NFL does not have a criminal epidemic

[Jason in LA]

Well it appears that there is not a criminal epidemic in the NFL, just like I’ve always thought. It’s not a league of thugs and criminals like many of you have made it out to be. Below I have posted a link to an articled from the San Diego Union Tribune. The writer of the article broke down all of the crimes, and compared the NFL to the general public. His findings do not support the argument that the NFL is filled with thugs.

Here is the link to the article.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/nfl/20070422-9999-lz1s22arrest.html

I will give a few quotes for those of you who do not want to read the entire article.

-Contrary to public perception, the arrest rate among NFL players is less than that of the general population.

-The arrest rate for the general population (about one per 21 people) is higher than the NFL's, which has averaged about one incident per 45 players per year since 2000, according to the review. The NFL has been making note of this fact for years, especially after 1998, when authors Jeff Benedict and Don Yaeger came out with a book entitled, “Pros and Cons, The Criminals Who Play in the NFL.”

-The NFL acknowledges it has an image problem because of these incidents, much more so than it has a criminal epidemic.

-The most prevalent charge was driving under the influence, which accounted for almost a third of the arrests. Over half of all incidents came after traffic stops or were vehicle-related, including DUIs and searches that turned up drugs or guns.

-Almost 40 percent (122) were committed by 50 players with multiple arrests, including DUI and other offenses.

-To analysts and those who study crime and race in society, this all adds up to one thing. They say it's a media-amplified microcosm of America.

-“You can say for sure the athletes have a problem, but athletes are not the problem,” said Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida. “They are representative of society where many of these issues are epidemic.”
-They are problems society hasn't solved, let alone the NFL.

-While drunken driving arrests were the most common arrest among NFL players, the arrest rate was below that for males under 30 in the United States, which is roughly 2 percent, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In the NFL, it's about one DUI arrest per 144 players (less than 1 percent), based on the review.
-Among people ages 22-34 in the United States, DUI and drug-related offenses are the two most common charges, according to the FBI.

-How the media reports the arrests can complicate the problem and feed stereotypes, Lapchick said.

-Take away 50 repeat offenders in the NFL since 2000, and you eliminate almost 40 percent of the incidents.

-“If you look at any given population, the troublemakers tend to be small in number,” said Sheldon Zhang, a sociology professor at San Diego State.

-Recent media attention focused on the lengthy records of Jones and Henry has amplified the issue publicly, much more so than even four years ago, when Carson was arrested for the fourth time since 2000 and hardly drew any media attention (only one arrest led to conviction).

[Jason in LA]

A few things.

This board has gone nuts over these players, labeling the NFL a league of thugs. It’s interesting to see that the arrest rate for NFL players is lower than the national average. I guess the United States is a country of thugs.

It looks like the league isn’t anywhere near as bad as some of you guys made it out to be. In fact, there are fewer problems than in the general population. And a good amount of the crimes are the same crimes that the average person gets arrested for.

You guys act like these players are violent, but most of the arrests are from traffic violations, and they are arrests that the everyday man gets.

I am not about to downplay drunk driving. Leonard Little is one of the few players that I hate on a personal level. Actually, I think he’s the only player that I hate. But let’s not act like a DUI is the crime of a bad person. If we were to do that we’d have to label a lot of good people as thugs.

I wonder how many people on this board have had a DUI. I know of one, and I’d say that poster is a very nice person. Everybody would agree with that. Does the DUI make that person a thug? Brian Griese had a DUI. We gave him a lot of crap for his on the field play, and he seemed to be a loner off the field. But is he a thug, or a bad guy? No. Far from it. Hell, he played for free one season because he donated all of his money to charity. How about John Elway? Is he a thug, or a bad guy? In the ESPN Classics show on Elway, it was either him or a friend of his that made reference to the fact that they had been out drinking, and driving, and that the cops let them go. Elway should have been busted. If he had, would any of you have called him a thug? The article stated that the NFL has a lower average of DUIs than people in a similar age group.

How many people here have smoked weed? I’ve seen a thread or two were people here have admitted to it. Are those people thugs? Probably not.

As for the weapons, ESPN did a feature of athletes who carry guns. They featured a white athlete. He was either a baseball or hockey player. The guy said that he carries his gun everywhere he goes and has it sitting on his lap in his car when he drives. In a lot of areas, if not all, it is illegal to have a gun inside your car. From the way I always understood the law a person could have a gun in their trunk but not on them in the car. So is that guy a thug? Is he a bad person? He didn’t seem like one to me.

I have a cousin who carries a gun. She’s in her late 30s, is educated and has a good job. She doesn’t even live in a bad area. But she’s packing heat, and told me that she has other friends he do the same. Are they thugs?

I guess if you play in the NFL and you get a DUI, get caught with weed, or get caught with a gun then you must be a thug.

If you people wanted to be consistent, then you’d have to hate a lot of good people. You may even have to hate yourself. I’m sure that a good amount of us have had a couple drinks and drove home because we felt fine. What if you got pulled over and blew that .09. Would that make you a thug or a bad person?

Like the article stated, the NFL has a bad image, but there is no criminal epidemic like you guys think. The media has overblown a lot of this, and some of you guys just piled on.

It’s time for you guys to wake up and realize that the same issues that are in the NFL are also in your communities. According to the stats, these issues are more of a problem in your communities than in the NFL.

And can you guys stop acting like a large percentage of the NFL is bad. One poster here said it was 20%. Well, we can see that isn’t the case. Last year 2% of the league gets arrested and people went nuts. So 2% makes the other 98% look bad? That doesn’t make any since. And a large percentage of the crimes are by repeat offenders.

A very few bad apples should make the whole lot bad.

[Beantown Bronco]

I love arrest statistics.....they really are meaningless when you involve celebrities/sports figures/etc. Seriously....Joe Shmoe doesn't stand a chance of getting a free pass for a DUI or possession of pot 99% of the time. NFL players on the other hand....we don't even hear about it unless they run into the rookie on duty who wants to make a name for himself.

[Rock Chalk]

So DUI is OK if you are an NFL player is what you re saying...

[Jason in LA]

So DUI is OK if you are an NFL player is what you re saying...

I never said or implied that in any way. You totally missed the point.

[scorpio]

but but but Jason Whitlock said....

[rbackfactory80]

With the recent DWI death in MLB the news is making it out to be a problem among baseball players and now teams are making sure no alcohol is permitted in locker rooms. The news amplifies every problem when this was just a case of one person being careless.

[Jason in LA]

I love arrest statistics.....they really are meaningless when you involve celebrities/sports figures/etc. Seriously....Joe Shmoe doesn't stand a chance of getting a free pass for a DUI or possession of pot 99% of the time. NFL players on the other hand....we don't even hear about it unless they run into the rookie on duty who wants to make a name for himself.


I'd say that when the average guy gets busted, nobody ever hears about it. But when the NFL, or NBA player gets busted for the same thing, it's all over the news.

[GonzoLays]

I never said or implied that in any way. You totally missed the point.

How can someone NOT get the gist of your original post is beyond me.

Alec, how in the hell did you not understand what the first post was about?

[Hotrod]

After careful review of those stats I think its clear that if NFL players would simply stop driving the league would be better off.

[Beantown Bronco]

I'd say that when the average guy gets busted, nobody ever hears about it. But when the NFL, or NBA player gets busted for the same thing, it's all over the news.

You missed my point. What I'm saying is the celebrity is far less likely to ever GET arrested.

[Hotrod]

Honestly that was a very interesting read.

I'd have to say even with those stats the "role model" card is in play here.

[GonzoLays]

we don't even hear about it unless they run into the rookie on duty who wants to make a name for himself.

How do you know that?

[GonzoLays]

You missed my point. What I'm saying is the celebrity is far less likely to ever GET arrested.

do you really think officer Joe Brown knows who the hell Curome Cox is? I doubt it. If anything, officers are more prone to arrest an athlete so he can have a good story to tell and hear about what he did all over the papers and newscasts. It make him a psuedo-celebrity. "So let me tell you about the time I arrested a denver bronco..."

And besides, officers let people go all the time. It could possibly be that the rate for letting the average citizen go on an offense is much higher than an athlete.

[Beantown Bronco]

do you really think officer Joe Brown knows who the hell Curome Cox is?

If he's a Denver-area cop, then yes, without a doubt he does.



If anything, officers are more prone to arrest an athlete so he can have a good story to tell and here about what he did all over the papers and newscasts. It make him a psuedo-celebrity. "So let me tell you about the time I arrested a denver bronco..."

Some may believe that, but if that were the case, then Elway would've been ineligible to play in most of his games, because he'd be in prison.

And ALL of the Broncos have admitted that at the end of the last day of training camp when it was held in Greeley, the players basically pulled a cannon ball run on their way home on the highway. The speeds they admitted to driving on the record would be enough for an arrest. And the cops know about this and simply look the other way. Now if my friends and I decided to do that one day, what would happen? Arrest and loss of license for sure.

[BroncsRule]

The initial fact presented in this piece is absurd on it's face:

"-The arrest rate for the general population (about one per 21 people) .."

There are 300,000,000 Americans, ergo 1/21 would equal 14.285 million arrests per year.

Waaaay too high.

[Tredici]

-Take away 50 repeat offenders in the NFL since 2000, and you eliminate almost 40 percent of the incidents.

:thumbs:

[Beantown Bronco]

The initial fact presented in this piece is absurd on it's face:

"-The arrest rate for the general population (about one per 21 people) .."

There are 300,000,000 Americans, ergo 1/21 would equal 14.285 million arrests per year.

Waaaay too high.

Actually that number is spot on according to the Uniform Crime Report (and it doesn't even include traffic violations, which is scary).

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_29.html

[cutthemdown]

I agree with Jason. I've been saying all along that its a handfull of players that are the bad ones. Teams keep them around because they are good players. You don't see scrubs getting arrested and then still being in nfl.

The ray Caruth thing really stained the NFL.

[GonzoLays]

If he's a Denver-area cop, then yes, without a doubt he does.

Nope. Only a diehard knows who Curome Cox is. Let's be serious.


Some may believe that, but if that were the case, then Elway would've been ineligible to play in most of his games, because he'd be in prison.

And ALL of the Broncos have admitted that at the end of the last day of training camp when it was held in Greeley, the players basically pulled a cannon ball run on their way home on the highway. The speeds they admitted to driving on the record would be enough for an arrest. And the cops know about this and simply look the other way. Now if my friends and I decided to do that one day, what would happen? Arrest and loss of license for sure.

Using John Elway as an example is quite unfair considering he was the most popular person in the history of this state.

don't get it twisted, cops love to bust famous people. And why shouldn't they? A curome freaking cox signature isn't going to do **** for them.

[Paladin]

........but, but, they got CHARACTER ISSUES. Isn't that different?

[Bladerunner]

rep to Jason for doing some research and getting some real facts on the table...I still think the NFL has been rather permissive in its approach to criminal players, but I'm a Marine so everything seems nasty and undisciplined to me...Hopefully the commish can remain on solid legs and address the individuals that are skewing perception so much.

[BroncsRule]

Actually that number is spot on according to the Uniform Crime Report (and it doesn't even include traffic violations, which is scary).

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_29.html

I stand corrected.

And may I just say - holy crap!!! that's a lotta friggin' arrests!

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Well it appears that there is not a criminal epidemic in the NFL, just like I’ve always thought. It’s not a league of thugs and criminals like many of you have made it out to be. Below I have posted a link to an articled from the San Diego Union Tribune. The writer of the article broke down all of the crimes, and compared the NFL to the general public. His findings do not support the argument that the NFL is filled with thugs.
Here is the link to the article.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/nfl/20070422-9999-lz1s22arrest.html
I will give a few quotes for those of you who do not want to read the entire article.
-Contrary to public perception, the arrest rate among NFL players is less than that of the general population.
These numbers show nothing. Now, if you can show numbers with people who earn the same amount of money as NFL players then you will have something but trying to compare them to the general population which includes all of the inner city thugs, criminals, etc... is meaningless.

[-Slap-]

-Take away 50 repeat offenders in the NFL since 2000, and you eliminate almost 40 percent of the incidents.

:thumbs:

This is the truly meaningful part of the article. The Ray Lewis, Leonard Little and Pacman Jones type thugs, that people like Jason bend over backwards to defend, make the rest of the League look bad.

I know the only way for the author to spin this article was to look at the statistics superficially, but what percentage of the 1 in 21 people in the general population who commit crimes return to high paying jobs after they're arrested? What percentage of them can afford expensive legal representation in the first place? 1 in 21 almost perfectly mirrors the unemployment rate, doesn't it? This not a coincidence.

This article is an excellent example of how easy it is to mislead people with statistics when they're unwilling, or simply not smart enough, to figure out what you're doing to them.

[-Slap-]

These numbers show nothing. Now, if you can show numbers with people who earn the same amount of money as NFL players then you will have something but trying to compare them to the general population which includes all of the inner city thugs, criminals, etc... is meaningless.

Bastard. I just said the same thing one minute later.

:)

[watermock]

I didn't know they were living in abject poverty.

[-Slap-]

rep to Jason for doing some research and getting some real facts on the table...I still think the NFL has been rather permissive in its approach to criminal players, but I'm a Marine so everything seems nasty and undisciplined to me...Hopefully the commish can remain on solid legs and address the individuals that are skewing perception so much.

The statistics are bull****, but rep away.

[Northman]

I'd say that when the average guy gets busted, nobody ever hears about it. But when the NFL, or NBA player gets busted for the same thing, it's all over the news.

Well no **** genius. They are star athletes just like anyone who is in the spotlight has this kind of thing shed on them. Took you this long in life to figure that out? LOL

[Garcia Bronco]

a DUI at .02 over the limit is a bull**** criminal offense IMO.

[GonzoLays]

These numbers show nothing. Now, if you can show numbers with people who earn the same amount of money as NFL players then you will have something but trying to compare them to the general population which includes all of the inner city thugs, criminals, etc... is meaningless.

What in the hell does have to do with anything? Now we are SELECTIVELY comparing crime statistics? That doesn't make sense at all. Actually, there is no reason to do it.

And if you really think about it, doctors and lawyers drink and argue with their wives as much as the next guy.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

What in the hell does have to do with anything? Now we are SELECTIVELY comparing crime statistics? That doesn't make sense at all. Actually, there is no reason to do it.

And if you really think about it, doctors and lawyers drink and argue with their wives as much as the next guy.So there are as many thugs among doctors and lawyers as NFL players percentage wise?

[GonzoLays]

So there are as many thugs among doctors and lawyers as NFL players percentage wise?

You tell me, guy. Go show me the figures of crime statistics broken down by profession and income bracket. I'll be waiting.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You tell me, guy. Go show me the figures of crime statistics broken down by profession and income bracket. I'll be waiting.You said it not me (doctors and lawyers). The point about the NFL players being a different "group" of people than the general population is valid regardless whether you can comprehend that fact or not. So that comparison, as I stated is basically meaningless.

[GonzoLays]

The point about the NFL players being a different "group" of people than the general population is valid regardless

Why so? Because they are your heroes?

[Jason in LA]

This is the truly meaningful part of the article. The Ray Lewis, Leonard Little and Pacman Jones type thugs, that people like Jason bend over backwards to defend, make the rest of the League look bad.

I know the only way for the author to spin this article was to look at the statistics superficially, but what percentage of the 1 in 21 people in the general population who commit crimes return to high paying jobs after they're arrested? What percentage of them can afford expensive legal representation in the first place? 1 in 21 almost perfectly mirrors the unemployment rate, doesn't it? This not a coincidence.

This article is an excellent example of how easy it is to mislead people with statistics when they're unwilling, or simply not smart enough, to figure out what you're doing to them.

I have never defended Leonard Little, and in my post that started this thread I said that I hated the guy. I have never defended Pacman Jones. Actually, I have never defended any thug. I have defended Ray Lewis, who was wrongly accused for murder.

I find it funny that people want to ignore these numbers and say that these players should be compared to peolpe in their tax bracket. I guess some people just don't want to admit that they are wrong, even though the facts are staring them in the face.

[Jason in LA]

These numbers show nothing. Now, if you can show numbers with people who earn the same amount of money as NFL players then you will have something but trying to compare them to the general population which includes all of the inner city thugs, criminals, etc... is meaningless.

These numbers show the truth. Like I said in my last post, I find it funny that people want to ignore these numbers and say that these players should be compared to peolpe in their tax bracket. I guess some people just don't want to admit that they are wrong, even though the facts are staring them in the face.

[Jason in LA]

Bastard. I just said the same thing one minute later.

:)

And you were just as wrong as he was.

[Jason in LA]

Well no **** genius. They are star athletes just like anyone who is in the spotlight has this kind of thing shed on them. Took you this long in life to figure that out? LOL


I guess that was an attempt to be clever.

[Jason in LA]

What in the hell does have to do with anything? Now we are SELECTIVELY comparing crime statistics? That doesn't make sense at all. Actually, there is no reason to do it.

And if you really think about it, doctors and lawyers drink and argue with their wives as much as the next guy.


Exactly. I don't have the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised to see rich people getting arrested for DUIs and other minor crimes at the same rate as middle and lower class people.

[Jason in LA]

So there are as many thugs among doctors and lawyers as NFL players percentage wise?

So all of the NFL players who get busted for DUIs are thugs? Is everybody who gets a DUI a thug?

[GonzoLays]

I guess that was an attempt to be clever.

That was clever for him, Jason. :rofl: He was probably proud of that post, too. :rofl:

[Jason in LA]

You said it not me (doctors and lawyers). The point about the NFL players being a different "group" of people than the general population is valid regardless whether you can comprehend that fact or not. So that comparison, as I stated is basically meaningless.


Even if you don't like the comparison, the fact is that there is a very low percentage of NFL players who are getting busted, and a lot of the arrests are by the same players. It's a very small group. But a lot of you guys are making it seem like it is a very large group.

[fdf]

It’s interesting to see that the arrest rate for NFL players is lower than the national average.

I suspect the NFL rate is pretty high if you compare it to the arrest rate of young men who are getting or are about to get offers to be employed for $250,000 a year and up.

[Jason in LA]

I suspect the NFL rate is pretty high if you compare it to the arrest rate of young men who are getting or are about to get offers to be employed for $250,000 a year and up.

Even if that is true, the point is that the NFL arrest rate is very low. The NFL is not a league of thugs like many have made it out to be.

[GonzoLays]

I suspect the NFL rate is pretty high if you compare it to the arrest rate of young men who are getting or are about to get offers to be employed for $250,000 a year and up.

Go and get the statistics then and show us. Enough with the suspecting, lets do some showing.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Even if you don't like the comparison, the fact is that there is a very low percentage of NFL players who are getting busted, and a lot of the arrests are by the same players. It's a very small group. But a lot of you guys are making it seem like it is a very large group.I didn't say I didn't like it, I said it is pretty much meaningless. A better comparison would be using criminal stats (percentage wise) from Americans in the same income class. I imagine those numbers are out there somewhere.

[GonzoLays]

Oh noooos, its an empidemic of doctors and lawyers killing people! They need a PR firm!!

Lawyer Kills Neighbor In Rage Over Molestation Accusations

By JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN
Associated Press Writer

FAIRFIELD, Conn. (AP) -- A lawyer climbed through a neighbor's bedroom window and stabbed him to death after being told by a family member that the man had molested his 2-year-old daughter, authorities say.Advertisement



Barry James, 58, was stabbed in the chest nearly a dozen times Monday. The lawyer, Jonathon Edington, 29, was jailed on $1 million bail on charges of murder and burglary.

Capt. Gary MacNamara said Wednesday that police had not received a complaint about the child being assaulted before the killing, and "we have no indication it's true or not true."

Edington's attorney, Michael Sherman, said the information came from Edington's wife. "The daughter gave the mother information which was alarming and disturbing. The mom relayed it to her husband. That was the spark," Sherman said.

James' 87-year-old mother discovered his body. When officers went to Edington's home a short time later, they found him standing by his kitchen sink with blood on his hands and arms, authorities told the Connecticut Post. Officers said a large kitchen knife was next to him on a counter.

"He's in shock," Edington's attorney said. "This is the most unexpected turn of events one can imagine with this young man's background."

Police had gone to the neighborhood before, when Edington called to complain that he could see James through a window, police said. "Either he was partly clothed or revealed parts of his anatomy that were inappropriate," MacNamara said.

Edington, a graduate of Syracuse University and Fordham University Law School, has been practicing patent law, Sherman said. Police said Edington has no criminal record.

Rita James declined to comment on her son's death.

Pat Wysocki, a neighbor who has known the James family for 39 years, described Barry James as a "very nice fellow" who worked for a funeral home and said she found it hard to believe he would molest a child.

"But then again, you don't know," she said.

(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Doctor kills wife, then self in Michigan
05/08/2007 | 06:57 PM

Email this | Email the Editor | Print | Digg this | Add to del.icio.us A distraught member of the Filipino community in Michigan killed his 58-year-old wife in her sleep and then took his own life on Monday.

Rolando Santa Ana, 63, is a pediatrician and retired US Army colonel with three children living in California.

Police in Macomb County in Michigan, USA said Santa Ana called 911 at 7:45 a.m. and gave his home address and said he had a gun and was going to commit suicide, the county’s online newspaper reported Tuesday. The dispatcher then heard a gunshot and the conversation ended.

When police arrived they found Santa Ana and his wife Eden lying dead in bed at their home in Ravens Pointe Subdivision off Schoenherr, near 21 Mile.

The police also found a handgun on the bed and a suicide note in the bedroom, Macomb Daily said. Police said they both have gunshot wounds in the head.

Santa Ana works as doctor at Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Harrison township after he received an honorable discharge from the US Army five years ago.

Detroit News quoted investigators saying that Santa Ana was apparently distraught over possibly losing his job as government cutbacks at the township clinic.

"The (suicide) note indicated (Rolando) is doing this because of financial reasons and possible job cutbacks," said Shelby Township Police Detective Terry Hogan. "There is no indication of any type of struggle."

Neighbors on Greenville Drive were shocked by the shooting. They said the couple were heavily involved in the Filipino community, and often held parties at their brown brick two-story split-level home.

Monica Shamami said the couple was friendly, and Eden could often be found tending to the flowers and other landscaping in the front yard.

"They always had lots of people over. It looked like they got along," said Shamami, 34, who works for an automotive supplier.

"They were wonderful people and very friendly," according to Shamami, who lived next door to the couple for the past two years.

Mrs. Santa Ana used to send food and clothing to the Philippines every month. She said they were a member of a Filipino organization and had parties at their house several times during the summer.

"Their kids came here from out of state last year for a large family party," said Shamami. "It's very sad. I didn't know what happened until I spoke to a neighbor." - GMANews.TV

[GonzoLays]

Oh nooooos, more doctor criminal activity!

Doctor charged with rapes


Discuss This: Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Linking Blogs | Add to del.icio.us | Digg it
A doctor who once lived in Central Florida is accused of two rapes -- and investigations said today "there is a strong possibility that there may be other as yet unknown victims." Dr. George Pyke (left), a doctor from Anna Maria Island near Bradenton, is accused of capital sexual battery against a child under 12 and a child between 12 and 18, according to the Seminole Sheriff's Office. One of the victims was assaulted in the 1990s but only came forward recently when he learned of another molestation, according to a news release.

Pyke moved to Manatee County, where Anna Maria Island is located, in 2001 but before that officials say he did sports physicals in the Central Florida area, including at a local high school -- I don't have the name yet. Anyone with information about Dr. Pyke may call Investigator Dana Ortiz at the Seminole Sheriff's Office at 407-665-5437.

[GonzoLays]

I didn't say I didn't like it, I said it is pretty much meaningless. A better comparison would be using criminal stats (percentage wise) from Americans in the same income class. I imagine those numbers are out there somewhere.


Then go and get the stats, dumbass. Do you not know how to use google?

[Jason in LA]

I didn't say I didn't like it, I said it is pretty much meaningless. A better comparison would be using criminal stats (percentage wise) from Americans in the same income class. I imagine those numbers are out there somewhere.

At this point I don't think it matters. The point is that the percentages of players getting in trouble is very low. A lot of you guys have acted like it is very high. It doesn't matter who you compare the numbers to, the NFL will still have a low number.

The point is that there are not that many thugs in the NFL.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Then go and get the stats, dumbass. Do you not know how to use google?You go get "em" Mr. b*tchslapped I'm not that interested in them.

[GonzoLays]

You go get "em" Mr. b*tchslapped I'm not that interested in them.

Hurry, boy, I don't have all day. chop chop...

[Jason in LA]

Really thinking about this, the fact that the crime rate in the NFL is lower than the general public is an endorsment for the NFL. If you can make the NFL, the chances of you committing a crime will be lower. Hey, the stats prove it.

Man, I bet you guys hate that I found this article. It just proves you all wrong.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Hey Gonzo, I was just wondering, how does it feel to get your ass kicked all over the forum by the dudes AND dudettes?

[Popps]

Another example of people believing what they want to believe.

According to Benedict and Yaeger, 21 percent of NFL players -- more than one in five -- have been charged with at least one serious crime, including two murder arrests, seven rape charges, 45 counts of domestic violence and 42 charges of assault and battery.

"Is it surprising to see those kinds of numbers in one league?" asks Benedict, a former director of research at Northeastern University's Center for Sport and Society. "Number one, it reflects the higher crime rate in society. The kinds of crimes these men are being charged with -- guns and drugs, for instance -- are higher than they were 20 years ago. Number two, it shows the NFL's willingness to employ guys with this type of behavior. Typically, employers would not be anxious to pay six or seven figures to a person with an arrest record."


Gotta love Jason in LA.....

-Property owners are not responsible for what happens on their property

-20% of a company's employees are criminals, but that's cool

-You can add 40 lbs of muscle in 3 months without steroids.

Look for more of Jason's posts next week, when he unveils more truths in his coming threads...

- "The Easter Bunny is real, but is a racist"

- "O.J. has found the real killer"

and my favorite...

- "Drive-by shootings are not that bad, if you think about it."

[GonzoLays]

Another example of people believing what they want to believe.



Well, moron, if you think about it, you are doing the exact same thing in your post. "You are believing what you want to believe" or whatever the hell that means.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Gotta love Jason in LA.....

-Property owners are not responsible for what happens on their property
-20% of a company's employees are criminals, but that's cool
-You can add 40 lbs of muscle in 3 months without steroids.

I'm finding it hard to believe anyone actually said that crap?

[Jason in LA]

Another example of people believing what they want to believe.

According to Benedict and Yaeger, 21 percent of NFL players -- more than one in five -- have been charged with at least one serious crime, including two murder arrests, seven rape charges, 45 counts of domestic violence and 42 charges of assault and battery.

"Is it surprising to see those kinds of numbers in one league?" asks Benedict, a former director of research at Northeastern University's Center for Sport and Society. "Number one, it reflects the higher crime rate in society. The kinds of crimes these men are being charged with -- guns and drugs, for instance -- are higher than they were 20 years ago. Number two, it shows the NFL's willingness to employ guys with this type of behavior. Typically, employers would not be anxious to pay six or seven figures to a person with an arrest record."


Gotta love Jason in LA.....

-Property owners are not responsible for what happens on their property

-20% of a company's employees are criminals, but that's cool

-You can add 40 lbs of muscle in 3 months without steroids.

Look for more of Jason's posts next week, when he unveils more truths in his coming threads...

- "The Easter Bunny is real, but is a racist"

- "O.J. has found the real killer"

and my favorite...

- "Drive-by shootings are not that bad, if you think about it."

You need to get your head out of your ass.

I never implied that property owners had zero responsibility for what happens on their property.

The bulk of that 20% were arrested for crimes that the average person gets arrested for, and the players in the NFL get arrested for those crimes at a lower rate.

You are going back to that steroid debate from like 5 years ago. Man, you are a silly as fool. I never said that somebody could put on that much weight in that short period of time. But a person certainly can put on weight without steriods. That was my only point.

You better worry about your next door neighbor more than an NFL player. Chances are you'll have more problems out of him than somebody from the NFL...going by the stats.

As for the book that you brought up, that book was also brought up in the article that I provided. Sorry, but those stats from that book are very misleading.

[Jason in LA]

I'm finding it hard to believe anyone actually said that crap?

I find it hard too, because I didn't say that.

He's going back to his old tricks. Bash the poster instead of his arguments. What he just did was greatly exaggerate my points in an attempt to make them look silly. He took my points way out of context to try to win the battle.

[GonzoLays]

I'm finding it hard to believe anyone actually said that crap? :thumbsup: You worked construction, right?
:rofl:

[Bronco_Beerslug]

:thumbsup: You worked construction, right?
:rofl:I'd say 99% of the people I've worked with (industrial construction, U.S. Army, U.S West) have more common sense, less bias and a better grip on reality than you do, what's your point?

[Jason in LA]

Another example of people believing what they want to believe.


I'd say that statement is true about you. I could understand you making that point if I just posted the article and said nothing about it. But I made many points of my own to back up my position. Funny that you didn't mention any of my points, or the points from the article, in your reply.

Did you even read the article that I supplied, or anything that I wrote in regard to that article? Because you did not mention any of it in your reply. All you did was post the samething about that book that you posted a few days ago. It seems like you just read the title and formed your own conclusion based off of that.

The article that I supplied mentioned that book, and pretty much stated that it is misleading. The NFL said the samething. Both were correct.

Why don't you go back and read the info. The article and what I wrote, and argue against the points, instead of trying to rip me. Well, I think that's asking a bit too much out of you. I don't think you are smart enough comprehend the information at hand, and I don't think you are smart enough to present a valid argument. You'll just believe what you want to believe. You'll read very basic information and believe it, instead of looking deeper into that information. I guess I should have kept it simple for you.

[fdf]

I'd say that when the average guy gets busted, nobody ever hears about it. But when the NFL, or NBA player gets busted for the same thing, it's all over the news.

Well, that's true across the board. Leona Helmsly and Paris Hilton going to jail are news--they are rich and/or famous. Same with NFL players. It's a big deal when Ray Lewis is caught hanging around a drive-by. It would be a big deal if Donald Trump were caught hanging around a drive-by. But it's not news when Sniper from the hood is caught hanging around a drive-by.

And, it's appropriate that Trump and Lewis are held to a higher standard than Sniper (although Lewis probably is a bad example of that--Sniper and Trump would get it much harder, on this hypothetical, than did Lewis).

This shouldn't be an issue in the NFL; but it is. It's the clubs' faults for being willing to hire physically talented criminals and to continue to employ them after they are obviously criminals. And, of course, it's the criminals' faults for being criminals.

That said, most NFL players are good folk. There are probably more devout, bible-believing Christians in the NFL than in the general population. So your overall point is probably correct--the NFL is less thuggish than the general population. But I don't see where that gets you--that point is is no excuse at all for the behavior of folks like Henry and Lewis nor is it an excuse for the behavior of the clubs that employ them.

[ton80]

I have never defended Leonard Little, and in my post that started this thread I said that I hated the guy. I have never defended Pacman Jones. Actually, I have never defended any thug. I have defended Ray Lewis, who was wrongly accused for murder.

I find it funny that people want to ignore these numbers and say that these players should be compared to peolpe in their tax bracket. I guess some people just don't want to admit that they are wrong, even though the facts are staring them in the face.

Wasn't Ray Lewis thrown in jail by a judge for obstuction of justice for not ratting out his friends that committed the murders that he was with during the stabbing, and witnessed with his own eyes? If I remember correctly, Ray Lewis was never charged with any crimes. Ray went to jail for telling the judge to shove it up his a$$.

[Jason in LA]

Wasn't Ray Lewis thrown in jail by a judge for obstuction of justice for not ratting out his friends that committed the murders that he was with during the stabbing, and witnessed with his own eyes? If I remember correctly, Ray Lewis was never charged with any crimes. Ray went to jail for telling the judge to shove it up his a$$.

He was charged with murder because the DA was trying to make a name for himself. The DA dropped the charges, and Lewis testified against the two guys who did commit the murders. The two guys ended up walking. I didn't follow the trial, so I'm not sure how they beat the charges.

[ton80]

These numbers show the truth. Like I said in my last post, I find it funny that people want to ignore these numbers and say that these players should be compared to peolpe in their tax bracket. I guess some people just don't want to admit that they are wrong, even though the facts are staring them in the face.

Come on Jason. Stats rarely tell the truth. I know you are smart enough to know that when you make comparisons using numbers you got to compare apples to apples. Comparing crime stats for NFL players to the general public is ridiculous. That being said, I completely agree with you that the NFL is not a league of thugs. Thugs are undiciplined. The undiciplined don't cut in the NFL. This articles premise is correct in my opinion, but the stats in this article mean nothing. Please understand that journalists are journalists because their strengths are words and their deficiencies are mathematics. They don't understand math and were probably were lucky to get a C in algebra class. Passing statistics or even understanding statistics for a journalist is likely out of the question. It's proven every time gonzo posts. Gonzo is a great writer but when he comes to anything related to logic or math he is a complete idiot.

[Jason in LA]

I just don't buy that argument that NFL players can't be compared to the general population. Even if you chose a group in the same tax bracket, the percentages for NFL players are still very low. Lower than what people around here make it out to be. That's really my point.

If the NFL is a league of thugs, then the US is a nation of thugs. We know that's not the case.

[ton80]

He was charged with murder because the DA was trying to make a name for himself. The DA dropped the charges, and Lewis testified against the two guys who did commit the murders. The two guys ended up walking. I didn't follow the trial, so I'm not sure how they beat the charges.

That rings a bell. Without Lewis testifying, the DA had no case.

[ton80]

I just don't buy that argument that NFL players can't be compared to the general population. Even if you chose a group in the same tax bracket, the percentages for NFL players are still very low. Lower than what people around here make it out to be. That's really my point.

If the NFL is a league of thugs, then the US is a nation of thugs. We know that's not the case.

Agreed.

[ton80]

A fair comparison would be to compare the crime figures of NFL players to NBA players. That would answer the question.

[-Slap-]

I have never defended Leonard Little, and in my post that started this thread I said that I hated the guy. I have never defended Pacman Jones. Actually, I have never defended any thug. I have defended Ray Lewis, who was wrongly accused for murder.

I find it funny that people want to ignore these numbers and say that these players should be compared to peolpe in their tax bracket. I guess some people just don't want to admit that they are wrong, even though the facts are staring them in the face.

I find it funny some people aren't intelligent enough to understand this topic. Not at all surprising, just funny.

[-Slap-]

Wasn't Ray Lewis thrown in jail by a judge for obstuction of justice for not ratting out his friends that committed the murders that he was with during the stabbing, and witnessed with his own eyes? If I remember correctly, Ray Lewis was never charged with any crimes. Ray went to jail for telling the judge to shove it up his a$$.

Ray did go on to rat out his friends, one of whom has recently surfaced to threaten him for said impropriety. He was also convicted of obstruction of justice. Small price for being present while two men are slaughtered in the street like animals and then helping the murderers escape.

Expand your reading list beyond ESPN the Magazine.

[-Slap-]

He was charged with murder because the DA was trying to make a name for himself. The DA dropped the charges, and Lewis testified against the two guys who did commit the murders. The two guys ended up walking. I didn't follow the trial, so I'm not sure how they beat the charges.

LOL

Good God, this post pretty much sums up Jason's contributions to the Mane in general. He didn't follow the story, he just throws out his uninformed opinions to fit his particular agenda.

Great thread, Jason.

ROFL!

[ton80]

Ray did go on to rat out his friends, one of whom has recently surfaced to threaten him for said impropriety. He was also convicted of obstruction of justice. Small price for being present while two men are slaughtered in the street like animals and then helping the murderers escape.

Expand your reading list beyond ESPN the Magazine.

Please. For starters i piss on anything ESPN and think Ray Lewis is a piece of garbage. Next, are you sure Ray ratted out his friends. Last i knew, no one went to jail for the murder of those guys we're talking about, because Ray wouldn't testify. If Ray would have ratted them out, someone would have gone to jail for the murders. I think Jason is correct with his recap of the entire ordeal a couple of posts ago.

[cutthemdown]

He was charged with murder because the DA was trying to make a name for himself. The DA dropped the charges, and Lewis testified against the two guys who did commit the murders. The two guys ended up walking. I didn't follow the trial, so I'm not sure how they beat the charges.

They walked because Lewis eventually just said he never saw a knife, I don't know nothing, blah blah blah. Ya Jason he's a real gem of society.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Great find Jason. A few things...

First, nobody on this board assaulting the statistics as biased has a legitimate claim to do so unless they've personally reviewed the data and can explain WHY they are biased in specific terms. That eliminates every argument presented that suggests the figures are skewed by claiming the generic "statistics can prove anything" theory. This is the common outcry for those who want to hang on to their own bias rather than change their view to reflect an accurate understanding of the problem. Since I work with statistical research for a living I'll call BS on that immediately. The improper use of statistics can be used to prove anything but statistics themselves are highly accurate if they're used appropriately and understood within the context they are intended to be.

Second, to specifically address the argument that NFL arrests should be compared to those of people in the same income bracket, which is what several posters who are bemoaning the use of statistics here as misleading are saying...actually represents an ideal example of using statistics in an inappropriate manner because the relevance of data sets are skewed by lumping individuals into groups based on only one set of shared characteristics rather than several.

If you want to compare arrests, convictions, types of crimes, etc...for NFL players vs something other than those representative of society at large, you need to select defining characteristics that represent multiple nexus points rather than only one. As the article accurately pointed out, poverty and race are the two most important demographics that predict crime in the US and nobody who knows a lick about the data can dispute that. Associating people who are 1) almost entirely white, 2) were mostly raised apart from poverty and typically either 3) own businesses, 4) work as professionals or 5) create wealth through investments...within the same data set with a group that is 1) 70% black and 2) overwhelmingly raised in poverty, 3) has less education, 4) does not own a business or depend on investment income...based solely on net income...is a horrible comparison that will without question create a fatally flawed analysis because it's based on the improper use of statistics.

A far better way of looking at the NFL crime stats is to view them versus those for a group with which they hold the most in common with on several fronts rather that simply the one factor of income, in this case blacks living in or around poverty for long periods of time. If you were raised for 18 years in the hood, spent 3 or 4 years in college and 5 in the NFL you are still looking at 66% of your life having been spent in poverty and in close connection with crime, meaning you have much more in common with that demographic group than you do with the set of all those making the same income you do. Income in this case represents a factor that is overly valued in this comparison and thus it is legitimate to use it in comparisons only if it's associated with other factors as well. So while the NFL has a lower rate of arrests among its predominately black players to society at large, it's actually more appropriate to compare NFL players to drug dealers from inner city neighborhoods because these two groups share a higher level of income, but also have far more in common with respect to additional common reference points than NFL players do with a doctor or lawyer who grew up in suburbia, went to law or medical school and has had comparatively little contact with the seedier side of life apart from professional associations with clients (lawyers) or prescription drug habits (doctors). Since NFL players are arrested at a lower rate than members of society at large, that data is more impressive given that the 70% of NFL players who are black share little in common with most members of society in terms of demographics that relate to crime. We can presume that the numbers of NFL arrests are infinitely lower than they are for those working in the drug trade in inner city neighborhoods since they are lower than society at large, and society has a far lower arrest record than criminals in urban areas dealing drugs or engaging in other high risk activity.

What I find more disturbing than the arrest records for NFL players, which I agree is mostly a problem blown out of proportion by media hysteria is the practice of sweeping serious criminal behavior under the rug that we see colleges doing with male athletes that help universities make millions in their high profile sports programs. Goodell's policy of get tough is a good thing, and it needs to be adopted by the NCAA as well.

Perhaps if we saw fewer colleges hiding their players criminal behavior or excusing it, let alone ignoring it by allowing athletes to continue playing after getting into criminal mischief, we might see even fewer NFL players getting in trouble.

[-Slap-]

Please. For starters i piss on anything ESPN and think Ray Lewis is a piece of garbage. Next, are you sure Ray ratted out his friends. Last i knew, no one went to jail for the murder of those guys we're talking about, because Ray wouldn't testify. If Ray would have ratted them out, someone would have gone to jail for the murders. I think Jason is correct with his recap of the entire ordeal a couple of posts ago.

This was published in the Daily Stanford three years ago.

http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2004/11/8/terrellOwensCelebratedNflBadBoy

Ray Lewis may label T.O. a coward for his on-field antics, yet this is a man who went to a Super Bowl party in Atlanta, went gangsta and jumped a couple of kids outside of the nightclub, and fled in a limo in order to avoid arrest. You want a true coward, Ray? Look at yourself, and how the murder charges against you were dropped in exchange for a guilty plea of obstruction of justice, during which you ratted out your friends for their part in the murder. You sold your friends out, testified against them, so you could continue with NFL stardom. And yet, somehow the league decides that this is a man who they want promoting their product, who they want as the face of the NFL.

[-Slap-]

Perhaps if we saw fewer colleges hiding their players criminal behavior or excusing it, let alone ignoring it by allowing athletes to continue playing after getting into criminal mischief, we might see even fewer NFL players getting in trouble.

The lower leagues takes their cues from the higher leagues. Who doesn't know that?

Maybe if we didn't mollycoddle these Pop Warner thugs, they wouldn't infest the colleges ranks, huh?

ROFL!

[Atlas]

Let's compare the arrest rate of NFL players to that of people that are in their same income bracket. How about that? I mean the reason most people commit crimes is because they don't have all the material things they want.

I'll bet you $100 that the arrest record of NFL players is triple that compared to other people that are in their tax bracket.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Let's compare the arrest rate of NFL players to that of people that are in their same income bracket. How about that? I mean the reason most people commit crimes is because they don't have all the material things they want.

I'll bet you $100 that the arrest record of NFL players is triple that compared to other people that are in their tax bracket.
That was a bad place to post this...:giggle:

[Atlas]

NFL players have no reason in the world to commit a crime, none whatsoever In fact they have very strong reasons to stay out of trouble yet they don't do it. The only reason is because a lot of them are just criminals at heart.

What is one reason why Vick would even consider fighting pitbulls? He has none and he has $130 million reasons not to. He does it because he is a punk ass criminal, plain and simple.

[footstepsfrom#27]

NFL players have no reason in the world to commit a crime, none whatsoever In fact they have very strong reasons to stay out of trouble yet they don't do it. The only reason is because a lot of them are just criminals at heart.

What is one reason why Vick would even consider fighting pitbulls? He has none and he has $130 million reasons not to. He does it because he is a punk ass criminal, plain and simple.
Scroll up 6 spots.

[rubaiyat]

These numbers show nothing. Now, if you can show numbers with people who earn the same amount of money as NFL players then you will have something but trying to compare them to the general population which includes all of the inner city thugs, criminals, etc... is meaningless.

Good thing I kept reading...exactly what I was thinking.

Let's compare these numbers to high level professionals or CEO's...that have comparable income and connections.

[Atlas]

That was a bad place to post this...:giggle:


HAHAH I guess I should have read the thread before posting..... anyway I left some really good videos in the youtube thread!!

Carry on pretend I didn't show up.

[footstepsfrom#27]

HAHAH I guess I should have read the thread before posting..... anyway I left some really good videos in the youtube thread!!

Carry on pretend I didn't show up.
LOL...it's 3:00 am here...the mind slows down considerably after midnight! Normal people are asleep now anyway...;D

[footstepsfrom#27]

Good thing I kept reading...exactly what I was thinking.

Let's compare these numbers to high level professionals or CEO's...that have comparable income and connections.
Lets not...see post #77.

[ton80]

Great find Jason. A few things...

First, nobody on this board assaulting the statistics as biased has a legitimate claim to do so unless they've personally reviewed the data and can explain WHY they are biased in specific terms. That eliminates every argument presented that suggests the figures are skewed by claiming the generic "statistics can prove anything" theory. This is the common outcry for those who want to hang on to their own bias rather than change their view to reflect an accurate understanding of the problem. Since I work with statistical research for a living I'll call BS on that immediately. The improper use of statistics can be used to prove anything but statistics themselves are highly accurate if they're used appropriately and understood within the context they are intended to be.

Second, to specifically address the argument that NFL arrests should be compared to those of people in the same income bracket, which is what several posters who are bemoaning the use of statistics here as misleading are saying...actually represents an ideal example of using statistics in an inappropriate manner because the relevance of data sets are skewed by lumping individuals into groups based on only one set of shared characteristics rather than several.

If you want to compare arrests, convictions, types of crimes, etc...for NFL players vs something other than those representative of society at large, you need to select defining characteristics that represent multiple nexus points rather than only one. As the article accurately pointed out, poverty and race are the two most important demographics that predict crime in the US and nobody who knows a lick about the data can dispute that. Associating people who are 1) almost entirely white, 2) were mostly raised apart from poverty and typically either 3) own businesses, 4) work as professionals or 5) create wealth through investments...within the same data set with a group that is 1) 70% black and 2) overwhelmingly raised in poverty, 3) has less education, 4) does not own a business or depend on investment income...based solely on net income...is a horrible comparison that will without question create a fatally flawed analysis because it's based on the improper use of statistics.

A far better way of looking at the NFL crime stats is to view them versus those for a group with which they hold the most in common with on several fronts rather that simply the one factor of income, in this case blacks living in or around poverty for long periods of time. If you were raised for 18 years in the hood, spent 3 or 4 years in college and 5 in the NFL you are still looking at 66% of your life having been spent in poverty and in close connection with crime, meaning you have much more in common with that demographic group than you do with the set of all those making the same income you do. Income in this case represents a factor that is overly valued in this comparison and thus it is legitimate to use it in comparisons only if it's associated with other factors as well. So while the NFL has a lower rate of arrests among its predominately black players to society at large, it's actually more appropriate to compare NFL players to drug dealers from inner city neighborhoods because these two groups share a higher level of income, but also have far more in common with respect to additional common reference points than NFL players do with a doctor or lawyer who grew up in suburbia, went to law or medical school and has had comparatively little contact with the seedier side of life apart from professional associations with clients (lawyers) or prescription drug habits (doctors). Since NFL players are arrested at a lower rate than members of society at large, that data is more impressive given that the 70% of NFL players who are black share little in common with most members of society in terms of demographics that relate to crime. We can presume that the numbers of NFL arrests are infinitely lower than they are for those working in the drug trade in inner city neighborhoods since they are lower than society at large, and society has a far lower arrest record than criminals in urban areas dealing drugs or engaging in other high risk activity.

What I find more disturbing than the arrest records for NFL players, which I agree is mostly a problem blown out of proportion by media hysteria is the practice of sweeping serious criminal behavior under the rug that we see colleges doing with male athletes that help universities make millions in their high profile sports programs. Goodell's policy of get tough is a good thing, and it needs to be adopted by the NCAA as well.

Perhaps if we saw fewer colleges hiding their players criminal behavior or excusing it, let alone ignoring it by allowing athletes to continue playing after getting into criminal mischief, we might see even fewer NFL players getting in trouble.

I'm no statistician, but i followed the logic about what you said until you said this

"it's actually more appropriate to compare NFL players to drug dealers from inner city neighborhoods because these two groups share a higher level of income..."

You can't compare NFL players to drug dealers. One group obtains their money legally, one illegally.

Later you say "We can presume that the numbers of NFL arrests are infinitely lower than they are for those working in the drug trade in inner city neighborhoods since they are lower than society at large..."

Don't these two statements conflict with each other. Please explain, I've had a few beers in me tonight and might not be understanding exactly what you are trying to say.

I find it real difficult to compare professional althletes to society at any level. The only real comparison that makes sense to me is comparing the NFL crime rates to the crime rates of the the NBA or perhaps MLB, but not the NHL. Playing hockey costs way too much money for youths.

[Odysseus]

Great find Jason. A few things...

First, nobody on this board assaulting the statistics as biased has a legitimate claim to do so unless they've personally reviewed the data and can explain WHY they are biased in specific terms. That eliminates every argument presented that suggests the figures are skewed by claiming the generic "statistics can prove anything" theory. This is the common outcry for those who want to hang on to their own bias rather than change their view to reflect an accurate understanding of the problem. Since I work with statistical research for a living I'll call BS on that immediately. The improper use of statistics can be used to prove anything but statistics themselves are highly accurate if they're used appropriately and understood within the context they are intended to be.

Second, to specifically address the argument that NFL arrests should be compared to those of people in the same income bracket, which is what several posters who are bemoaning the use of statistics here as misleading are saying...actually represents an ideal example of using statistics in an inappropriate manner because the relevance of data sets are skewed by lumping individuals into groups based on only one set of shared characteristics rather than several.

If you want to compare arrests, convictions, types of crimes, etc...for NFL players vs something other than those representative of society at large, you need to select defining characteristics that represent multiple nexus points rather than only one. As the article accurately pointed out, poverty and race are the two most important demographics that predict crime in the US and nobody who knows a lick about the data can dispute that. Associating people who are 1) almost entirely white, 2) were mostly raised apart from poverty and typically either 3) own businesses, 4) work as professionals or 5) create wealth through investments...within the same data set with a group that is 1) 70% black and 2) overwhelmingly raised in poverty, 3) has less education, 4) does not own a business or depend on investment income...based solely on net income...is a horrible comparison that will without question create a fatally flawed analysis because it's based on the improper use of statistics.

A far better way of looking at the NFL crime stats is to view them versus those for a group with which they hold the most in common with on several fronts rather that simply the one factor of income, in this case blacks living in or around poverty for long periods of time. If you were raised for 18 years in the hood, spent 3 or 4 years in college and 5 in the NFL you are still looking at 66% of your life having been spent in poverty and in close connection with crime, meaning you have much more in common with that demographic group than you do with the set of all those making the same income you do. Income in this case represents a factor that is overly valued in this comparison and thus it is legitimate to use it in comparisons only if it's associated with other factors as well. So while the NFL has a lower rate of arrests among its predominately black players to society at large, it's actually more appropriate to compare NFL players to drug dealers from inner city neighborhoods because these two groups share a higher level of income, but also have far more in common with respect to additional common reference points than NFL players do with a doctor or lawyer who grew up in suburbia, went to law or medical school and has had comparatively little contact with the seedier side of life apart from professional associations with clients (lawyers) or prescription drug habits (doctors). Since NFL players are arrested at a lower rate than members of society at large, that data is more impressive given that the 70% of NFL players who are black share little in common with most members of society in terms of demographics that relate to crime. We can presume that the numbers of NFL arrests are infinitely lower than they are for those working in the drug trade in inner city neighborhoods since they are lower than society at large, and society has a far lower arrest record than criminals in urban areas dealing drugs or engaging in other high risk activity.

What I find more disturbing than the arrest records for NFL players, which I agree is mostly a problem blown out of proportion by media hysteria is the practice of sweeping serious criminal behavior under the rug that we see colleges doing with male athletes that help universities make millions in their high profile sports programs. Goodell's policy of get tough is a good thing, and it needs to be adopted by the NCAA as well.

Perhaps if we saw fewer colleges hiding their players criminal behavior or excusing it, let alone ignoring it by allowing athletes to continue playing after getting into criminal mischief, we might see even fewer NFL players getting in trouble.

If you are on this thread READ THIS POST. You don't have to agree with it. All you have to do is understand it. I'm not going to jump in this one as all of you have pretty much decided what you are going to believe and who you like or don't like. Take a minute from chewing on each other and read this then you can go back to tossing furniture around. It's on you. Peace.

[Odysseus]

I'm no statistician, but i followed the logic about what you said until you said this

"it's actually more appropriate to compare NFL players to drug dealers from inner city neighborhoods because these two groups share a higher level of income..."

You can't compare NFL players to drug dealers. One group obtains their money legally, one illegally.

Later you say "We can presume that the numbers of NFL arrests are infinitely lower than they are for those working in the drug trade in inner city neighborhoods since they are lower than society at large..."

Don't these two statements conflict with each other. Please explain, I've had a few beers in me tonight and might not be understanding exactly what you are trying to say.

I find it real difficult to compare professional althletes to society at any level. The only real comparison that makes sense to me is comparing the NFL crime rates to the crime rates of the the NBA or perhaps MLB, but not the NHL. Playing hockey costs way too much money for youths.

At least you took time to read. Well done. Good questions.

[footstepsfrom#27]

You can't compare NFL players to drug dealers. One group obtains their money legally, one illegally.

Later you say "We can presume that the numbers of NFL arrests are infinitely lower than they are for those working in the drug trade in inner city neighborhoods since they are lower than society at large..."

Don't these two statements conflict with each other. Please explain, I've had a few beers in me tonight and might not be understanding exactly what you are trying to say.

I find it real difficult to compare professional althletes to society at any level. The only real comparison that makes sense to me is comparing the NFL crime rates to the crime rates of the the NBA or perhaps MLB, but not the NHL. Playing hockey costs way too much money for youths.
It's legitimate to compare arrests for NFL players to arrests for inner city criminals who share a high income because they also share multiple OTHER demographics in common that predict criminal behavior...most importantly race and poverty. The comparison you are looking for if you're going to look at NFL players vs. members in society must have more than one factor in common. Since income was suggested as the single defining characteristic...an obvious attempt to skew the data falsely and negatively towards NFL players...70% of whom are black...I suggested a control group that shares a common background with most NFL players in terms of demographics as well as income. Thus the comparison is more legitimate because it utilizes more things the two groups hold in common as opposed to merely income. The fact that drug money is obtained illegally is not germane to the point...that tax bracket alone represents an invalid point of reference from which to draw conclusions about arrest data.

[cutthemdown]

Scroll up 6 spots.

Oh you mean to the post where you say as long as NFL players aren't as bad as drug dealers they are doing good? Yeah that's an all time footfungus classic.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Oh you mean to the post where you say as long as NFL players aren't as bad as drug dealers they are doing good? Yeah that's an all time footfungus classic.
You're a very poor spin doctor. Nowhere did I say that and nobody with a lick of sense will think so. I'm sure you're bright enough to digest the gist of what I was saying...sadly you're not honest enough to portray it accurately though.

[Atlas]

but not the NHL. Playing hockey costs way too much money for youths.

Why not hockey? probably 1/2 of the league comes from the poor countries that make up Eastern Europe. I rarely ever hear about them fighting pitbulls, or slamming strippers heads into the floor or waving their gun around shooting it in the air like Sean Taylor did two years ago. They probably like to drink a lot but infrequently do you hear about DUI's. I know a few years ago a hockey player died in a drunk driving accident but that's about all I can remember. Hockey players just don't get in trouble. Spin it the way you want. Maybe, it's because they were raised differently, Maybe they had fathers present when they were growing up. Something is different and it's not the price of their equipment.

I think societies breakdowns can almost all be attributed to the breakdown of the family. When dad runs off, gets killed or goes to jail it's a terrible sentence to put on the children. The hardest job in America is being a single mom.

[-Slap-]

As long as you came from a poverty stricken upbringing, nothing is your fault. You can turn out like Thurgood Marshall or Pacman Jones and both outcomes are equally acceptable.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Hockey players just don't get in trouble.
Someone on here posted a fair sized list of hockey players who have been in trouble but we haven't heard about it...I can't remember who it was but it surprised me because I also though hockey guys were pretty clean. See if you can find it if you're interested...this has been in the last few days.

[ton80]

It's legitimate to compare arrests for NFL players to arrests for inner city criminals who share a high income because they also share multiple OTHER demographics in common that predict criminal behavior...most importantly race and poverty. The comparison you are looking for if you're going to look at NFL players vs. members in society must have more than one factor in common. Since income was suggested as the single defining characteristic...an obvious attempt to skew the data falsely and negatively towards NFL players...70% of whom are black...I suggested a control group that shares a common background with most NFL players in terms of demographics as well as income. Thus the comparison is more legitimate because it utilizes more things the two groups hold in common as opposed to merely income. The fact that drug money is obtained illegally is not germane to the point...that tax bracket alone represents an invalid point of reference from which to draw conclusions about arrest data.

Nice try, but that is complete garbage. Drug dealers and NFL players have so much not in common that the two groups cannot be compared. And that is why i stated in one of my earlier posts that stats rarely tell the truth. You have made my point for me and I thank you for it.

This is like batting practice.

[Odysseus]

As long as you came from a poverty stricken upbringing, nothing is your fault. You can turn out like Thurgood Marshall or Pacman Jones and both outcomes are equally acceptable.

For all you new posters this would be called a DAYUM! Oh NO! HE DIDN'T post. If you are not familiar take note of the historical references which would include Booker T Washington versus W.E.B. Dubois references and by default 1954 Brown versus Board of Education. Moving forward you might also notice a slight aroma of Clarence Thomas and the whole Anita Hill incident. The by default insult resting at the feet of the current usual suspects of "black leaders" who, though not elected by any recognized government body continue to raise issues rather than answers. The implied question remains did MLK lay his life down for this?

If you indeed followed the context the electrons should be moving by now.

[cutthemdown]

Here's the recent arrests from PFT. Funny thing is Jared Allen is the only white guy on the list. I was thinking there have to be more white guys from NFL then that who have been busted right? I mean they are outnumbered but they do make up about 35 percent.

Ahmad Carrol
Frostee Rucker
Tank Johnson
Jeremy Stevens
Tarrell Brown*rookie
Cedrick Griffin
Anthony Davis
Darelle Ried
Lionel Gates
Brandon Marshall
Pac Man Jones
Chris Henry
Dominic Rhodes
Gerald sensebaugh
EJ Kuale
Joey Porter
Charles Sharon
Dominque Byrd
AJ NIcholson
Deshea Townsend
Odell Thurman
Jonathan Babineux
Jared Allen
Terrence Kiel

[footstepsfrom#27]

Nice try, but that is complete garbage. Drug dealers and NFL players have so much not in common that the two groups cannot be compared. And that is why i stated in one of my earlier posts that stats rarely tell the truth. You have made my point for me and I thank you for it.

This is like batting practice.
And you just went down on a called 3rd strike.

You're failing to understand the nature of the comparison, which has nothing to do with moral or ethical considerations, integrity or character or how money is made. We are looking here only for data representative of multiple demographic factors in common as opposed to a single factor like income...and by far the two largest factors predicting criminal behavior (and by extension arrests) are race and poverty. Thus, we need to find a group of individuals that are predominately black, are over represented by race in the population, share common demographic traits that include poverty, and who make a lot of money.

I'm open to suggestions if you have another group in mind that more closely matches the 70% of NFL players who are black and who largely come from a similar background. If not you fall into the category of those crying about statistics who know little about how to actually use statistics.

[Odysseus]

Here's the recent arrests from PFT. Funny thing is Jared Allen is the only white guy on the list. I was thinking there have to be more white guys from NFL then that who have been busted right? I mean they are outnumbered but they do make up about 35 percent.


A friend of mine was picking up a prisoner in Orleans Parrish prison and he calls me up surprised "Do they ever arrest white guys down here?" If you want to expand the topic all you are doing is avoiding the question. We can cover all NFL cities or just major hubs or stick with the question.

It's amazing you didn't put Plummer on there. Oh yeah. They walked that deal. You want to know what Elway's real record for arrest should be? Oh wait. That was a long time ago. Poor Griese. We haven't thrown him under the bus in awhile. I wonder how Bella is doing?

This issue can spiderweb in a thousand directions. I don't think any of you want the real questions or the real answers.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Here's the recent arrests from PFT. Funny thing is Jared Allen is the only white guy on the list. I was thinking there have to be more white guys from NFL then that who have been busted right? I mean they are outnumbered but they do make up about 35 percent.

Ahmad Carrol
Frostee Rucker
Tank Johnson
Jeremy Stevens
Tarrell Brown*rookie
Cedrick Griffin
Anthony Davis
Darelle Ried
Lionel Gates
Brandon Marshall
Pac Man Jones
Chris Henry
Dominic Rhodes
Gerald sensebaugh
EJ Kuale
Joey Porter
Charles Sharon
Dominque Byrd
AJ NIcholson
Deshea Townsend
Odell Thurman
Jonathan Babineux
Jared Allen
Terrence Kiel
Clearly you either failed to read the article or you're ignoring the points the author made to spread your own brand of disinformation. Having observed both laziness and lack of integrity now it's tough to decide which...

Race is a factor here only because 70% of NFL players are black, but since those 70% have a LOWER arrest rate than the predominately white society at large, most of which is concentrated among only a few individuals...it's obvious that selecting the bad actors for special review and trying to tag black players in general as thugs is simply a poorly disguised effort to continue your legacy of foolishness.

The fact that 70% of NFL players have more in common with the backgrounds of inner city drug dealers but maintain lower arrest records than society at large suggests that the league's problem is more hype than substance.

But don't let facts get in the way...you rarely do.

[cutthemdown]

Clearly you either failed to read the article or you're ignoring the points the author made to spread your own brand of disinformation. Having observed both laziness and lack of integrity now it's tough to decide which...

Race is a factor here only because 70% of NFL players are black, but since those 70% have a LOWER arrest rate than the predominately white society at large, most of which is concentrated among only a few individuals...it's obvious that selecting the bad actors for special review and trying to tag black players in general as thugs is simply a poorly disguised effort to continue your legacy of foolishness.

The fact that 70% of NFL players have more in common with the backgrounds of inner city drug dealers but maintain lower arrest records than society at large suggests that the league's problem is more hype than substance.

But don't let facts get in the way...you rarely do.

No I just listed the players that have been arrested since PFT started keeping track. I also never said I thought the NFL had a problem. Hell I feel if you didn't kill anyone, rape anyone, rob anyone you are ok in my book. Most of those arrests are DUI and drugs. I don't consider a DUI as something that makes you a thug. Drugs either. To me being a thug or a a big problem should be reserved for cruel people. Once again the main point of your argument is just an attack on the person you are arguing with. That's no way to be.

[footstepsfrom#27]

No I just listed the players that have been arrested since PFT started keeping track. I also never said I thought the NFL had a problem. Hell I feel if you didn't kill anyone, rape anyone, rob anyone you are ok in my book. Most of those arrests are DUI and drugs. I don't consider a DUI as something that makes you a thug. Drugs either. To me being a thug or a a big problem should be reserved for cruel people. Once again the main point of your argument is just an attack on the person you are arguing with. That's no way to be.
You introduced personal attack into the discussion, not me...and my main point is all about the data and how it's handled...nothing more.

I entered this conversation with an observation that those wishing to skew the data negatively towards NFL players by crying about statistics and claiming that NFL players (70% of whom happen to be black) should legitimately be compared with white collar business executives or others they have nothing in common with other than their tax bracket rather than society at large, were merely looking for ways to avoid an honest look at the information presented in the article. The entire context of my argument has had zero to do with anything not related to the proper use of the data. Your entire argument is meant to legitimize an improper use of the data.

[Atlas]

There have been 24 NFL people arrested. 23 of them are black. White people consist of about 30% of the league but yet commit only 5% of the crime.

It's not so much a black white thing as it is a family thing. 24% of all Black adult males in this country are in jail at one time or another. This puts a huge burden on the family. Bill Cosby is right about everything he says.

[Atlas]

One of the smartest men in America

Bill Cosby on raising children

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sGq_81Sld4Y"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sGq_81Sld4Y" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

[Atlas]

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0lXz1oihejs"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0lXz1oihejs" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

[Northman]

Another example of people believing what they want to believe.

According to Benedict and Yaeger, 21 percent of NFL players -- more than one in five -- have been charged with at least one serious crime, including two murder arrests, seven rape charges, 45 counts of domestic violence and 42 charges of assault and battery.

"Is it surprising to see those kinds of numbers in one league?" asks Benedict, a former director of research at Northeastern University's Center for Sport and Society. "Number one, it reflects the higher crime rate in society. The kinds of crimes these men are being charged with -- guns and drugs, for instance -- are higher than they were 20 years ago. Number two, it shows the NFL's willingness to employ guys with this type of behavior. Typically, employers would not be anxious to pay six or seven figures to a person with an arrest record."


Gotta love Jason in LA.....

-Property owners are not responsible for what happens on their property

-20% of a company's employees are criminals, but that's cool

-You can add 40 lbs of muscle in 3 months without steroids.

Look for more of Jason's posts next week, when he unveils more truths in his coming threads...

- "The Easter Bunny is real, but is a racist"

- "O.J. has found the real killer"

and my favorite...

- "Drive-by shootings are not that bad, if you think about it."




LOL REP

[Northman]

Well, that's true across the board. Leona Helmsly and Paris Hilton going to jail are news--they are rich and/or famous. Same with NFL players. It's a big deal when Ray Lewis is caught hanging around a drive-by. It would be a big deal if Donald Trump were caught hanging around a drive-by. But it's not news when Sniper from the hood is caught hanging around a drive-by.

And, it's appropriate that Trump and Lewis are held to a higher standard than Sniper (although Lewis probably is a bad example of that--Sniper and Trump would get it much harder, on this hypothetical, than did Lewis).

This shouldn't be an issue in the NFL; but it is. It's the clubs' faults for being willing to hire physically talented criminals and to continue to employ them after they are obviously criminals. And, of course, it's the criminals' faults for being criminals.

That said, most NFL players are good folk. There are probably more devout, bible-believing Christians in the NFL than in the general population. So your overall point is probably correct--the NFL is less thuggish than the general population. But I don't see where that gets you--that point is is no excuse at all for the behavior of folks like Henry and Lewis nor is it an excuse for the behavior of the clubs that employ them.



Thats just it, Jason cant comprehend that being a celebrity means you are in the spotlight more than Joe Blow. And he is a attention whore, somehow someway he has it in his head that a lot of people on this board thinks the NFL is full of thugs. Where he got this idea i dont know. The only subjects ive seen discussed on here is the Pac Man and Vick stories. Although our newly draft picks have been of concerned for sketchy pasts it has been the other two stories that have been the hot topics. I havent read anywhere on here who thinks the NFL is full of thugs. The NBA maybe, but nothing on the NFL.

[footstepsfrom#27]

There have been 24 NFL people arrested. 23 of them are black. White people consist of about 30% of the league but yet commit only 5% of the crime.

It's not so much a black white thing as it is a family thing. 24% of all Black adult males in this country are in jail at one time or another. This puts a huge burden on the family. Bill Cosby is right about everything he says.
Actually it is a black/white thing since there is such a wide variance in the data set that is inconsistent with crime/arrest statistics outside the NFL, and because blacks are so heavily represented in the data set for NFL arrests...because as I stated earlier, race and poverty are the two largest predictive factors with forecasting problems with the legal system. I get your point that the problems in the black community are caused or exasperated by family issues, but issues of social justice or racial politics are really outside the parameters of this discussion because we're (supposedly) talking about how NFL players are represented in crime statistics rather than looking to "blame" a group of individuals or decipher the study with the intent of finding a way to discredit it.

It's no surprise that blacks are heavily over represented in the arrest statistics for the NFL as a whole because they are, 1) also heavily over represented in the crime statistics for society at large due to issues related to poverty, and 2) apt to be the subject of prosecution and incarceration disproportionate to their actual numbers just as they are in the larger society. Blacks in society at large aren't just more likely to be arrested, they're also more likely to be prosecuted after arrest, more likely to receive higher sentences for the same crime committed by whites, and more likely than whites by 5 times to be under supervision in one form or another by the justice system. The statistical oddity here is that not only are NFL players (70% of whom are black) NOT represented at statistically higher arrest rates that are consistent with society at large...they're UNDER represented in arrest statistics related to society and FAR LOWER than other blacks who do not play in the NFL to be arrested.

This data suggests that not only does the NFL not have a greater problem with it's players than society has, but in fact it's highest risk group is drastically under represented both in terms of its relationship to society and its relationship to others in the same demographic group. The fact that media scrutiny and high profile stories exist so large in the public conscience rather than wide recognition of this information only provide exceptions that prove the rule that NFL players have a smaller problem than the general society but have the spotlight's glare focused much closer on them.

Does this mean the NFL shouldn't do anything about character problems that express themselves in problems with the law? Obviously not.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This data suggests that not only does the NFL not have a greater problem with it's players than society has, but in fact it's highest risk group is drastically under represented both in terms of its relationship to society and its relationship to others in the same demographic group. . Meaningless. Like I said, if you have the numbers showing the rest of Americans who are in the same salary range with college educations then you have something.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Meaningless. Like I said, if you have the numbers showing the rest of Americans who are in the same salary range with college educations then you have something.
Incorrect...because isolating a single factor two wildly different groups have in common to portray them as similar is a sure fire way to produce flawed statistical data. See post #77.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Incorrect...because isolating a single factor two wildly different groups have in common to portray them as similar is a sure fire way to produce flawed statistical data. See post #77.Exactly!

[footstepsfrom#27]

Exactly!
I'm referring to income...what are you referring to?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I'm referring to income...what are you referring to?You referred to "two wildly different groups" not working which is correct. And that is why using Americans with same income/education as comparison would be more appropriate.

[NaptownChief]

-Contrary to public perception, the arrest rate among NFL players is less than that of the general population.

-The arrest rate for the general population (about one per 21 people) is higher than the NFL's, which has averaged about one incident per 45 players per year since 2000, according to the review.



Not a good stat as you are comparing upper middle and high income classes of individuals to the broad population that consists of a lot of poor people.

The average person in upper middle class America or higher doesn't come even close to one incident per 45 people since 2000. So there is no doubt that the NFL players have issues that go way beyond the norm for people in their socioeconomic status.

I'm also betting their off the field issues probably rise to a much higher level than MLB and NHL....and proably even the NBA.

[Tredici]

Great find Jason. A few things...

The improper use of statistics can be used to prove anything but statistics themselves are highly accurate if they're used appropriately and understood within the context they are intended to be.

Second, to specifically address the argument that NFL arrests should be compared to those of people in the same income bracket, which is what several posters who are bemoaning the use of statistics here as misleading are saying...actually represents an ideal example of using statistics in an inappropriate manner because the relevance of data sets are skewed by lumping individuals into groups based on only one set of shared characteristics rather than several.

If you want to compare arrests, convictions, types of crimes, etc...for NFL players vs something other than those representative of society at large, you need to select defining characteristics that represent multiple nexus points rather than only one. As the article accurately pointed out, poverty and race are the two most important demographics that predict crime in the US and nobody who knows a lick about the data can dispute that. Associating people who are 1) almost entirely white, 2) were mostly raised apart from poverty and typically either 3) own businesses, 4) work as professionals or 5) create wealth through investments...within the same data set with a group that is 1) 70% black and 2) overwhelmingly raised in poverty, 3) has less education, 4) does not own a business or depend on investment income...based solely on net income...is a horrible comparison that will without question create a fatally flawed analysis because it's based on the improper use of statistics.

A far better way of looking at the NFL crime stats is to view them versus those for a group with which they hold the most in common with on several fronts rather that simply the one factor of income, in this case blacks living in or around poverty for long periods of time. If you were raised for 18 years in the hood, spent 3 or 4 years in college and 5 in the NFL you are still looking at 66% of your life having been spent in poverty and in close connection with crime, meaning you have much more in common with that demographic group than you do with the set of all those making the same income you do. Income in this case represents a factor that is overly valued in this comparison and thus it is legitimate to use it in comparisons only if it's associated with other factors as well. So while the NFL has a lower rate of arrests among its predominately black players to society at large, it's actually more appropriate to compare NFL players to drug dealers from inner city neighborhoods because these two groups share a higher level of income, but also have far more in common with respect to additional common reference points than NFL players do with a doctor or lawyer who grew up in suburbia, went to law or medical school and has had comparatively little contact with the seedier side of life apart from professional associations with clients (lawyers) or prescription drug habits (doctors). Since NFL players are arrested at a lower rate than members of society at large, that data is more impressive given that the 70% of NFL players who are black share little in common with most members of society in terms of demographics that relate to crime. We can presume that the numbers of NFL arrests are infinitely lower than they are for those working in the drug trade in inner city neighborhoods since they are lower than society at large, and society has a far lower arrest record than criminals in urban areas dealing drugs or engaging in other high risk activity.

What I find more disturbing than the arrest records for NFL players, which I agree is mostly a problem blown out of proportion by media hysteria is the practice of sweeping serious criminal behavior under the rug that we see colleges doing with male athletes that help universities make millions in their high profile sports programs. Goodell's policy of get tough is a good thing, and it needs to be adopted by the NCAA as well.

Perhaps if we saw fewer colleges hiding their players criminal behavior or excusing it, let alone ignoring it by allowing athletes to continue playing after getting into criminal mischief, we might see even fewer NFL players getting in trouble.

First of, congrats on the automatic headpat response you seem obligated to give Jason. (That always is a crack up BTW).

Second. THis statement says it all. The improper use of statistics can be used to prove anything. Just because you want to take the statistical data here and believe in it implicitly, doesn't make it any more or less correct than other comparisons.

Third is this assumption: Meaning you have much more in common with that demographic group than you do with the set of all those making the same income you do.

So for this basis we assume every black NFL Player has more in common with poverty stricken, inner city people than with others in their income brackets?
Ummm... okie dokie. We are assuming drug dealers had the opportunity to go to college? We are assuming the people who eventually went on to the NFL were completely incapable of actually getting an education that was presented to them?

I dunno. I find these stats simply represent a different rationalization. Not better. Not worse. Different. So for you to imply it is a definative study so don't go anywhere else is pretty close minded in it's own right.

Bottom line, people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable regardless of race, creed, color or income bracket.

The problem today regarding any criminal activity is the lack of accountability. If everyone was held to the same standard regardless, there wouldn't be any statistical debates.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

283 NFL players who have been arrested or charged for offenses ranging from drunken driving to domestic violence to weapons possession since 2000. (http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/sports/17194633.htm?source=rss&channel=journalgazette_sports)

[NaptownChief]

Bottom line, people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable regardless of race, creed, color or income bracket.

The problem today regarding any criminal activity is the lack of accountability. If everyone was held to the same standard regardless, there wouldn't be any statistical debates.




Very well said. It is way past time for people to accept responsibility for their own actions rather than scrambling around looking for something else to blame.

[footstepsfrom#27]

You referred to "two wildly different groups" not working which is correct. And that is why using Americans with same income/education as comparison would be more appropriate.
False. You are using a single shared characteristic (income) to show an expected equivalent outcome for two groups that differ far more than they are the same.

The highest predictors for problems with criminal behavior (arrests in this case) is race and poverty...race because blacks are vastly over represented in poverty. Spending 18-22 years in and around the effects of poverty and its associated ills...drugs, violence, exposure to gangs, unemployment, inferior schools, mediocre health care, etc...represents a radically different background than the subset of others making a similar income...predominately white, affluent or middle class upbringing, exposure to a higher quality education, lack of exposure to gangs or other violent acts. Comparing black athletes who grew up in urban America with white CEO's, professionals, business owners or investors based on equivalent income brackets is research suicide.

Bottom line...the size of the current paycheck as a single predictor of risk does not negate 20 plus years spent with multitudes of other risk factors and move a subject into a category where no other shared characteristics exist.

This should be obvious.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

False. You are using a single shared characteristic (income) to show an expected equivalent outcome for two groups that differ far more than they are the same.

Wrong again. Americans with college educations at the same salary levels would be the most appropriate comparison.

[ton80]

And you just went down on a called 3rd strike.

You're failing to understand the nature of the comparison, which has nothing to do with moral or ethical considerations, integrity or character or how money is made. We are looking here only for data representative of multiple demographic factors in common as opposed to a single factor like income...and by far the two largest factors predicting criminal behavior (and by extension arrests) are race and poverty. Thus, we need to find a group of individuals that are predominately black, are over represented by race in the population, share common demographic traits that include poverty, and who make a lot of money.

I'm open to suggestions if you have another group in mind that more closely matches the 70% of NFL players who are black and who largely come from a similar background. If not you fall into the category of those crying about statistics who know little about how to actually use statistics.

You're still making my point. Statisticians cherry pick how they group their data and ignore "moral or ethical considerations, integrity or character or how money is made".

[Paladin]

The majority of NFL players went to colleg3. How do you know they were "educated"? Some definitely were, but not all by any means. Underwater Basket Weaving is not a subjevt that could lead to employment. Football 101 is, but for a limited few.....

[Garcia Bronco]

I am think the NFL arrest rate should be about zero.

[Beantown Bronco]

The majority of NFL players went to colleg3. How do you know they were "educated"? Some definitely were, but not all by any means. Underwater Basket Weaving is not a subjevt that could lead to employment. Football 101 is, but for a limited few.....

Non-athletes take just as many fluff courses and major in basket weaving too. And it could easily be argued that the non-athletes blow off class, drink and party even more in college because they don't necessarily have to get good grades to stay eligible and they don't have to get up early every day and stay in good shape for their sport.

[Tredici]

False. You are using a single shared characteristic (income) to show an expected equivalent outcome for two groups that differ far more than they are the same.

The highest predictors for problems with criminal behavior (arrests in this case) is race and poverty...race because blacks are vastly over represented in poverty. Spending 18-22 years in and around the effects of poverty and its associated ills...drugs, violence, exposure to gangs, unemployment, inferior schools, mediocre health care, etc...represents a radically different background than the subset of others making a similar income...predominately white, affluent or middle class upbringing, exposure to a higher quality education, lack of exposure to gangs or other violent acts. Comparing black athletes who grew up in urban America with white CEO's, professionals, business owners or investors based on equivalent income brackets is research suicide.

Bottom line...the size of the current paycheck as a single predictor of risk does not negate 20 plus years spent with multitudes of other risk factors and move a subject into a category where no other shared characteristics exist.

This should be obvious.

The highest predictors for problems with criminal behavior (arrests in this case) is race and poverty...race because blacks are vastly over represented in poverty.

Wow. Just wow. How about if we compare black athletes who grew up in urban America to black CEO's, professionals, business owners or investors based on similar income who also grew up in urban environments? Those people do exist. Wouldn't those people represent a more similar demographic?

What else is obvious is you are having to add a few good justifications now to fit the theory. -- Spending 18-22 years in and around the effects of poverty and its associated ills...drugs, violence, exposure to gangs, unemployment, inferior schools, mediocre health care, etc...represents a radically different background than the subset of others making a similar income.

So the demographics of where a person comes from are far more important in statistical equations then the demographics of where they are now? So the assumption is no background can ever be overcome?

Or is that the excuse?

[NaptownChief]

The highest predictors for problems with criminal behavior (arrests in this case) is race and poverty...race because blacks are vastly over represented in poverty.


If that is the case then race is irrelevant. You just adjust the measure to account for the proper proportion of those in poverty. For example if 70% of those in poverty are black and 30% other then you would expect poverty related crime to be about 70% black and 30% other. If those numbers don't match up closely then you know there are other factors involved that could be race related.

But back to the topic you keep making the point that poverty is the primary driver of criminal activity then that doesn't explain the NFL problems as none of their players are currently suffering from poverty.

This topic can be twisted to say whatever a person would like for it to say. The bottom line is when you do something wrong it is your fault. Not society, not your neighbor, not the government...but yours.

[footstepsfrom#27]

First of, congrats on the automatic headpat response you seem obligated to give Jason. (That always is a crack up BTW).
Glad you're amused. You seem inordinately preoccupied with the fact that I hold views related to social justice or racial politics that don't jibe with your expectations of white men. Perhaps you're one of these people who is offended by someone choosing to think for themselves rather than parrot the party line along racial, economic or political lines like most of the lemmings in our society. Jason has more posts than I do...I think you might find half a dozen points where I've made it a point to agree with him. I'm sure I can find dozens of places you agree with someone else, so what is your point...that I'm obligated to hold opinions dictated to me by my race? If so that's narrow minded in the extreme.
Second. THis statement says it all. The improper use of statistics can be used to prove anything. Just because you want to take the statistical data here and believe in it implicitly, doesn't make it any more or less correct than other comparisons.
I read the article carefully and took note of the procedures the writer expressed as those employed for producing the background for the basis of the story as well as the statistics cited, which seem fairly straight forward. Short of arbitrarily calling the writer a liar and mounting an accusation of forged data or deliberate misrepresentation, there is no basis for determining bias without examining the original research the writer was working with. Short of doing your own original research to verify the results...which nobody on this board has done...the expectation and assumption legitimately exists that the information is valid unless proven otherwise. People who analyze research for accuracy begin without the assumption that bias, flawed methodology or improper use of data has taken place in the absence of evidence suggesting so.

If you wish to be Dick Tracy and track down the information used by the paper, or perhaps become a prevention science research analyst and delve into potential conflicts of interest by finding out who paid for research studies, what sources were utilized, who the researchers were, who had established fiduciary duties to whom, what kind of statistical analysis was done and whether the conclusions were properly tested for validity and relevance then by all means do so. Short of personal knowledge to the contrary, the proper course of action is to assume no evil intentions exist unless evidence suggests otherwise. Do you have such evidence?
Third is this assumption: Meaning you have much more in common with that demographic group than you do with the set of all those making the same income you do.
If by "assumption" you mean "baseless" assumption...you're wrong. Assumptions based on facts or sound reasoning drawn from the proper use of data are entirely appropriate however, so this is not a baseless assumption...it's a statement on how research is properly employed when aggregate factors are utilized to compare or contrast different sets of data in order to predict future results. In this case I referenced the widely known and almost universally accepted truism that the highest predictors of criminal behavior (including arrests) are race and exposure to poverty and all it's ills. Thus, my conclusion that ignoring 20 plus years of exposure to this known risk factor to clumsily patchwork data on two entirely different demographic groups together by utilizing a single, and less reliable point of intersection (current income)...is considered BAD research methodology. You might just as well suggest that people with brown eyes are more likely to be arrested...true enough...but worthless information none the less.
So for this basis we assume every black NFL Player has more in common with poverty stricken, inner city people than with others in their income brackets?
Ummm... okie dokie. We are assuming drug dealers had the opportunity to go to college? We are assuming the people who eventually went on to the NFL were completely incapable of actually getting an education that was presented to them?
No actually you are assuming that I'm assuming several things I've not said. Roughly 70% of NFL players have more similarities to their own demographic sub group that engages in criminal behavior than they do to ultra wealthy people who have not been exposed to similar risk factors for arrest...very basic stuff here. The comparison using income as the sole basis for examining potential for arrest is highly over valued here due to the nature of the extremely high incomes players make, which put them in the top 1/10th of 1% of all American income brackets. Their financial peers include CEO's, business owners, Hollywood entertainers, extremely successful lawyers such as partners in firms, professional investors and a tiny selection of individuals with enormous inherited wealth. Since those individuals have little or nothing in common with the group you mentioned...college graduates as a stand alone group or others "capable of getting an education"...you could just as easily compare this income bracket to Harvard business school graduates and still come up short, let alone generic "college graduates". NFL incomes held by people who are 70% black and who spent roughly 18-22 years in urban neighborhoods experiencing the other risk factor for arrest (poverty) cannot possibly be likened by any sensible person to the same experience that white CEO's, business owners, professional investors or trust fund babies experience. I know you understand this because you're smart, hence I view your poorly constructed efforts to ignore the obvious and paint me as intellectually dishonest as a designed effort to misconstrue facts to your own advantage.
I dunno. I find these stats simply represent a different rationalization. Not better. Not worse. Different. So for you to imply it is a definative study so don't go anywhere else is pretty close minded in it's own right.
I never said any such thing. Your objective here is obviously to selectively pull information out of context and twist it to suit your own purposes. This study was done by a newspaper that went looking for some very basic facts that any freshman in college ought to recognize as rather germane to this discussion, yet somehow you've managed to find a way to dispute the relevance of the information merely by casting out the possibility of impropriety on the part of the paper without showing justification for that. If you can prove their data is falsified, or show reason's why the arrest rate for NFL players being lower than it is for society at large is illegitimate based on something other than horrendously flawed efforts to classify them along with white CEO's, millionaire investors, and partners in law firms...please do so.
Bottom line, people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable regardless of race, creed, color or income bracket.
I never said otherwise. In fact none of the commentary I've produced in this thread has anything to do with my personal views on social justice, racial politics or the inadequacies of the American justice system. 100% of it has to do with me commenting on the the baseless effort to denigrate the findings of the paper based on some kind of mythical comparison that falsely utilizes statistics to prove something other than what the data actually suggests.
The problem today regarding any criminal activity is the lack of accountability. If everyone was held to the same standard regardless, there wouldn't be any statistical debates.
Well as most intelligent people know and all who have integrity enough to admit it...we do not have the same system or standards of justice in this country. We have two...one for you and me and one for people who don't look like you and me...I'm sorry that pointing that out to you rubs you the wrong way but maybe you ought to look in the mirror before casting stones and accusing somebody else of a hidden agenda, which is what most of your little hit and run shots at me generally do.

I think yours is the hidden agenda...and I see through it like freshly polished glass.

[footstepsfrom#27]

If that is the case then race is irrelevant. You just adjust the measure to account for the proper proportion of those in poverty. For example if 70% of those in poverty are black and 30% other then you would expect poverty related crime to be about 70% black and 30% other. If those numbers don't match up closely then you know there are other factors involved that could be race related.
There are other factors that are race related. I already stated that...chief among them is the outlandish disparity in how the two tiered judicial system functions in this country. However you're missing the point by thinking my comments are related to my personal views on race relations, social justice, etc...they're not.
But back to the topic you keep making the point that poverty is the primary driver of criminal activity then that doesn't explain the NFL problems as none of their players are currently suffering from poverty.
EXPOSURE to poverty, and by extension all it's associated ills...drugs, violence spousal abuse, gang activity, high incidents of unmarried young women giving birth, poorer educational opportunities, limited jobs in urban communities...the list goes on...and 18-22 years worth of that exposure is not magically wiped away with a paycheck that places the recipient in the same demographic data set as white CEO's, trust fund babies or Hollywood entertainers. Second, while desire for more "things" has been stated by at least one poster here as the reason for crime...this is also false. Theft, burglary or armed robbery might be motivated by this, but the desire for more material possessions does not explain drug addiction, spousal battery, rape or murder...hence the illustration is false that suggests crime is merely the result of wanting more stuff and not having the money to pay for it.
This topic can be twisted to say whatever a person would like for it to say. The bottom line is when you do something wrong it is your fault. Not society, not your neighbor, not the government...but yours.
I didn't say otherwise.

[Beantown Bronco]

Well as most intelligent people know and all who have integrity enough to admit it...we do not have the same system or standards of justice in this country. We have two...one for you and me and one for people who don't look like you and me....

While I agree that we have two standards of justice in this country, I'd disagree with your breakdown. There is one standard for the rich who can afford a top-notch legal team and there is one for everyone else.

[GonzoLays]

Glad you're amused. You seem inordinately preoccupied with the fact that I hold views related to social justice or racial politics that don't jibe with your expectations of white men. Perhaps you're one of these people who is offended by someone choosing to think for themselves rather than parrot the party line along racial, economic or political lines like most of the lemmings in our society. Jason has more posts than I do...I think you might find half a dozen points where I've made it a point to agree with him. I'm sure I can find dozens of places you agree with someone else, so what is your point...that I'm obligated to hold opinions dictated to me by my race? If so that's narrow minded in the extreme.

You really don't have to explain yourself to Tredici. From my dealings with her (a very loose her at that) I have come away with the impression she is very insecure and tends to "jump on bandwagons" sort to speak so she will have a calvary of toadies -- Slap in particular -- licking her ass and bowing down in agreeance.

If you were to go back and read how many times Slap and Tredici have sent each other virtual rimjobs you, too, would blush.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You really don't have to explain yourself to Tredici. From my dealings with her (a very loose her at that) I have come away with the impression she is very insecure and tends to "jump on bandwagons" sort to speak so she will have a calvary of toadies -- Slap in particular -- licking her ass and bowing down in agreeance.

If you were to go back and read how many times Slap and Tredici have sent each other virtual rimjobs you, too, would blush.You have to be one of the most ignorant posters in OM history! Besides all your obvious bias and racial bating, you're generally just an all around asshole.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Wrong again. Americans with college educations at the same salary levels would be the most appropriate comparison.
Based on what? Because you said so? As a financial analyst I interact with research statistics for a living. Producing a report for a client based on a single common nexus point between two groups, companies, opportunities or courses of action who share literally nothing else in common or using that method to submit project proposals would cause me to go broke almost overnight. The only way to integrate data accurately from widely divergent information sets is to consider as many potential factors as possible. Since exposure to poverty is the #1 predictor of risk for arrest and criminal prosecution, your suggestion that 4 or 5 years of living in a high income bracket trumps 20 or more in the hood is preposterous. You use a computer...you must have more in common with Bill Gates than you do a guy who uses a typewriter to write a letter.

[footstepsfrom#27]

You're still making my point. Statisticians cherry pick how they group their data and ignore "moral or ethical considerations, integrity or character or how money is made".
Statisticians do not "cherry pick" data unless they wish to find themselves unemployed. It's not the job of researchers...which are not necessarily statisticians...to consider any of the factors you mention here. Research, unless it's funded by somebody with a hidden connected interest in the outcome...ie; pharmaceutical companies that hire doctors to produce reports on their products for FDA approval based on supposed "unbiased" analysis...is not an emotional process. It's sole objective is to identify accurately what the data is, what it says, and what it means.

[cutthemdown]

Based on what? Because you said so? As a financial analyst I interact with research statistics for a living. Producing a report for a client based on a single common nexus point between two groups, companies, opportunities or courses of action who share literally nothing else in common or using that method to submit project proposals would cause me to go broke almost overnight. The only way to integrate data accurately from widely divergent information sets is to consider as many potential factors as possible. Since exposure to poverty is the #1 predictor of risk for arrest and criminal prosecution, your suggestion that 4 or 5 years of living in a high income bracket trumps 20 or more in the hood is preposterous. You use a computer...you must have more in common with Bill Gates than you do a guy who uses a typewriter to write a letter.

Your thinking is flawed because you compare the NFL players to drug dealers. For one the average drug dealer doesn't make near the money the NFL players do. The big money in drugs is made by organized gangs and probably up the line some fat white dude etc. Street drug dealers like the ones you are comparing NFL players to don't have as much money as you think they do. For your stats to mean anything you would have to have accurate numbers on what black steet drug dealers from the hood make in a year. Those numbers just aren't in your post though if they even exist.

[footstepsfrom#27]

While I agree that we have two standards of justice in this country, I'd disagree with your breakdown. There is one standard for the rich who can afford a top-notch legal team and there is one for everyone else.
You make an interesting point...I should have said that we have THREE justice systems though...one for the wealthy regardless of race (O.J.)...one for whites who aren't wealthy and one for poor blacks. Evidence is overwhelming that strong bias exists that puts black defendants at increased risk across all categories when compared to whites that are not wealthy.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Based on what? Because you said so? As a financial analyst I interact with research statistics for a living. Producing a report for a client based on a single common nexus point between two groups, companies, opportunities or courses of action who share literally nothing else in common or using that method to submit project proposals would cause me to go broke almost overnight. The only way to integrate data accurately from widely divergent information sets is to consider as many potential factors as possible. Since exposure to poverty is the #1 predictor of risk for arrest and criminal prosecution, your suggestion that 4 or 5 years of living in a high income bracket trumps 20 or more in the hood is preposterous. You use a computer...you must have more in common with Bill Gates than you do a guy who uses a typewriter to write a letter.I see you keep forgetting to add they attended college too. Seems to me that groups of people who have the benefit of college educations and are wealthy shouldn't be suffering over 20% arrest rates?

[footstepsfrom#27]

Your thinking is flawed because you compare the NFL players to drug dealers. For one the average drug dealer doesn't make near the money the NFL players do. The big money in drugs is made by organized gangs and probably up the line some fat white dude etc. Street drug dealers like the ones you are comparing NFL players to don't have as much money as you think they do. For your stats to mean anything you would have to have accurate numbers on what black steet drug dealers from the hood make in a year. Those numbers just aren't in your post though if they even exist.
Nowhere did I suggest I was comparing NFL players salaries to what low level pushers make from their sales to street junkies or soccer moms because I'm not. I'm comparing it to the millions made by people considerably higher up the food chain...those who turn hundreds of thousands on a single transaction. These individuals share similar backgrounds with the 70% of NFL players who are black, as well as an income in the top 1/10th of 1% of the income bracket, and more than likely do not have an MBA from Harvard to boot.

[BKK]

Let's face it, anymore it seems that people in this country love to watch somebody else fall. It has become entertainment. Most people are so bored with their own lives they relish it when anybody gets caught for stepping out of line, much like watching a reality show. Political Correctness probably has something to do with it as well.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I see you keep forgetting to add they attended college too. Seems to me that groups of people who have the benefit of college educations and are wealthy shouldn't be suffering over 20% arrest rates?
I already stated that the generic college grad is not making that kind of money. If you wish to add "and are wealthy" to the group, you're now talking about a sub group of individuals who usually did more than attend college. These individuals probably have MBA's, own highly profitable businesses, are positioned as CEO's and senior managers in Fortune 1000 companies, hold partnerships in law firms, etc...and typically they are overwhelmingly white, raised in suburbia and probably have almost zero exposure to the primary risk factors for arrest...meaning they don't qualify on any count as viable candidates for comparison based on the twin factors of income bracket and the fact they've got a college degree.

[shakenbake]

I see you keep forgetting to add they attended college too. Seems to me that groups of people who have the benefit of college educations and are wealthy shouldn't be suffering over 20% arrest rates?

good post. I pretty sure I have read that education is the most important factor in determining whether or not a person becomes a criminal in adulthood.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I already stated that the generic college grad is not making that kind of money. If you wish to add "and are wealthy" to the group, you're now talking about a sub group of individuals who usually did more than attend college. How much education does one need to learn right from wrong?

[cutthemdown]

Nowhere did I suggest I was comparing NFL players salaries to what low level pushers make from their sales to street junkies or soccer moms because I'm not. I'm comparing it to the millions made by people considerably higher up the food chain...those who turn hundreds of thousands on a single transaction. These individuals share similar backgrounds with the 70% of NFL players who are black, as well as an income in the top 1/10th of 1% of the income bracket, and more than likely do not have an MBA from Harvard to boot.

It's still a bad comparison but keep trying to spin it. NFL players we know who they are and what they make. We know how often football players get arrested. The group you are trying to compare them to is undocumented. We don't know what their race is. Who they are. How much they make. How much they get caught and arrested. The best group to compare black nfl players to are other black professional athletes from America. But really they should be comparing themselves to the general population because we are all in this life together. Being from the hood, no dad, no money is not an excuse to commit crimes and be a jerk.

[footstepsfrom#27]

How much education does one need to learn right from wrong?
Sunday school and strong parental involvement provide enough to get that point...but this is irrelevant to the issue. You're continuing to phrase this as if NFL players are more prone to criminal behavior or arrest, when the point has been made and supported with evidence that NFL players have a lower rate of arrest than the general population...and FAR lower than blacks that are not in the NFL. You seem to be looking to attack the record here...and what I'm saying is that the record needs no defense based on this information. If anything the larger collective of NFL players ought to be commended for being less likely to be arrested, not vilified and portrayed as needing to justify the way they are portrayed in the media.

Again...my comments are not motivated by personal opinions on social justice, race politics, judicial license...etc...but rather by an annoyance with the attempt to prove that NFL players experiencing high risk factors for arrest be arbitrarily compared to a group they have almost nothing in common with apart from income level.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Sunday school and strong parental involvement provide enough to get that point...but this is irrelevant to the issue. Really? So education really isn't very effective on this bunch in the NFL?

You're continuing to phrase this as if NFL players are more prone to criminal behavior or arrest, when the point has been made and supported with evidence that NFL players have a lower rate of arrest than the general population.Meaningless.

Find another peer group to compare with and then you have something. How about MLB players?

[footstepsfrom#27]

It's still a bad comparison but keep trying to spin it. NFL players we know who they are and what they make. We know how often football players get arrested. The group you are trying to compare them to is undocumented. We don't know what their race is. Who they are. How much they make. How much they get caught and arrested.
You don't know these things. Don't assume others don't. The fact is we do know what race most CEO's, partners in law firms, millionaire investors and trust fund babies, etc...are. They're white, and predominately male. We also know what the income levels for these individuals are, and while we may not know how often stockbrokers engage high dollar lawyers to purchase justice for their clients after a cocaine charge, what we do know is that while white collar millionaires might get caught cheating on their taxes, shafting shareholders, violating SEC rules on insider trading or violating the Rico Act, we do know these individuals are unlikely to stick up a liquor store, knock an old lady in the head with a brick or be running a crack house...all high profile crimes covered with extensive media glare and consumed daily by millions who form their view of the world on their exposure to this information.
The best group to compare black nfl players to are other black professional athletes from America. But really they should be comparing themselves to the general population because we are all in this life together. Being from the hood, no dad, no money is not an excuse to commit crimes and be a jerk.
"Risk factor" does not equal "excuse"...never said it did.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Really? So education really isn't very effective on this bunch in the NFL?
You appear to be lumping blacks from inner city cesspools laughably called "schools" who go to football factories and have tests taken for them with people who have Ivy League MBA's...which is just silly.
Find another peer group to compare with and then you have something. How about MLB players?
No such comparison is needed, since 1) a far smaller percentage of blacks play major league baseball than football, and 2) NFL players apparently have a significantly lower arrest record than the average Joe who works in an office, runs a hardware store or drives a truck...in other words you're fighting a battle against an imaginary foe.

[Popps]

He was charged with murder because the DA was trying to make a name for himself.

!Booya!

Like I said, there's Jason... rushing to the defense of Ray Ray.

I GUARANTEE you this guy was defending O.J. Simpson during the trial.

Those poor guys, just innocent victims of a pile-on. Just like Mike Vick. Just guys minding their own business and society just won't leave them alone.

Have you written Ray Caruth in prison yet, Jason? All he did was kill a woman. I'm sure the person in the next office over at my work probably killed a few people.

Hey, we're having a company dog fight tonight. Wanna come? Just a "normal" work place, ya know? We'll BBQ, have games for the kids, maybe a charity raffle... then we'll have dogs kill each other.

[GonzoLays]

!Booya!

Like I said, there's Jason... rushing to the defense of Ray Ray.

I GUARANTEE you this guy was defending O.J. Simpson during the trial.

Those poor guys, just innocent victims of a pile-on. Just like Mike Vick. Just guys minding their own business and society just won't leave them alone.

Have you written Ray Caruth in prison yet, Jason? All he did was kill a woman. I'm sure the person in the next office over at my work probably killed a few people.

Hey, we're having a company dog fight tonight. Wanna come? Just a "normal" work place, ya know? We'll BBQ, have games for the kids, maybe a charity raffle... then we'll have dogs kill each other.

If only your dumbass put this much effort into **** that mattered. I tell you what, if the "criminal element" in the NFL bothers you so ****ing much, quit watching. Your constant whining and crying about NFL players that run afoul of the law is moronic. Either **** or get off the pot.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You appear to be lumping blacks from inner city cesspools laughably called "schools" who go to football factories and have tests taken for them with people who have Ivy League MBA's...which is just silly. Once again, you're saying graduating high school and attending college isn't enough education to know right from wrong?

No such comparison is needed, since 1) a far smaller percentage of blacks play major league baseball than football, and 2) NFL players apparently have a significantly lower arrest record than the average Joe who works in an office, runs a hardware store or drives a truck...in other words you're fighting a battle against an imaginary foe.You almost had it, except you forgot the millions of urban criminals that make up that "general population".

[cutthemdown]

In my opinion using risk factors like no dad, being poor, being uneducated as a predicator for bad behavoir is a politically correct way of saying It's not their fault. You say risk factors, I say excuses. It all depends on what side of the argument you are on. I however agree with you that NFL players are not a problem in society. If you threw out the DUIs and the drugs which are a national epidemic it wouldn't even look that bad.

[Popps]

If only your dumbass put this much effort into **** that mattered. I tell you what, if the "criminal element" in the NFL bothers you so ****ing much, quit watching. Your constant whining and crying about NFL players that run afoul of the law is moronic. Either **** or get off the pot.

You're so mean. Gosh.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

If only your dumbass put this much effort into **** that mattered. I tell you what, if the "criminal element" in the NFL bothers you so ****ing much, quit watching. Your constant whining and crying about NFL players that run afoul of the law is moronic. Either **** or get off the pot.
LOL

Says the fool who is always defending them..............Classic!!!

[ton80]

Statisticians do not "cherry pick" data unless they wish to find themselves unemployed. It's not the job of researchers...which are not necessarily statisticians...to consider any of the factors you mention here. Research, unless it's funded by somebody with a hidden connected interest in the outcome...ie; pharmaceutical companies that hire doctors to produce reports on their products for FDA approval based on supposed "unbiased" analysis...is not an emotional process. It's sole objective is to identify accurately what the data is, what it says, and what it means.

Please re-read what I said. I didn't say anything about cherry picking data.

[footstepsfrom#27]

The highest predictors for problems with criminal behavior (arrests in this case) is race and poverty...race because blacks are vastly over represented in poverty.

Wow. Just wow. How about if we compare black athletes who grew up in urban America to black CEO's, professionals, business owners or investors based on similar income who also grew up in urban environments? Those people do exist. Wouldn't those people represent a more similar demographic?
Possibly...good question...why don't you do some research and find out? Apparently you're concerned that you're more likely to be shot or slugged with a bat in an alley by an NFL player than you are Harvey who just took his company to IPO status...a bizarre fear to say the least but if it makes you feel safer by all means research black CEO's and lawyers making Johnny Cochran money so you'll feel better justified to lump people into neat little compartments that fit your world view. :thumbs:
What else is obvious is you are having to add a few good justifications now to fit the theory. -- Spending 18-22 years in and around the effects of poverty and its associated ills...drugs, violence, exposure to gangs, unemployment, inferior schools, mediocre health care, etc...represents a radically different background than the subset of others making a similar income.
Your analogy makes zero sense...because I'm not the one who tried to compare NFL players to CEO's and millionaire investors. I stated from the start that poverty and race are the primary risk factors most likely to predict criminal arrest records...which is what the above sentence you quoted also states...get a clue.
So the demographics of where a person comes from are far more important in statistical equations then the demographics of where they are now? So the assumption is no background can ever be overcome?

Or is that the excuse?
As I stated before..."risk factor" does not equal "excuse"...and I never said it did. Yes...the risk factors associated with an entire lifetime growing up in poverty, crime, drug and alcoholism, inferior educational and employment opportunities and potential for violence on a daily basis, etc... have a far higher statistical correlation to being arrested than being highly paid now. Black CEO's, business owners and partners in law firms or wealthy investors have sunk years of not only education but also rigid discipline and study into getting where they are now. By contrast NFL players were lifting weights and running 40's, catching passes, and being told they're special people. Which one of these two groups of career behavioral characteristics has a smaller likelihood of producing a future leading to arrest or incarceration for a crime?

It's not a trick question.

[Popps]

I am think the NFL arrest rate should be about zero.

What, a bunch of millionaires whom we take our children to cheer for? Why would you expect them to be civilized?

Can you imagine if some other (small) company with a few thousand employees had this kind of crime rate? Say, the accounting firm down the street. Imagine if 1 in 5 accountants at the firm had been tagged for something moderately to severely serious. People would avoid it like the plague and assume it must be almost institutionalized. But, since it's the NFL.... it's rationalized.

[footstepsfrom#27]

In my opinion using risk factors like no dad, being poor, being uneducated as a predicator for bad behavoir is a politically correct way of saying It's not their fault. You say risk factors, I say excuses. It all depends on what side of the argument you are on.
Nope...it depends on whether you understand how research uses statistics to predict risk...nothing else.

[Popps]

LOL

Says the fool who is always defending them..............Classic!!!

Plus, I love the logic... someone is sh!tting on your neighborhood, so YOU better move out. Don't ask them to stop, or attempt to discuss the problem, just run away and let people destroy something you value. Solid life strategy, there.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Please re-read what I said. I didn't say anything about cherry picking data.
Fine..."how they group their data"...you're still suggesting personal bias on the part of the researchers without evidence. Researchers and statisticians employed to analyze data are paid to be accurate not politically correct. If they cared at all it would suggest they're being funded by somebody with a vested interest in the outcome....which does happen. Did it happen here? You can't say it did unless you have evidence.

[epa86b@netzero]

This thread has been very interesting to read; I appreciate you all’s efforts.

Going to college for a few years does not equal “an education”.

Comparing football players who are typically poor and then, become instantly rich to a group who attend college anywhere from 4 to 12 years and work extremely long hours and accumulative their wealth over a long period of time is a poor comparison.

The best comparison I can think of for professional athletes are to “lottery winners” who ironically usually end up wasting their fortune in a lot of cases; which is what happens to a lot of athletes.

Bottomline: Personal accountability must trample everything else but a person’s background will influence their decisions and choices.

[Jason in LA]

!Booya!

Like I said, there's Jason... rushing to the defense of Ray Ray.

I GUARANTEE you this guy was defending O.J. Simpson during the trial.

Those poor guys, just innocent victims of a pile-on. Just like Mike Vick. Just guys minding their own business and society just won't leave them alone.

Have you written Ray Caruth in prison yet, Jason? All he did was kill a woman. I'm sure the person in the next office over at my work probably killed a few people.

Hey, we're having a company dog fight tonight. Wanna come? Just a "normal" work place, ya know? We'll BBQ, have games for the kids, maybe a charity raffle... then we'll have dogs kill each other.

I'm not surprised that you still haven't addressed the points that I made to start this thread, or the points from the article. How you read them yet? Because you haven't addressed any of it yet.

All you are doing is making wild assumptions, over exaggerating certain points that I've made, and you are trying to be clever by insulting me. But at no time have you addressed what I wrote, or what the author of the article wrote.

Like I said a good 5 years ago, your tactic is to attack the person, and not his arguments. You do that because you are too stupid to form a good argument. I challenged you in my last post to argue against the points that I made, and the points from the article. I'm not surprised that you still haven't. I said that I didn't feel that you were smart enough to do it, and you just proved me right. Thank you very much.

The next time you try to pick on somebody, find somebody stupid like you. Maybe you'll have a chance.

For the record, I think OJ did it, and I have never defended Ray Caruth. I guess you are just trying to be clever with that one. It wasn't a good attempt at being clever, but what would I expect out of somebody as dumb as you.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Can you imagine if some other (small) company with a few thousand employees had this kind of crime rate? Say, the accounting firm down the street. Imagine if 1 in 5 accountants at the firm had been tagged for something moderately to severely serious. People would avoid it like the plague and assume it must be almost institutionalized. But, since it's the NFL.... it's rationalized.
Excuse me...what? Where are you getting this 1 in 5 stuff? I saw Beerslug also suggest a 20% arrest rate...the paper found that 1 in 45 players had been arrested...that's about twice as low as your accountants and it's 2.2% not 20% so you're high by a factor of more than 900%. How could you possibly miss the entire point of the article and the thread itself by manufacturing this number out of left field and not see that it failed to fit the entire point of the thread?

Is this new math? ???

[Jason in LA]

LOL

Good God, this post pretty much sums up Jason's contributions to the Mane in general. He didn't follow the story, he just throws out his uninformed opinions to fit his particular agenda.

Great thread, Jason.

ROFL!

That sums up your contribuations to the mane. Just throw out insults at people. Never mind all the points that I made in this thread, since you have no answer for any of them. You focus on a point that I don't even go into. Is that the best you got?

I didn't throw out an opinion on the trial because I didn't follow it. I'm not going to go into an issue that I do not know the details too.

I guess you are going into your normal crap. Attack the person when you have no answer for their points.

[Jason in LA]

Excuse me...what? Where are you getting this 1 in 5 stuff? I saw Beerslug also suggest a 20% arrest rate...the paper found that 1 in 45 players had been arrested...that's about twice as low as your accountants and it's 2.2% not 20% so you're high by a factor of more than 900%. How could you possibly miss the entire point of the article and the thread itself by manufacturing this number out of left field and not see that it failed to fit the entire point of the thread?

Is this new math? ???

I don't think some people who are trying to make a lot of noise in this thread have even read the article.

[footstepsfrom#27]

This thread has been very interesting to read; I appreciate you all’s efforts.

Going to college for a few years does not equal “an education”.

Comparing football players who are typically poor and then, become instantly rich to a group who attend college anywhere from 4 to 12 years and work extremely long hours and accumulative their wealth over a long period of time is a poor comparison.

The best comparison I can think of for professional athletes are to “lottery winners” who ironically usually end up wasting their fortune in a lot of cases; which is what happens to a lot of athletes.

Bottomline: Personal accountability must trample everything else but a personal’s background will influence their decisions and choices.
Rep. Excellent point and succinctly put.

[ton80]

Fine..."how they group their data"...you're still suggesting personal bias on the part of the researchers without evidence. Researchers and statisticians employed to analyze data are paid to be accurate not politically correct. If they cared at all it would suggest they're being funded by somebody with a vested interest in the outcome....which does happen. Did it happen here? You can't say it did unless you have evidence.

I agree with everything you have said in how one properly crunches statistical data. I just thing it's ridiculous to compare NFL players to drug dealers and then draw conclusions based upon that statistical analysis. That is what I mean by grouping data. Sorry for the confustion.

Nowhere have i made any political statements since we started our discussion last night. Drop the political crap. Take it up with others. It's boring and we won't get anywhere.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Excuse me...what? Where are you getting this 1 in 5 stuff? I saw Beerslug also suggest a 20% arrest rate...the paper found that 1 in 45 players had been arrested...that's about twice as low as your accountants and it's 2.2% not 20% so you're high by a factor of more than 900%. How could you possibly miss the entire point of the article and the thread itself by manufacturing this number out of left field and not see that it failed to fit the entire point of the thread?

Is this new math? ???
283 NFL players who have been arrested or charged for offenses ranging from drunken driving to domestic violence to weapons possession since 2000. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18541131/)

[footstepsfrom#27]

I don't think some people who are trying to make a lot of noise in this thread have even read the article.
ha ha!...correctamundo...why should this one be any different though?

[Jason in LA]

283 NFL players who have been arrested or charged for offenses ranging from drunken driving to domestic violence to weapons possession since 2000. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18541131/)


That should still work out to about 2%.

If we are going by total arrest from 2000, we have to factor in all of the players that have played since 2000. There is no way that 20% of the league has been arrested. How can that be when only 2% of the league gets arrested per year, and many of those arrests are by repeat offenders?

Anyway you want to spin it, it's still lower than the national average.

[footstepsfrom#27]

283 NFL players who have been arrested or charged for offenses ranging from drunken driving to domestic violence to weapons possession since 2000. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18541131/)
Is this supposed to mean something? Where did you get the figure that 20% of NFL players have been arrested?

[epicSocialism4tw]

This is the truly meaningful part of the article. The Ray Lewis, Leonard Little and Pacman Jones type thugs, that people like Jason bend over backwards to defend, make the rest of the League look bad.

I know the only way for the author to spin this article was to look at the statistics superficially, but what percentage of the 1 in 21 people in the general population who commit crimes return to high paying jobs after they're arrested? What percentage of them can afford expensive legal representation in the first place? 1 in 21 almost perfectly mirrors the unemployment rate, doesn't it? This not a coincidence.

This article is an excellent example of how easy it is to mislead people with statistics when they're unwilling, or simply not smart enough, to figure out what you're doing to them.


You beat me to it.

The average salary in the NFL among players (the sample being questioned) is considerably higher than any other employment demographic of a similar tax bracket.

I would bet that it's as if you took the demographic of below 25,000.00/year and transposed it.

[Jason in LA]

ha ha!...correctamundo...why should this one be any different though?

I think they read the title, rolled their eyes, and then spewed out the same crap that they always have, even though there are numbers that prove them wrong.

[cutthemdown]

Nope...it depends on whether you understand how research uses statistics to predict risk...nothing else.

Trust me when it comes to race and crime the last thing people really want are the real statistics. But I do understand that stats can be used very well to predict things like risk for criminal activity. As long as we make sure that punishment is not mitigated by those risk factors.

[footstepsfrom#27]

That should still work out to about 2%.

If we are going by total arrest from 2000, we have to factor in all of the players that have played since 2000. There is no way that 20% of the league has been arrested. How can that be when only 2% of the league gets arrested per year, and many of those arrests are by repeat offenders?

Anyway you want to spin it, it's still lower than the national average.
Hey don't you get it? You're more likely to be assaulted by a linebacker than you are by the CEO of Starbucks! Scary stuff! ;D

[ludo21]

Stats can be twisted into anything.

There are much more good people in the NFL than not. Thats enough for me.

and another thing, where in this thread are people defending Pac Man? They are simply stating the criminal epidemic in the nfl isnt as bad as ppl make it out to be.

[epicSocialism4tw]

What, a bunch of millionaires whom we take our children to cheer for? Why would you expect them to be civilized?

Can you imagine if some other (small) company with a few thousand employees had this kind of crime rate? Say, the accounting firm down the street. Imagine if 1 in 5 accountants at the firm had been tagged for something moderately to severely serious. People would avoid it like the plague and assume it must be almost institutionalized. But, since it's the NFL.... it's rationalized.

Great comment, Popps. :thumbsup:

[Jason in LA]

You beat me to it.

The average salary in the NFL among players (the sample being questioned) is considerably higher than any other employment demographic of a similar tax bracket.

I would bet that it's as if you took the demographic of below 25,000.00/year and transposed it.

Even if this point is true, it still doesn't refute the point that there is no criminal epidemic in the NFL. 2% of the league gets arrested (many are repeat offenders), most for non-voilent crimes, and we have an criminal epidemic?

It's a silly point. If the stats weren't compared to anything, it's still a very low number. Much lower than what people around here would think.

BTW, what happened to Dirk? Are you ever going to talk about that?

[Jason in LA]

Great comment, Popps. :thumbsup:

Yeah, but he still hasn't read the article, so what does he really know.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Trust me when it comes to race and crime the last thing people really want are the real statistics. But I do understand that stats can be used very well to predict things like risk for criminal activity. As long as we make sure that punishment is not mitigated by those risk factors.
Mitigated by risk factors? Hmmm...let me see...blacks are more likely to receive a harsher punishment for the same crime committed by whites, more likely to be convicted after arrest, more likely to receive the death penalty, less likely to be able to afford good legal representation, less likely to be given probation and more likely to have an appeal turned down by a higher court.

I think you're safe!

Now let's look at how we can figure out how to stop all these car salesmen, clerks, mechanics, taxi drivers, truckers, computer programmers and teachers from their rampant wave of crime that's twice as high as it is in the NFL.

I say we racially profile white folks mmmkay? ;D

[Atlas]

great thread guys, God I love this site!!

[Popps]

Great comment, Popps. :thumbsup:

Thanks man. But, I gotta run. My coworkers and I usually go to a dog fight for Friday lunch, then stop off and beat up a pedestrian on the way home.

You know, normal business stuff.

[footstepsfrom#27]

You beat me to it.

The average salary in the NFL among players (the sample being questioned) is considerably higher than any other employment demographic of a similar tax bracket.

I would bet that it's as if you took the demographic of below 25,000.00/year and transposed it.
*sigh*...see post #77...

[Northman]

Even if this point is true, it still doesn't refute the point that there is no criminal epidemic in the NFL. 2% of the league gets arrested (many are repeat offenders), most for non-voilent crimes, and we have an criminal epidemic?

It's a silly point. If the stats weren't compared to anything, it's still a very low number. Much lower than what people around here would think.

BTW, what happened to Dirk? Are you ever going to talk about that?

Im just curious Jason, since you paint with such a broad brush about how " most " of the Mane thinks the NFL is full of thugs what exactly is the percentage? Do you have examples of who claims the NFL to be full of thugs? Since your such a stat geek can you please give us the percentage of the Mane who believe this " theory " you claim?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Yeah, but he still hasn't read the article, so what does he really know.

He knows what is painfully obvious for everyone else but a few who are driven by some ulterior motive to defend the NFL thug lifestyle.

Popps' point is that a person who sees the NFL as family-worthy entertainment should seriously weight the value of subjecting your children to the off-the-field party lifestyle that we see all the time.

The NFL is no longer family friendly. It has allowed players like Ray Lewis and Jamal Lewis to remain in the marketing arm of the league. Any other business would have kicked a man involved in the mass distribution of large quantities of COCAINE to the curb. The NFL allows players like this to remain associated with the league.

[Jason in LA]

If you can look at any group and say that only 2% of them per year will be arrested, nobody would say that group has a criminal epidemic.

But since it's the NFL, that 2% turns into damn near all of them. It makes not sense. The numbers do not support the fact that the NFL is filled with criminals.

I bet the crime rate of the OM is about the same as the NFL. Hell, it might even be higher. I wonder how many people around here have got a DUI?

[cutthemdown]

Footsteps for instance take this hypothetical situation.

A boy from the hood deals drugs, someone is going to rip him off, so he kills the guy and dumps his body in a dumpster.

A boy from the burbs had everything he could want. Kills someone just for the fun of it.

The risk factors may be different, but the crime is the same, both should be executed.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Thanks man. But, I gotta run. My coworkers and I usually go to a dog fight for Friday lunch, then stop off and beat up a pedestrian on the way home.

You know, normal business stuff.

Hilarious!

Dont forget to call Chico to move that cocaine up the eastern seaboard, okay?

[Jason in LA]

Im just curious Jason, since you paint with such a broad brush about how " most " of the Mane thinks the NFL is full of thugs what exactly is the percentage? Do you have examples of who claims the NFL to be full of thugs? Since your such a stat geek can you please give us the percentage of the Mane who believe this " theory " you claim?

I don't have the stats, and you know I don't have stats on that. I don't see the point on you asking for those numbers. I guess you are trying to catch me in some trap.

I don't need to stats to form my opinion. Funny, but nobody has ever argued against that opinion. Because it's true. People around here have stated many times that it is a league of thugs. Are you telling me that people haven't?

[Jason in LA]

Thanks man. But, I gotta run. My coworkers and I usually go to a dog fight for Friday lunch, then stop off and beat up a pedestrian on the way home.

You know, normal business stuff.


Are you planning on addressing any point in this thread at any time? Have you read the article yet? It surely doesn't seem like it.

[epicSocialism4tw]

It's not just a league of thugs, its a league of pampered and enabled thugs.

The worst of whom ,in my mind, is no worse than Bill Romanowski.

[Jason in LA]

It's not just a league of thugs, its a league of pampered and enabled thugs.

The worst of whom ,in my mind, is no worse than Bill Romanowski.

So are you ever going to talk about Dirk and the Mavs?

[footstepsfrom#27]

I agree with everything you have said in how one properly crunches statistical data. I just thing it's ridiculous to compare NFL players to drug dealers and then draw conclusions based upon that statistical analysis. That is what I mean by grouping data. Sorry for the confustion.
I didn't draw any conclusions or develop analysis of risk based on comparing NFL players to drug dealers. I pointed out that NFL players share more characteristics associated with risk factors like poverty and race with drug dealers making big money than they do with white CEO's, investment gurus or high priced attorney's with partnerships in law firms.
Nowhere have i made any political statements since we started our discussion last night. Drop the political crap. Take it up with others. It's boring and we won't get anywhere.
You suggested the motives of the researchers were in view with the "cherry picking" comment, when there's no evidence of that. Whether that's from political motivation or not is known only to you but political/racial/economic bias towards the information the paper presented would obviously predispose an assumption of guilt in the absence of even an accusation, let alone evidence to support such a conclusion. If the shoe doesn't fit...don't wear it.

[Northman]

I don't have the stats, and you know I don't have stats on that. I don't see the point on you asking for those numbers. I guess you are trying to catch me in some trap.

I don't need to stats to form my opinion. Funny, but nobody has ever argued against that opinion. Because it's true. People around here have stated many times that it is a league of thugs. Are you telling me that people haven't?

Personally, im not debating your article. I personally have never claimed the NFL to be full of thugs. But when you started this thread you presented it as if the entire board believed that the NFL was full of thugs. When you make a generalization like that it weakens your arguement. Im sure there are a few people who might think the league is full of thugs ( although i find that people believe it too be more so with the NBA ) but it certainly isnt on the scale you insinuated it was on. You should have presented it different than i think people would take you more seriously.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Footsteps for instance take this hypothetical situation.

A boy from the hood deals drugs, someone is going to rip him off, so he kills the guy and dumps his body in a dumpster.

A boy from the burbs had everything he could want. Kills someone just for the fun of it.

The risk factors may be different, but the crime is the same, both should be executed.
Guess which one will get the needle.

[Northman]

Guess which one will get the needle.

Both

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

People around here have stated many times that it is a league of thugs. Are you telling me that people haven't?

I don't remember anyone saying the NFL is a league of thugs, but there are many of us that would like to see the thugs that do exist removed from the league.

[Master___Pain]

So are you ever going to talk about Dirk and the Mavs?

Highly unlikely.

The idea that the NFL is a thug league is perpetuated by guys like Pac-Man, Chris Henry, Vick, Lewisx2. The NFL is composed of mainly high quality dudes that are not criminals, thugs or whatever. For every Pac Man there are Guys like Manning, Lynch, Brady, Champ, Brees, LT and on and on. Problem is, to many folks, perception is reality. I do take exception with Jason assertion that "many on the OM view the NFL as a league of thugs". I guess I don't know how many "many" means. Too many times on this board the vocal minority are perceived to be the majority here.

[Northman]

I don't remember anyone saying the NFL is a league of thugs, but there are many of us that would like to see the thugs that do exist removed from the league.

Exactly. I hear more griping about the NBA than i do about the NFL. Its just that with the Vick and Jones situations it has become a large issue this offseason. I think Jason is just overreacting over a couple of incidents.

[footstepsfrom#27]

The NFL is no longer family friendly. It has allowed players like Ray Lewis and Jamal Lewis to remain in the marketing arm of the league. Any other business would have kicked a man involved in the mass distribution of large quantities of COCAINE to the curb. The NFL allows players like this to remain associated with the league.
Unions don't automatically fire members for convictions, including teachers unions, which are so protective of their members it's almost impossible to fire a teacher. As you know, here in Dallas we've got textbook examples of teachers who have been hired as known felons, including some who were actually under CURRENT investigation for theft of funds and falsifying test scores for the Wilmer Hutchins ISD...yet were hired in Dallas 10 miles away...but the fact that the NFL has adopted policies in the past that allowed known thugs to still play in the league or represent it in some other fashion is not germane to the point that only 2% of NFL players...less than half as many as the general population...have been arrested. One signifies irresponsibility and hypocrisy at the level of managerial decision making...the other signifies responsibility at the level where the players are.

Criticism of NFL policies? No problem. Criticism of players as disproportionately prone to criminal arrest?...not supportable by evidence.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Both
Wrong.

[Northman]

Highly unlikely.

The idea that the NFL is a thug league is perpetuated by guys like Pac-Man, Chris Henry, Vick, Lewisx2. The NFL is composed of mainly high quality dudes that are not criminals, thugs or whatever. For every Pac Man there are Guys like Manning, Lynch, Brady, Champ, Brees, LT and on and on. Problem is, to many folks, perception is reality. I do take exception with Jason assertion that "many on the OM view the NFL as a league of thugs". I guess I don't know how many "many" means. Too many times on this board the vocal minority are perceived to be the majority here.


Thank you, that was my point to begin with. You just said it a hell of a lot better. :thumbsup:

[Northman]

Wrong.

If i am wrong than by all means put some stats up to back up your arguement. You know you want to. lol

[Jason in LA]

Personally, im not debating your article. I personally have never claimed the NFL to be full of thugs. But when you started this thread you presented it as if the entire board believed that the NFL was full of thugs. When you make a generalization like that it weakens your arguement. Im sure there are a few people who might think the league is full of thugs ( although i find that people believe it too be more so with the NBA ) but it certainly isnt on the scale you insinuated it was on. You should have presented it different than i think people would take you more seriously.

I didn't say the entire board felt that way, but a decent amount of the board felt that way. If you never said that, or don't feel that way, then it wasn't directed at you.

[Jason in LA]

Highly unlikely.

The idea that the NFL is a thug league is perpetuated by guys like Pac-Man, Chris Henry, Vick, Lewisx2. The NFL is composed of mainly high quality dudes that are not criminals, thugs or whatever. For every Pac Man there are Guys like Manning, Lynch, Brady, Champ, Brees, LT and on and on. Problem is, to many folks, perception is reality. I do take exception with Jason assertion that "many on the OM view the NFL as a league of thugs". I guess I don't know how many "many" means. Too many times on this board the vocal minority are perceived to be the majority here.

I guess I may have overstated it a bit. My point was directed at the ones who bash the NFL. I've seen a number of posters complain.

You are totally right when you said that "perception is reality" when it comes to the NFL. The perception is that there is a criminal epidemic, and some people thinks that the reality, when it really isn't.

[cutthemdown]

Mitigated by risk factors? Hmmm...let me see...blacks are more likely to receive a harsher punishment for the same crime committed by whites, more likely to be convicted after arrest, more likely to receive the death penalty, less likely to be able to afford good legal representation, less likely to be given probation and more likely to have an appeal turned down by a higher court.

I think you're safe!

Now let's look at how we can figure out how to stop all these car salesmen, clerks, mechanics, taxi drivers, truckers, computer programmers and teachers from their rampant wave of crime that's twice as high as it is in the NFL.

I say we racially profile white folks mmmkay? ;D


What about the stat that shows blacks commit over half the crimes even though they make up only like 15 percent of the people.

[Jason in LA]

I think Jason is just overreacting over a couple of incidents.

It is way more than a couple of incidents. I may have overstated a bit, and I should have directed my comments to those individuals who made the comments, but it does happen often around here, by a number of posters.

[Master___Pain]

I didn't say the entire board felt that way, but a decent amount of the board felt that way. If you never said that, or don't feel that way, then it wasn't directed at you.

No trick or trap or anything Jason, but what constitutes "many" or a "decent amount" ? Obviously there have been a handful (typically around 5 or so ;D) of posters in this thread that do view the NFL as a thug league, but it certainly appears that the vast majority of posters that have expressed themselves in this thread feel that the so called thugs over shadow the good guys. I think many casual NFL fans, might see the recent Pac Man/Vick stuff and think what a league of thugs, but the football die hards that hang here don't seem to have labeled it as a thug league.

[Tredici]

Glad you're amused. You seem inordinately preoccupied with the fact that I hold views related to social justice or racial politics that don't jibe with your expectations of white men. Perhaps you're one of these people who is offended by someone choosing to think for themselves rather than parrot the party line along racial, economic or political lines like most of the lemmings in our society. Jason has more posts than I do...I think you might find half a dozen points where I've made it a point to agree with him. I'm sure I can find dozens of places you agree with someone else, so what is your point...that I'm obligated to hold opinions dictated to me by my race? If so that's narrow minded in the extreme.

I read the article carefully and took note of the procedures the writer expressed as those employed for producing the background for the basis of the story as well as the statistics cited, which seem fairly straight forward. Short of arbitrarily calling the writer a liar and mounting an accusation of forged data or deliberate misrepresentation, there is no basis for determining bias without examining the original research the writer was working with. Short of doing your own original research to verify the results...which nobody on this board has done...the expectation and assumption legitimately exists that the information is valid unless proven otherwise. People who analyze research for accuracy begin without the assumption that bias, flawed methodology or improper use of data has taken place in the absence of evidence suggesting so.

If you wish to be Dick Tracy and track down the information used by the paper, or perhaps become a prevention science research analyst and delve into potential conflicts of interest by finding out who paid for research studies, what sources were utilized, who the researchers were, who had established fiduciary duties to whom, what kind of statistical analysis was done and whether the conclusions were properly tested for validity and relevance then by all means do so. Short of personal knowledge to the contrary, the proper course of action is to assume no evil intentions exist unless evidence suggests otherwise. Do you have such evidence?

If by "assumption" you mean "baseless" assumption...you're wrong. Assumptions based on facts or sound reasoning drawn from the proper use of data are entirely appropriate however, so this is not a baseless assumption...it's a statement on how research is properly employed when aggregate factors are utilized to compare or contrast different sets of data in order to predict future results. In this case I referenced the widely known and almost universally accepted truism that the highest predictors of criminal behavior (including arrests) are race and exposure to poverty and all it's ills. Thus, my conclusion that ignoring 20 plus years of exposure to this known risk factor to clumsily patchwork data on two entirely different demographic groups together by utilizing a single, and less reliable point of intersection (current income)...is considered BAD research methodology. You might just as well suggest that people with brown eyes are more likely to be arrested...true enough...but worthless information none the less.

No actually you are assuming that I'm assuming several things I've not said. Roughly 70% of NFL players have more similarities to their own demographic sub group that engages in criminal behavior than they do to ultra wealthy people who have not been exposed to similar risk factors for arrest...very basic stuff here. The comparison using income as the sole basis for examining potential for arrest is highly over valued here due to the nature of the extremely high incomes players make, which put them in the top 1/10th of 1% of all American income brackets. Their financial peers include CEO's, business owners, Hollywood entertainers, extremely successful lawyers such as partners in firms, professional investors and a tiny selection of individuals with enormous inherited wealth. Since those individuals have little or nothing in common with the group you mentioned...college graduates as a stand alone group or others "capable of getting an education"...you could just as easily compare this income bracket to Harvard business school graduates and still come up short, let alone generic "college graduates". NFL incomes held by people who are 70% black and who spent roughly 18-22 years in urban neighborhoods experiencing the other risk factor for arrest (poverty) cannot possibly be likened by any sensible person to the same experience that white CEO's, business owners, professional investors or trust fund babies experience. I know you understand this because you're smart, hence I view your poorly constructed efforts to ignore the obvious and paint me as intellectually dishonest as a designed effort to misconstrue facts to your own advantage.

I never said any such thing. Your objective here is obviously to selectively pull information out of context and twist it to suit your own purposes. This study was done by a newspaper that went looking for some very basic facts that any freshman in college ought to recognize as rather germane to this discussion, yet somehow you've managed to find a way to dispute the relevance of the information merely by casting out the possibility of impropriety on the part of the paper without showing justification for that. If you can prove their data is falsified, or show reason's why the arrest rate for NFL players being lower than it is for society at large is illegitimate based on something other than horrendously flawed efforts to classify them along with white CEO's, millionaire investors, and partners in law firms...please do so.

I never said otherwise. In fact none of the commentary I've produced in this thread has anything to do with my personal views on social justice, racial politics or the inadequacies of the American justice system. 100% of it has to do with me commenting on the the baseless effort to denigrate the findings of the paper based on some kind of mythical comparison that falsely utilizes statistics to prove something other than what the data actually suggests.

Well as most intelligent people know and all who have integrity enough to admit it...we do not have the same system or standards of justice in this country. We have two...one for you and me and one for people who don't look like you and me...I'm sorry that pointing that out to you rubs you the wrong way but maybe you ought to look in the mirror before casting stones and accusing somebody else of a hidden agenda, which is what most of your little hit and run shots at me generally do.

I think yours is the hidden agenda...and I see through it like freshly polished glass.

First of all footsteps. TOO MANY WORDS. It is possible to express yourself without the excess.

You seem inordinately preoccupied with the fact that I hold views related to social justice or racial politics that don't jibe with your expectations of white men.

In fact it's exactly the opposite. You hold the exact views I expect from a whilte man.

Perhaps you're one of these people who is offended by someone choosing to think for themselves rather than parrot the party line along racial, economic or political lines like most of the lemmings in our society.

Wierd. Because I believe your thoughts are those which completely parrot racial, economic or political lines in our society. That's my main problem with them.

Jason has more posts than I do...I think you might find half a dozen points where I've made it a point to agree with him. I'm sure I can find dozens of places you agree with someone else, so what is your point...that I'm obligated to hold opinions dictated to me by my race? If so that's narrow minded in the extreme

I'm not sure what post count has to do with anything so I put that in the reflex justification category. My point is, you seem to go out of your way to compliment Jason as a thinking black man. His posts stand on their own merit without that type of congratulatory pandering.

Short of arbitrarily calling the writer a liar and mounting an accusation of forged data or deliberate misrepresentation, there is no basis for determining bias without examining the original research the writer was working with.

Very dramatic but has nothing to do with the discourse. The statement:

Just because you want to take the statistical data here and believe in it implicitly, doesn't make it any more or less correct than other comparisons- says nothing even suggestive about forged data or deliberate misrepresentation.

It simply states the data used for one study is not any more or less correct than data used in studies using different data for comparisons. If you take it at face value all the rest of the Dick Tracy stuff is pretty silly.

If by "assumption" you mean "baseless" assumption...you're wrong.

If I meant baseless assumptions I would've said so. And I would be wrong. But I didn't say it, don't think it. So that pretty much wipes out the hysterics following that statement.

No actually you are assuming that I'm assuming several things I've not said. Roughly 70% of NFL players have more similarities to their own demographic sub group that engages in criminal behavior than they do to ultra wealthy people who have not been exposed to similar risk factors for arrest...very basic stuff here.

No actually I'm assuming that you aren't using similarities to their own demographic sub group. I don't want to compare them to ultre wealthy people who have not been exposed to similar risk factors. I want to compare them directly to their peers. As in their own teammates who came from the exact same background and have not engaged in criminal behaviors. I don't believe there is a pandemic of criminal behavior in the NFL because the very statistics stated in the number of blacks in that organization prove otherwise. By far the majority of black people within the ranks in the NFL do not engage in criminal behavior while coming from the exact same background as those who do.

To my way of thinking to compare wealthy black players in the NFL to Drug Dealers based on income figures is disengenous in itself - and highly prejudicial.

I never said otherwise.

I took posts #81. #83 and #87 to be saying otherwise. To tell someone they can't make a different type of comparison based upon the one study you chose to post is close minded. That study doesn't use comparative salaries as it's basis but that doesn't mean you simply dismiss anyone who does want to use that type of comparison.

Well as most intelligent people know and all who have integrity enough to admit it...we do not have the same system or standards of justice in this country. We have two...one for you and me and one for people who don't look like you and me...I'm sorry that pointing that out to you rubs you the wrong way but maybe you ought to look in the mirror before casting stones and accusing somebody else of a hidden agenda, which is what most of your little hit and run shots at me generally do

This isn't a discussion about standards of justice so I don't know why this paragraph was even thown in. Just for the record though, there are more than two standards. You and I don't share the same one either, and we don't look alike. It's your pompous attitude you think you need to point out the obvious is what rubs me the wrong way.

Disagreeing with you does not constitute either a hidden agenda or qualify as hit and run shots. But then anyone with intelligence and integrity would get that without saying it. Right?

[footstepsfrom#27]

If i am wrong than by all means put some stats up to back up your arguement. You know you want to. lol
Nope...don't need to back this up because it's not in dispute. You do your own research if you're really so ignorant of this that you doubt it. I'm sure you know how to use Google right?

[Beantown Bronco]

One could argue that Goodell views the NFL as becoming a thug league....hence the new harsher punishments and the overall cracking down on bad behavior.

[Popps]

Are you planning on addressing any point in this thread at any time? Have you read the article yet? It surely doesn't seem like it.

Yea, I already addressed it. It's nonsense. But, I'll cover it again...

-The arrest rate for the general population (about one per 21 people) is higher than the NFL's.

Right out of the gate, this fallacy is just wrought with problems. First off, we're talking about a business... NOT the general population, which includes the unemployed and likely those incarcerated.

Compare the NFL to your average ad firm, or law firm, or charity group.

Right out of the gate, this idiot is comparing apples to oranges.

-The NFL acknowledges it has an image problem because of these incidents, much more so than it has a criminal epidemic.

Wow, so... let's just take the NFL's word on that. O.J. says he'll find the real killer. But, you probably buy that, too.

-The most prevalent charge was driving under the influence, which accounted for almost a third of the arrests. Over half of all incidents came after traffic stops or were vehicle-related, including DUIs and searches that turned up drugs or guns.


Millionaires that are too ****ing stupid to hire a driver, and then so astoundingly stupid that they carry their dope with them.

Yea, nothing to see, here.

-“You can say for sure the athletes have a problem, but athletes are not the problem,” said Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida. “They are representative of society where many of these issues are epidemic.”
-They are problems society hasn't solved, let alone the NFL.

Horse ****.

I probably know 300 people intimately. One of them has a DUI. None of the rest have been hit for anything beyond a speeding ticket.

There's no epidemic of dog fighting at my job. There's never been any epidemic at ANY job I've had. This is just more apologetic horse **** from the "it's not their fault" set.

-Take away 50 repeat offenders in the NFL since 2000, and you eliminate almost 40 percent of the incidents.

Good god, if you could read past that line without laughing.... you're a good cult material.

That's like a kid coming home from school and saying... well, if you took away all of the F's I got on my test, I really got a C.




So, yea... I read your skewed, goofball article. Looks like more stroking from another NFL lapdog.

Other stats put the NFL crime rate at 20%. Using your own eyes, it should be apparent that there's a problem. But, again... you are always hell bent on defending the criminal element.

[Atlas]

It's not just a league of thugs, its a league of pampered and enabled thugs.

The worst of whom ,in my mind, is no worse than Bill Romanowski.

Maybe you don't like Romo but he never wrecked his car drunk, he never beat his wife or his child. He never fought pitbulls or got caught soliciting a prostitute. I love Romo. His whole life was about football. He ate, drank and slept it. I love that dedication to team. Romo never did anything that Dick Butkus didn't do. Sure Romo was a jerk on the field that's why opponents hated him. He got under their skin and he played balls out every play.

[footstepsfrom#27]

In fact it's exactly the opposite. You hold the exact views I expect from a whilte man.
Odd then that I find my views on issues of race mostly supported on this board by blacks...but you're entitled to think what you wish.
Wierd. Because I believe your thoughts are those which completely parrot racial, economic or political lines in our society. That's my main problem with them.
Is that right? So I guess you can tell me what my political affiliation is...correct? Let's hear it.
I'm not sure what post count has to do with anything so I put that in the reflex justification category. My point is, you seem to go out of your wayto compliment Jason as a thinking black man. His posts stand on their own merit without that type of congratulatory pandering.
So if I agree with you will you consider it "congratulatory pandering"? Or is that just reserved for when I find myself in agreement with somebody who happens to be black? Just wondering because I think you do quite a bit of congratulatory pandering yourself don't ya sister? Unlike you however, I've never bothered to care who you agree with or who you don't. Odd that you find it strange that out of thousands of posts made by Jason you could isolate a tiny fraction where I expressly stated agreement with a black guy and call it "pandering"...wonder what that means?
Just because you want to take the statistical data here and believe in it implicitly, doesn't make it any more or less correct than other comparisons- says nothing even suggestive about forged data or deliberate misrepresentation.
I'll spell it out for you...in the absence of known evidence to the contrary such as established conflict of fiduciary interest, prior record of known bias, or examples of deliberate misbehavior (NBA Dateline)...there is no reason to suspect that raw statistical data with straightforward application to the question at hand which can easily be checked by the public or other media commentators is anything less than correct. You allude to "other comparisons", which I take to be a reference to the book which the newspaper referred to. Since co-author Don Yaeger draws speaking fees of $5000 to $7000 per engagement, I'm not troubled by holding him at arms length when it comes to his claims, nor that the paper contradicts them. Right off the bat I found immediate evidence of shaky research because the author admits to using arrests in college or other prior NFL time as part of his formula for computing his figures. On the other hand the paper used the same methodology as the FBI in drawing comparisons between NFL players and the general population. Good rule of thumb...when in doubt use FBI crime statistical methodology as opposed to what an author says.

The burden of proof is on the doubter to show evidence of bias on the part of the paper here. It's clear if you read the story that not only does the paper qualify it's research, but they plainly state potential limits, which is always something to keep an eye on. When you find people who claim their data is infallible...be suspicious. In the wake of what looks like potential bias from the original researchers with obvious profit incentives, I'm justified in holding their data up to scrutiny...and so is the paper. I repeat again...do you have any evidence that corroborates the original thesis of the book and diminishes that of the paper? Can you even identify the sources for the information you claim is contained in "other comparisons"? If not...why are you so easily able to accept information based on questionable practices of research?
It simply states the data used for one study is not any more or less correct than data used in studies using different data for comparisons.
Please produce such data and links where I may review it, since you are telling me the data is of equal value, as well as the additional studies you speak of so I can compare their conclusions against those of both the book and the work done by the paper.
I don't believe there is a pandemic of criminal behavior in the NFL because the very statistics stated in the number of blacks in that organization prove otherwise.
Good grief...then what are you whining about?
To my way of thinking to compare wealthy black players in the NFL to Drug Dealers based on income figures is disengenous in itself - and highly prejudicial.
Nope...I didn't say you should use this as the basis for comparison. I said these individuals share more characteristics in common with NFL players than those suggested by other posters on the basis of income alone, which they do. You made the leap in logic that I wanted to use the two groups to compare each other. You missed the absurdity that seems obvious...
I took posts #81. #83 and #87 to be saying otherwise. To tell someone they can't make a different type of comparison based upon the one study you chose to post is close minded. That study doesn't use comparative salaries as it's basis but that doesn't mean you simply dismiss anyone who does want to use that type of comparison.
You have some reading comprehension issues. And yes...I CAN simply dismiss anyone who chooses to use a single point of comparison to establish relevance for research that purports to support the idea that black NFL players face similar risk factors as white CEO's based on income levels because that is BAD RESEARCH methodology, faulty analysis and ignores accepted practices for handling statistical data sets between disparate groups of subjects.
This isn't a discussion about standards of justice so I don't know why this paragraph was even thown in. Just for the record though, there are more than two standards.
My reference was to the "double standard"...ie the one that exists along racial lines in this country. If you would like to propose three I'm cool with that as well. But you're splitting hairs and I'm quite sure you know that.
You and I don't share the same one either, and we don't look alike. It's your pompous attitude you think you need to point out the obvious is what rubs me the wrong way.
If you're white and middle class we are looked upon far more equally than we are differently by the justice system. I can't imagine why you'd even dispute this.
Disagreeing with you does not constitute either a hidden agenda or qualify as hit and run shots. But then anyone with intelligence and integrity would get that without saying it. Right?
You have a history of accusing me of hypocrisy and even in this thread you suggest some kind of clandestine undercurrent related to my occasional notations of agreement with Jason, so don't hand me the little innocent girl routine like you think I'm stupid enough to buy it. You know perfectly well you've offered numerous veiled suggestions that I have some kind of hidden agenda and you make frequent use of the opportunity to claim as much from your own little high horse. As for hit and run shots I've noted you generally disappear as soon as your argument is countered and return once you find another issue you can pick at...so yeah...you're a hit and run wonder in my book.

[cutthemdown]

Maybe you don't like Romo but he never wrecked his car drunk, he never beat his wife or his child. He never fought pitbulls or got caught soliciting a prostitute. I love Romo. His whole life was about football. He ate, drank and slept it. I love that dedication to team. Romo never did anything that Dick Butkus didn't do. Sure Romo was a jerk on the field that's why opponents hated him. He got under their skin and he played balls out every play.

Romo is one of my all time favorite Broncos. Being a dirty player and a jerk is not the same thing as being a criminal. Romo did get into some trouble with the law though, but it was all over roids, i mean supplements. I don't care though Romo played his ass off for the Broncos.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

That should still work out to about 2%. Really? I hope math wasn't your major.

If we are going by total arrest from 2000, we have to factor in all of the players that have played since 2000. Even with a 30% turnover year to year (which there isn't) that would equal about 3000 players.

There is no way that 20% of the league has been arrested. How can that be when only 2% of the league gets arrested per year, and many of those arrests are by repeat offenders?Says who? And the stats are arrested and or charged. Then you have other guys that like Pac Man that haven't been either.

Anyway you want to spin it, it's still lower than the national average.One would sure hope so considering the amount of education and money these players have. Keep in mind crime rate stats also include repeat offenders. But take a look at the nation's crime overall rate crime rate of 4.6% (2005 FBI Crime Reports) and tell me again what group has a higher percentage?

[Jason in LA]

Yea, I already addressed it. It's nonsense. But, I'll cover it again...

-The arrest rate for the general population (about one per 21 people) is higher than the NFL's.

Right out of the gate, this fallacy is just wrought with problems. First off, we're talking about a business... NOT the general population, which includes the unemployed and likely those incarcerated.

Compare the NFL to your average ad firm, or law firm, or charity group.

Right out of the gate, this idiot is comparing apples to oranges.

-The NFL acknowledges it has an image problem because of these incidents, much more so than it has a criminal epidemic.

Wow, so... let's just take the NFL's word on that. O.J. says he'll find the real killer. But, you probably buy that, too.

-The most prevalent charge was driving under the influence, which accounted for almost a third of the arrests. Over half of all incidents came after traffic stops or were vehicle-related, including DUIs and searches that turned up drugs or guns.


Millionaires that are too ****ing stupid to hire a driver, and then so astoundingly stupid that they carry their dope with them.

Yea, nothing to see, here.

-“You can say for sure the athletes have a problem, but athletes are not the problem,” said Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida. “They are representative of society where many of these issues are epidemic.”
-They are problems society hasn't solved, let alone the NFL.

Horse ****.

I probably know 300 people intimately. One of them has a DUI. None of the rest have been hit for anything beyond a speeding ticket.

There's no epidemic of dog fighting at my job. There's never been any epidemic at ANY job I've had. This is just more apologetic horse **** from the "it's not their fault" set.

-Take away 50 repeat offenders in the NFL since 2000, and you eliminate almost 40 percent of the incidents.

Good god, if you could read past that line without laughing.... you're a good cult material.

That's like a kid coming home from school and saying... well, if you took away all of the F's I got on my test, I really got a C.




So, yea... I read your skewed, goofball article. Looks like more stroking from another NFL lapdog.

Other stats put the NFL crime rate at 20%. Using your own eyes, it should be apparent that there's a problem. But, again... you are always hell bent on defending the criminal element.

Well of course you think it's nonsense, because it kills your notion that the NFL is a league full of criminals.

I'm not surprised that you used the same argument that others have used to dismiss these stats. I see you can't think on your own.

I don't buy that argument at all. And that argument implies that rich people don't get DUIs, or commit other crimes. I wouldn't be shocked if the average for rich people are similar to the national average, especially for DUIs.

What does OJ have to do with this? He is not the NFL's problem. You are reaching for anything at this point.

You say these millionairs are too stupid to get a driver. But millionairs in all walks of life get DUIs. I wouldn't say it's a lower of middle class crime. Is that what you are saying?

Are you that naive that you think that you know every detail of those 300 people? Do people broadcast their issues? If you got a DUI, would you tell those 300 people about it? Probably not. You really don't know how many of them have a DUI, or how many of them may have been arrested. Everybody has some unflattering details about them that they don't tell others. It would be silly to think that a person would get arrested, and then get on the phone or send out a mass email to all of his friends to let them know about it. You would probably be shocked about some of the details that some of your friends haven't told you about. I'm sure that you have some details that you have kept to yourself. That was a silly example.

It's funny that you so easily dismissed real numbers that kills your argument.

2% of the league gets arrested per year and you are going crazy. That's just silly.

If you hate these players so much, stop watching and shut the f*** up.

[-Slap-]

You really don't have to explain yourself to Tredici. From my dealings with her (a very loose her at that) I have come away with the impression she is very insecure and tends to "jump on bandwagons" sort to speak so she will have a calvary of toadies -- Slap in particular -- licking her ass and bowing down in agreeance.

If you were to go back and read how many times Slap and Tredici have sent each other virtual rimjobs you, too, would blush.

Hey, Tredici, get in here and control your b****. The undisciplined mutt is ****ting all over the place again.

[Popps]

Well of course you think it's nonsense, because it kills your notion that the NFL is a league full of criminals.
.

Not full, just 20%. Way more than any job I've ever been associated with. Maybe you work with 1/5th criminals, but most of us don't.

I'm not surprised that you used the same argument that others have used to dismiss these stats. I see you can't think on your own. .

Hey Jason.... I also agree with the rest of the forum that the earth is round.
Maybe the more important clue here is that so many people are telling you you're full of ****.

You say these millionairs are too stupid to get a driver. But millionairs in all walks of life get DUIs. I wouldn't say it's a lower of middle class crime. Is that what you are saying?.

Ummm... I'm saying these are millionaires that are too stupid to hire drivers. Didn't I already say it? There, I said it again.

The fact that "other people do bad things, too" is absolutely irrelevant.

Are you that naive that you think that you know every detail of those 300 people?.

Jason, I said I know them INTIMATELY. That means they're close friends, family or close enough acquaintances that I know those types of issues.
So, yes is the answer. I absolutely know for a FACT. That clear it up for you?

You would probably be shocked about some of the details that some of your friends haven't told you about. I'm sure that you have some details that you have kept to yourself. That was a silly example..

No, it was a perfectly valid and simple example. If your friends have dog fights and kill people, that's your own issue. Mine don't, and my co-workers don't. Is it POSSIBLE that one of the people I know has a DUI and is hiding it from me? Sure. (Aside from the aforementioned) Is it possible that 1 in 5 have criminal pasts.... no.

So, yes, it was a simple, logical, valid example of an everyday person with everyday friends, family and co-workers. (Who don't kill people at nightclubs.)

If you hate these players so much, stop watching and shut the **** up.

Talk about copping other people's arguments, and a stupid one at that.

Jason, if one of your criminal buddies in the NFL that you idolize so heavily came over to your house and lit it on fire.... would you just "stop living there?"

Why not?

Perhaps because you like your home?

Ahhh.... so, you don't really want someone ****ting on something you cherish, huh?

Great. I feel the same way about your criminal heros.

[Popps]

Hey, I'll say one thing for the NFL... it's not the NBA....

Forty percent of NBA players have criminal records. Read that again. That means that on average, there are four guys on the court at any given time who have committed a criminal offense.

http://daily.stanford.org/article/2005/2/16/nbasImageIsPureMadness

I'm sure Jason has a perfectly good explanation, though.

[Jason in LA]

Not full, just 20%. Way more than any job I've ever been associated with. Maybe you work with 1/5th criminals, but most of us don't.



Hey Jason.... I also agree with the rest of the forum that the earth is round.
Maybe the more important clue here is that so many people are telling you you're full of ****.



Ummm... I'm saying these are millionaires that are too stupid to hire drivers. Didn't I already say it? There, I said it again.

The fact that "other people do bad things, too" is absolutely irrelevant.



Jason, I said I know them INTIMATELY. That means they're close friends, family or close enough acquaintances that I know those types of issues.
So, yes is the answer. I absolutely know for a FACT. That clear it up for you?



No, it was a perfectly valid and simple example. If your friends have dog fights and kill people, that's your own issue. Mine don't, and my co-workers don't. Is it POSSIBLE that one of the people I know has a DUI and is hiding it from me? Sure. Is it possible that 1 in 5 have criminal pasts.... no.

So, yes, it was a simple, logical, valid example of an everyday person with everyday friends, family and co-workers. (Who don't kill people at nightclubs.)



Talk about copping other people's arguments, and a stupid one at that.

Jason, if one of your criminal buddies in the NFL that you idolize so heavily came over to your house and lit it on fire.... would you just "stop living there?"

Why not?

Perhaps because you like your home?

Ahhh.... so, you don't really want someone ****ting on something you cherish, huh?

Great. I feel the same way about your criminal heros.


Who is telling me that I'm full of it? Some members in this thread have agreed with me. And some have said that not everybody on the board feels that the NFL is full of thugs. Have you been reading the posts in this thread?

Not all of your close friends or family members are going to tell you everything. I guess in your prefect little world that would be true, but that's not how people work. You don't know as much as you think you do. And you think you really know that much about 300 people? That's silly.

So you think that if you friend has a DUI and doesn't tell you , he's hiding it from you? Man, do you think that you are that important? It would suck to be your friend. Some things are private, including to friends.


So if there is so much of a criminal epidemic in the NFL, then shouldn't there be higher than 2% arrest rate? You think that's a criminal epidemic.

You keep coming up with this 20% number, but none of us can prove that number. The author of the article that I provided, and the NFL, refuted that number. We can easily see the 2% stat is true. Do the math on it. There are 1800 players. And 42 or so arrests. That's 2%. And seeing that half of the crimes are non-violent crimes, that means that only about 1% of the crimes could be considered violent crimes.

So, do you think that a person with a DUI is a bad person? You know that there is a very well respected member of the OM that has a DUI. Is that person a thug? Brian Griese has a DUI. Is he a thug? It was said in John Elway's ESPN Classic show that the cops let him go when they caught him drinking and driving. I guess Elway is a thug too.

Just face it, when you watch a football game, most of the players that you are watching obey the law. If you don't like it, then why do you watch? Turn it off.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So if there is so much of a criminal epidemic in the NFL, then shouldn't there be higher than 2% arrest rate? You think that's a criminal epidemic.
308 since 2000 says your article or about 10% of those total players. Twice the rate of the national average of 4.6%.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Not full, just 20%. Way more than any job I've ever been associated with. Maybe you work with 1/5th criminals, but most of us don't.
Two questions for you:
First, I'm curious since you summarily dismissed the newspaper's findings in your approach to the reliability of the data in the book, (which was admitted by the authors to be based on statistics that; 1) count arrests before a player was in the NFL, and 2) admittedly do not conform to the standards set by the FBI for measuring this data)...why you think the book's data represents the more accurate statistics?

Second, do you see any greater potential conflict of fiduciary interest for authors who use speaking engagements for thousands of dollars an hour to talk about their book versus a news reporter who so far as we know has not profited off the research done by the paper that specifically disputes the book's findings? If not...why not? The first thing any analyst asks of research is whether or not there is a potential financial motive or other conflict of interest involved for the researchers. Second is whether there are potential issues of accuracy with the methodology or the data.

Since both these are potentially true in this case, upon what justification do you base your decision to use the book's findings as opposed to those of the paper that disagree?

[Popps]

[QUOTE=Jason in LA;1583416So you think that if you friend has a DUI and doesn't tell you , he's hiding it from you? Man, do you think that you are that important? It would suck to be your friend. Some things are private, including to friends. .[/QUOTE]

I've explained this three times, now. You want to keep piddling around with it, go ahead. You've got no basis for what you're saying, so I'm not surprised.


Like I said... you just keep on defending your criminal idols. Maybe the league can go to **** like the NBA, and we'll see the 20% number double to 40.

[orange 4 life]

What I find more disturbing than the arrest records for NFL players, which I agree is mostly a problem blown out of proportion by media hysteria is the practice of sweeping serious criminal behavior under the rug that we see colleges doing with male athletes that help universities make millions in their high profile sports programs. Goodell's policy of get tough is a good thing, and it needs to be adopted by the NCAA as well.


exactly.

everyone can focus on (and argue) the validity of the stats till theyre blue in the face, but at the end of the day the bigger issue is whats done with those men that ARE breaking the law.
if a guy like mike vick walks away from this, you better believe thats a black eye for the NFL and reporters will take HIS actions and transfer them to the rest of the league, most of which are innocent no matter what stats youre using.

is it a "league of thugs"?

no, but those thugs IN the league need to be dealt with swiftly and HARSHLY.

[Popps]

Two questions for you:
First, I'm curious since you summarily dismissed the newspaper's findings in your approach to the reliability of the data in the book, (which was admitted by the authors to be based on statistics that; 1) count arrests before a player was in the NFL, and 2) admittedly do not conform to the standards set by the FBI for measuring this data)...why you think the book's data represents the more accurate statistics?

Second, do you see any greater potential conflict of fiduciary interest for authors who use speaking engagements for thousands of dollars an hour to talk about their book versus a news reporter who so far as we know has not profited off the research done by the paper that specifically disputes the book's findings? If not...why not? The first thing any analyst asks of research is whether or not there is a potential financial motive or other conflict of interest involved for the researchers. Second is whether there are potential issues of accuracy with the methodology or the data.

Since both these are potentially true in this case, upon what justification do you base your decision to use the book's findings as opposed to those of the paper that disagree?

Wow, Tredici's right. You're wordy. Good lord. Get to the point.

Sure, both parties can have a slant. Thanks for blowing the lid off of that one.

I actually base my opinion on the fact that I can't go to the front page of any given NFL site without seeing 2 to 3 stories at any given time about NFL players beating up their wives, running dog-fight rings, beating up people in nightclubs, etc.

Conversely, I'm an active participant in the stock market. That means I follow companies of all sizes, and have never seen one with the willingness to continue to hire criminals, much less the rate of criminal activity that the NFL seems to contain.

See, other companies get in trouble if their employees are stabbing people at nightclubs. The NFL sweeps it under the rug, and puts the guy on the cover of Madden the next year.

[Popps]

308 since 2000 says your article or about 10% of those total players. Twice the rate of the national average of 4.6%.

Plus, again... the idiocy of that article is to compare a group of highly paid professionals to homeless, incarcerated and jobless.

Compare apples to apples.

Take your average hospital full of doctors, nurses and maintenance people... and compare that percentage to the NFL.

I wonder who's running more drugs and fighting more Pit Bulls?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Hey, I'll say one thing for the NFL... it's not the NBA....

Forty percent of NBA players have criminal records. Read that again. That means that on average, there are four guys on the court at any given time who have committed a criminal offense.

http://daily.stanford.org/article/2005/2/16/nbasImageIsPureMadness

I'm sure Jason has a perfectly good explanation, though.

Hmmm, well the NFL looks a lot better after reading that but I wonder what the rates are for MLB and the NHL?

The Pacers-Pistons brawl was a supposed watershed moment after which nothing would be the same. But was anyone really surprised? Forty percent of NBA players have criminal records. Read that again. That means that on average, there are four guys on the court at any given time who have committed a criminal offense. So when Stephen Jackson and Ron Artest turned into “Bad Dudes” for the original NES, I wasn’t shocked. Even when everyone got all weepy over the Pistons’ championship last year as the triumph over the big, bad Lakers, you knew there was a time bomb ticking somewhere.

There’s a lot of hand-wringing going on lately, as if David Stern were wondering why so many of his players are acting like criminals. You know why? Because they are criminals. No matter how many United Way ads I see, my spokesman for the NBA will still be Zach Randolph, about whom his high school coach once said, “I just don’t want the day to come where I pick up that paper and it says [Zach] shot someone or that he was shot. Every day that goes by that I don’t see that, I feel good.” Whether the NBA likes it or not (and it’s not entirely clear), its players have portrayed themselves to the community at large as ignorant (Jason Williams), violent (Ron Artest) and promiscuous (Shawn Kemp).

[orange 4 life]

The fact that drug money is obtained illegally is not germane to the point....

uhhh, yeah it is.

working as an NFL player isnt illegal.
selling drugs IS illegal.

wouldnt you agree that one who's primary job is IN ITSELF a crime is probably a bit more likely to be arrested than someone who's job isnt a crime?

youve made alot of good points (and my concern is more with whats done TO the criminals as opposed to how many there are), but this one is ludicrous as you must already know.
talk about skewing stats. whew!!

[footstepsfrom#27]

Hey, I'll say one thing for the NFL... it's not the NBA....

Forty percent of NBA players have criminal records. Read that again. That means that on average, there are four guys on the court at any given time who have committed a criminal offense.
That's not true either. How do we know? Because co-author Jeff Benedict admitted that the stats he used for his book on the NBA were based on incomplete data. He also admits the statistics he used in the book on the NFL that we are debating here were also wrong, and in fact states that the data on assault and domestic violence is less than half that of both blacks and whites in society...the same thing that the newspaper says as well. I ask you again...upon what basis did you conclude the paper's report false and a book published for profit whose co-author admits was based on false data was correct?

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0604/grove061804.asp

NBA numbers crunch; rap reversal?; strange bedfellows;

http://www.jewishworldreview.com | NEW YORK — ; There are — as Mark Twain said — lies, damned lies, and statistics.

But worst of all, says the National Basketball Association, there are Jeff Benedict's statistics.

On Thursday, NBA Commissioner David Stern's minions launched a full-court press against the Connecticut author's just-published expose of the league, "Out of Bounds: Inside the NBA's Culture of Rape, Violence & Crime."

They're outraged by Benedict's claim — touted prominently on the book jacket — that a jaw-dropping 40 percent of NBA players have police records.

"Criminal conduct is always a matter of serious concern," said Tim Andre, senior vice president of NBA communications. "But this guy Jeff Benedict has conjured up a few previously well-publicized incidents and is trying to use them as a springboard for fabricating this grossly inaccurate statistic that unjustly disparages all NBA players."

The NBA says the real figure is far lower, and Benedict himself acknowledges that his results are based on only 42 percent of the 450-player population.


He says the reason for the skewed sample is that 49 players from foreign countries were excluded ("I'm not going to go filing public records requests in Lithuania and France," he told me), and that U.S. law enforcement agencies provided information on only 177 players.

Benedict writes in "Out of Bounds," which received a favorable review from Publisher's Weekly, that if he had collected complete data, "it is conceivable that the 40 percent arrest rate for NBA players would drop."

On Thursday, he dismissed the NBA's complaints.

"That's just spin, and probably the only thing they can do is criticize these numbers," Benedict told me. "But this book isn't about statistics. It's about real stories of NBA players who have committed crimes and continued to play in the NBA."

Benedict is an old hand at raising hackles in the sports world with controversial numbers. His 1999 book, "Pros and Cons: The Criminals Who Play in the NFL," claimed that a whopping 21 percent of National Football League players had been arrested for serious crimes.

But in a subsequent article in the statistical journal Chance, Benedict and a co-author made a stunning correction, admitting that "the NFL rates (Assault/Domestic Violence) are less than half the general population rates for both whites and blacks."

Maybe this is a more relevant statistic: the Amazon.com sales rank for "Out of Bounds" was 3,681 on Thursday.

[-Slap-]

exactly.

everyone can focus on (and argue) the validity of the stats till theyre blue in the face, but at the end of the day the bigger issue is whats done with those men that ARE breaking the law.
if a guy like mike vick walks away from this, you better believe thats a black eye for the NFL and reporters will take HIS actions and transfer them to the rest of the league, most of which are innocent no matter what stats youre using.

is it a "league of thugs"?

no, but those thugs IN the league need to be dealt with swiftly and HARSHLY.

Instead, punishments are usually slaps on the wrist. The athletes are rarely contrite about their actions. Openly defiant is a more likely attitude. Why shouldn't Michael Irvin be incredulous when the police actually have the temerity to arrest him? Do they know who he is? Apparently ESPN does, because about the dozenth time this lowlife is caught with a crack pipe, they suspended him for about a dozen days.

The League enables these bad actors because of the resources they have invested in them. The fans don't have that excuse. Despite that, I can't really blame Jason for bending over backwards to defend Michael Vick, despite overwhelming evidence to show Vick is a piece of trash. Jason and apologist fans like him are easily manipulated. Most of them aren't real deep thinkers (Jasson certainly isn't) and they want someone to lie to them about this stuff anyway.

Footstepsfrom32 has essentially the same opinion of the abilities of black people as the average white supremacist in that he already expects most underprivileged blacks to fail miserably. The divergence is he wants to supply them with excuses for aberrant behavior long after they've achieved success and the chains of poverty have been lifted.

Any fool knows the difference between right and wrong and only a condescending fool excuses a person of privilege who insists on conducting himself like some desperate criminal.

[RhymesayersDU]

Hey, I'll say one thing for the NFL... it's not the NBA....

Forty percent of NBA players have criminal records. Read that again. That means that on average, there are four guys on the court at any given time who have committed a criminal offense.

http://daily.stanford.org/article/2005/2/16/nbasImageIsPureMadness

I'm sure Jason has a perfectly good explanation, though.

Wait a minute here. I had a feeling this thread would turn to the NBA at some point, and I didn't really want to jump into it, but I have to take issue with saying 40% of the NBA has a criminal record as fact.

I clicked the link you provided, and here is what I saw:

The Pacers-Pistons brawl was a supposed watershed moment after which nothing would be the same. But was anyone really surprised? Forty percent of NBA players have criminal records. Read that again. That means that on average, there are four guys on the court at any given time who have committed a criminal offense. So when Stephen Jackson and Ron Artest turned into “Bad Dudes” for the original NES, I wasn’t shocked. Even when everyone got all weepy over the Pistons’ championship last year as the triumph over the big, bad Lakers, you knew there was a time bomb ticking somewhere.

Look, I'm not here to say the NBA players are angels, nor do I really feel like defending the NBA on a board that is for the most part anti-basketball.

But, I do what to say this:
1) Read just that paragraph. This college junior spouts off a number of 40% without any citations or facts to back it up. Just says 40% as Gospel and moves on with his point.
2) The guy is a college junior, barely 21 years old I'd imagine. Stanford or not, he's not a professional journalist and it shows.

Like I said, I'm not trying to say the NBA guys are all angels. But if we're going to bash the NBA, let's try and do it with some better information than from some college junior who provides no facts or citations in his piece.

For the amount of arguing that has been going on in this thread over statistics and their validity, I find it pretty amusing that somebody is willing to take this guy's word as Gospel. Anything to push your own agenda, I suppose.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I actually base my opinion on the fact that I can't go to the front page of any given NFL site without seeing 2 to 3 stories at any given time about NFL players beating up their wives, running dog-fight rings, beating up people in nightclubs, etc.
OK...now we're getting somewhere. You admit you're opinion is based on your perception of media coverage not on facts, legitimate research or accurate data. Fine.

Given that you now know that the co-authors of the book admitted that their data was flawed and in fact records indicated that what the paper has been saying is true, do you still intend to stand by the falsity that 20% of NFL players and 40% of NBA players have criminal records or not?

[Cito Pelon]

No matter what segment of human society you look at, usually it's only about 10% of that segment that makes the rest of the group look bad.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Wait a minute here. I had a feeling this thread would turn to the NBA at some point, and I didn't really want to jump into it, but I have to take issue with saying 40% of the NBA has a criminal record as fact.
This debate is over. The authors admitted their data was flawed and placed the numbers in line with what the newspaper recorded.

Game...Set...Match.

[-Slap-]

No matter what segment of human society you look at, usually it's only about 10% of that segment that makes the rest of the group look bad.

But, Cito, you're in that 10%, bandido.

8')

[footstepsfrom#27]

Why did the authors of this book admit they skewed the statistics? Because professional statisticians caught them in a lie and published their findings. LOL....you've all been arguing for something the authors now admit was wrong...to funny.

http://www.amstat.org/pressroom/index.cfm?fuseaction=nflcrime

Chance Receives National Media Attention

Recent events have placed a media spotlight on Chance, a general-interest statistics publication of the American Statistical Association.

In the past two months, two NFL players have been charged with murder: Baltimore Ravens all-pro linebacker Ray Lewis and Carolina Panthers wide receiver Rae Carruth. The charges against these men have stirred debate over whether professional football players are more prone to violent behavior than members of the general population, a debate that was a feature of the coverage of the O.J. Simpson trial.

This topic of the seeming prevalence of violence among football players was tackled by Chance months ago in an article by Alfred Blumstein and Jeff Benedict. Their article grew out of the book Pros and Cons by Benedict and Don Yaeger, which describes the high rate of arrest by NFL football players and suggests corrective action is needed. In "Criminal Violence of NFL Players Compared to the General Population" (Chance, Vol. 12, No. 3, Summer 1999, pp. 12-15), Chance authors present data that demonstrate the violent crime rate among professional football players is actually less than that among other males of the same age and race.

Benedict and Yaegar collected data concerning arrest records of 509 NFL players. Their book reports that 21 percent of 509 NFL players had been arrested for something more serious than a minor brush with the law. The Chance article calculates rates for the general population and compares them to those of the football players, and concludes that despite what may appear to be a high prevalence rate of arrests for serious offenses among NFL players, these players in fact "seem to have a lower [crime] rate than the comparable population," even though they are members of a profession that rewards violence on the football field.

Since Lewis' January 31 arrest, ASA has been contacted for comment by CNBC, ABC News, the Chicago Tribune, and U.S. News. The Washington Post published a February 2 analysis mentioning ASA and its magazine; the New York Times likewise cited the article in support of a statement by NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue at the time of the Carruth case, to the effect that the track record of his players is far better than that of society at large. The Times article says in part that "an article last year by Alfred Blumstein and Jeff Benedict in Chance magazine, which is published by the American Statistical Association, reported that the crime rate among professional football players was much lower than that among other people of the same age and racial background overall."

The Blumstein and Benedict article can be found at the Chance web site http://www.public.iastate.edu/~chance99.

[Popps]

Highly unlikely.

For every Pac Man there are Guys like Manning, Lynch, Brady, Champ, Brees, LT and on and on.

I agree. They're not ALL thugs. You're absolutely right. Just way too many of them, and the NFL coddles their asses, just like the college systems did.

Just because there are ALSO good people in the league doesn't mean there aren't bad ones.

Think about it, we all think Rod Smith is such a great guy, and I love him. But, why is he such a good guy? Is he out doing mission work in poor South American villages?

Do we think the guy from the phone company is so great? How about the IT guy at work? Do we elevate them as "great people?" No. They're just people.... perhaps decent people, but just people doing their job.

That's all Rod Smith is. Nothing against him. He's a hard working guy... just like most of us.

Still, just a dude who does his job. Does a good job of it, but that's it. But, we hold him in such high esteem. Why? Sure, he's an athlete, and there's always a little of that school-kid nonsense we never lose.

But, moreover, I truly believe that we hold guys like Rod Smith in such high esteem because of his co-workers. Rod Smith looks like an angel because his company employs so many dip****s.

Seriously think about it, and tell me that there's not some truth to it.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

308 since 2000 according to link in this thread so roughly 10% compared to the 4.6% national average.

"This debate is over"

"Game...Set...Match"


Of the 308 incidents, unofficially only 29 were involving whites, including three with kicker Sebastian Janikowski. That means about 90 percent of the incidents involved black players, who make up about 70 percent of the league.

[RhymesayersDU]

Think about it, we all think Rod Smith is such a great guy, and I love him. But, why is he such a good guy? Is he out doing mission work in poor South American villages?

We're talking about the same Rod Smith that beat his wife, right?

[footstepsfrom#27]

308 since 2000 according to link in this thread so roughly 10% compared to the 4.6% national average.

"This debate is over"

"Game...Set...Match"
You didn't read the story did you? LOL An inch below the stat you've been quoting it states this:

For the general population, the arrest rate is twice as frequent – about one per 21 people, according to the FBI. The FBI's rate, like this NFL rate, does not count the number of individual people arrested, just incidents. The FBI rate also counts an arrest as “each separate instance in which a person is arrested, cited, or summoned for an offense.”

The numbers you're quoting are not for individual arrests but total number of incidents.

It's a moot point now...the authors admit their research was flawed and their conclusions in error.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You didn't read the story did you? LOLWhat, is it wrong?

[footstepsfrom#27]

What, is it wrong?
Google could have saved so much time. ;D

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Google could have saved so much time. ;DGoogle what? I'm quoting the number from the thread author's link, is it wrong?

[orange 4 life]

Stats can be twisted into anything.

There are much more good people in the NFL than not. Thats enough for me.

and another thing, where in this thread are people defending Pac Man? They are simply stating the criminal epidemic in the nfl isnt as bad as ppl make it out to be.

and again, its not about the percentage of bad apples, though thats been much of the focus.
the focus should be on whats DONE with those bad apples.

[footstepsfrom#27]

uhhh, yeah it is.

working as an NFL player isnt illegal.
selling drugs IS illegal.

wouldnt you agree that one who's primary job is IN ITSELF a crime is probably a bit more likely to be arrested than someone who's job isnt a crime?

youve made alot of good points (and my concern is more with whats done TO the criminals as opposed to how many there are), but this one is ludicrous as you must already know.
talk about skewing stats. whew!!
You missed the point. Go back to post 77...my point is not moral or ethical...it's procedural. Data on divergent populations can only be correlated if multiple nexus points for comparison exist, which in this case they do not. The point is...risk factors for arrests cannot be compared using income figures when the highest predictors of arrests and criminal behavior are race and poverty...both of which exist in the comparison between black criminals who make lots of money and NFL players who grew up in the same environment.

Obviously on moral/legal/ethical grounds drug dealing matters and is wrong...not what we're talking about here though.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Google what? I'm quoting the number from the thread author's link, is it wrong?
Read post 229 and 236...the statistics journal Chance exposed the results of the research as flawed and the authors admitted that the data shows basically what the newspaper says it does...in other words they fabricated the results of their research.

This debate is over.

[-Slap-]

We're talking about the same Rod Smith that beat his wife, right?

Rod Smith is an example of an athlete who got into trouble with the law and then did everything right afterwards. He was appropriately contrite for his awful behavior, to the point where he was basically hiding in his house for weeks after the incident came to light. He attended anger management sessions with a positive attitude. He removed himself from the relationship with the woman, but maintained a strong relationship with his kids. Most importantly, he's kept completely out of trouble in the subsequent seven and a half years. He can rightly be considered a role model for young athletes in the League.

Smart people weigh the hundreds of positive things Rod Smith has done in his time in Colorado against this one terrible thing. A less intelligent person would lump him in with Dwayne Carswell and other recidivist offenders.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Read post 229 and 236...the statistics journal Chance exposed the results of the research as flawed and the authors admitted that the data shows basically what the newspaper says it does...in other words they fabricated the results of their research.

This debate is over.
I generally don't read your 5 page dissertations (that you consider replies to previous posts) so maybe you can narrow it down for me. So you're saying the number from Jason's link in post number one of this thread is wrong?

[RhymesayersDU]

Rod Smith is an example of an athlete who got into trouble with the law and then did everything right afterwards. He was appropriately contrite for his awful behavior, to the point where he was basically hiding in his house for weeks after the incident came to light. He attended anger management sessions with a positive attitude. He removed himself from the relationship with the woman, but maintained a strong relationship with his kids. Most importantly, he's kept completely out of trouble in the subsequent seven and a half years. He can rightly be considered a role model for young athletes in the League.

Smart people weigh the hundreds of positive things Rod Smith has done in his time in Colorado against this one terrible thing. A less intelligent person would lump him in with Dwayne Carswell and other recidivist offenders.

Slap, you're absolutely right about everything you said here. And in fact, I really like Rod, and agree he paid his time on this issue.

But I just found it funny that throughout this thread, Popps has been ranting about thug players, players who have been in trouble with the law, players who have been "****ting on the sport he loves" (or something along those lines) and then the first player he uses as a good guy is one who has been in trouble with the law. I mean, like I said, Rod is generally a good guy, but after chastising Jason for defending certain players, and then using Rod Smith as an example to make his own point, it's just humorous.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

is it a "league of thugs"?

no, but those thugs IN the league need to be dealt with swiftly and HARSHLY.

That is exactly what most of us with an ounce of common sense have been saying