who walks in the room and you see that type of evidence that you haven't seen or heard before ...
“One thing Steve made very clear: there is no comparison of me and Ray Rice. It's night and day. It's night and day of anything we've ever been through and that's why both situations are totally different.”
With all due respect, and I do respect your takes. Ray Lewis killed no one. I watched that trial and he wasn't remotely connected. There is no way he killed those guys. No way.
Now maybe you have a point as it relates to his lack of candor about the two thugs in his posse that killed those guys, and the fact they were aquitted. I guess if that's your point, perhaps I agree after all. He certainly didn't spill his guts even if he wasn't involved.
Not remotely connected??? Where did his white suit go?
There was absolutely no evidence against him. That asshat covered it up though. He shoved them into the limo and tried to hush it all.
Look, courttv is a cool thing and hearing all the testimony is really interesting. He came off as only concerned with his image after two guys were murdered by two thugs in his group.
How did his white suit get blood on it? Because he was standing a discrete 30' away?
The problem is that you're comparing the NFL to regular jobs. It's an apple and orange comparison. It's well known that the NFL is completely about image and money, so therefore they base their decisions on those items. What an employee does there is completely magnified to the nth degree due to who they work for. It comes with the territory and the players and other employees know it. The same rules don't apply to the regular world as they do for the NFL due to their high profile. I think the comparison you're trying to do is flawed on a basic level. I see what you're looking to accomplish, but I don't think it works.
All hail the Ruler of the Meadow!
There is no sense in pretending the NFL is anything resembling a normal employer. A normal "career" in the NFL is 3 years long and ends abruptly before delivering pizzas forever. The nature of the industry is such that players must always be prepared to never play football again. Before the incident, the league was unquestionably better with Rice in it. His body didn't get injured but his image did and the result is exactly the same, the league thinks it no longer benefits from Rice's contributions. Seeing the NFL's action as a punishment is inaccurate. Ray Rice isn't banned because he hit his lady, he's banned because a video was released to the public of him hitting his lady.
70% of the Earth is covered by water. The rest is covered by Al Harris.
In all likelihood the standard NFL boilerplate contract contains a "morals clause" which is broad and which gives the NFL all kinds of power to have its way in matters like this. Rice voluntarily accepted the terms of his contract in exchange for millions in compensation. It's pretty cut and dried to me.
One time Lombardi was disgusted with the team in practice and told them they were going to have to start with the basics. He held up a ball and said: "This is a football." McGee immediately called out, "Stop, coach, you're going too fast," and that gave everyone a laugh.
John Maxymuk, Packers By The Numbers
I think this is right. While the wisdom of allowing Goodell to make these decisions can certainly be questioned, the NFL certainly has the right to suspend a player for behavior they feel is detrimental to the image of the NFL.
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
I think Patler is trying to ask a broader question: Should employers be able to terminate someone who has committed a transgression outside of work and work hours, regardless of industry or monopoly status?
I assume for the sake of my argument that the transgression in question does not impair the ability of the person to work (or be available to work) and does no harm (financial or PR) to the firm in question. So I am not considering the case of a cab driver booked on a DUI charge.
My answer is yes, they should, because absent specifically negotiated due process in a contract (personal services or Union), I am not sure such a matter can be adjudicated easily in a Court or arbitration hearing. But I am open to the argument that at will employment confers a greater advantage of information to the employer than to the employee.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
It's so arbitrary with the NFL that it is starting to drive me crazy.
3irty1 hit the nail on the head. Rice isn't band because of doestic violence. He's banned because of a video. If there had been video, lots of Packers would have been banned over the years.
So domestic abuse in the privacy of your home might get you as short suspension. Domestic abuse in public gets you banned, but only if there is video.
OK, but different levels of evidence exist in all cases of wrongdoing. And that affects verdicts and sentencing even for substantially the same act. Details of laws (there are often 5 levels of sexual assault on the books) and their corresponding sentences often depend on very fine grained reading of the available evidence.
So is that what disturbs you, or the fact that the League believed this was a "both sides are to blame and a slap isn't really a punch" incident that is domestic violence incident only in the technical sense?
Or is it my particular brand of exasperation, that Goodell seems to pick punishments out of a hat after reading USAToday?
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Yes. This is true. Like it or hate it, the level of certainty in the culpability, as well as the public perception seems to be a large factor. That being said, this is not a criminal proceeding where it is mostly a yes or no verdict. Here, the punishment can be adjusted based upon the certainty culpability as well as on other factors, such as the possible effect on the bottom line of the league ($$). Is it really so different than any other business?
The League's letter to Rice giving him official word about his suspension says that that the additional sanction was because the video showed a substantially different version of events than had been portrayed in the meeting with Goodell, League officials and the team.
Which, going back to our six stages of hypocrisy list, means that League officials who viewed the video at the casino (and received and watched their own copy of the video) managed not to convey the actual events very accurately to their superiors, if at all. If that was true, you might think someone would face sanctions themselves for failing at their job. We'll probably have to wait until a Friday news dump in April to get word from Mueller's investigation on that.
Last edited by pbmax; 09-12-2014 at 11:36 AM.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
The part that bothers me most is the response to mob mentality. Nothing changed from the original suspension to his total ban, other than the video. They knew it was a case of domestic violence, the video didn't change that. But, public perception changed, so then the NFL changes a ruling they had already made.
Sooner or later team will conduct surveys to see who the fans want to be the starters. After all, it's better for the league to give the fans the players they want to see.
They did that with the pro bowl and nobody watches anymore.
If we are talking about an ideal way to handle this stuff it is one thing. I agree with most of Patler's points on what the NFL did wrong. If, however, we are talking about what the NFL had the right to do (even if less than ideal) that's a whole different ball of wax.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote