Your Opinion on League Suspensions

[houghtam]

With conflicting information coming out on the Dumervil report, but the seeming consensus that Goodell is going to punish him anyway, what are your thoughts on league suspensions?

[oubronco]

**** Goodell

[bronco militia]

Originally Posted by oubronco

**** Goodell

^this!

[BoiseBluTurf]

Wrong place at the wrong time... He/players need to choose who and where they hang out a little better... Might also be wise to leave the guns at home unless you have a concealed weapons permit... all of that said... actions have consequences... so... i'm for them even though it will hurt our team. He is lucky it didn't happen in N.Y... he would be facing a two year sentence in the clink... hello Plax!


that is all,

Michael

[bronco militia]

I would add another choice. The league should avoid all action until the legal process is over.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by bronco militia

I would add another choice. The league should avoid all action until the legal process is over.

That's the second choice, unless you're talking about legal appeals, in which case many players would be out of the league before the legal process is over.

[Kaylore]

Generally I tend to think 99% of guys getting arrested are them being stupid. Dumervil apparently is the worst driver in the world, which I was unaware of. The God-complex these players have manifests in a variety of ways.

Having said that, it bothers me that the commissioner can suspend someone who had charges dismissed, or worse, was found innocent. I think that's too easy to exploit and the player has no recourse. I guess I think there should still be something done since they probably were guilty of at least being stupid, but they should have a much more reduced penalty if there are no charges filed.

[bronco militia]

Originally Posted by houghtam

That's the second choice, unless you're talking about legal appeals, in which case many players would be out of the league before the legal process is over.

no it's not...players have been suspended even after being found innocent (see Big Ben)

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Generally I tend to think 99% of guys getting arrested are them being stupid. Dumervil apparently is the worst driver in the world, which I was unaware of. The God-complex these players have manifests in a variety of ways.

Having said that, it bothers me that the commissioner can suspend someone who had charges dismissed, or worse, was found innocent. I think that's too easy to exploit and the player has no recourse. I guess I think there should still be something done since they probably were guilty of at least being stupid, but they should have a much more reduced penalty if there are no charges filed.

That's a good point. IMO it would be smart of Goodell just to have a chart with different crimes and their penalties for both "found guilty" and "innocent, but associating with the wrong people". When an incident occurs, the player automatically gets the lesser punishment (provided it's not a completely false claim, obviously). If you're found guilty, you get the greater punishment. If you fight it and are still found guilty, you get twice the punishment.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by bronco militia

no it's not...players have been suspended even after being found innocent (see Big Ben)

That's choice number 3. He was found innocent, but put himself in a bad situation and conduct detrimental to the league.

[Garcia Bronco]

I'd say let the legal system decide and then take action.

[Beantown Bronco]

I never understood the concept of having to appeal a suspension with the same person who gave you the suspension to begin with. Makes zero sense. When would Goodell ever say, "yup, that idiot Goodell suspended you when he shouldn't have. Suspension overruled."

Sure, he might reduce the original sentence, but there's zero chance he'd ever completely reverse his own ruling.

[ColoradoDarin]

I went with 3 because of the money, fame, access to lawyers, and other circumstances that may affect the legal process (aka Big Ben rapey rape/Cox rapey rape). If it shows the NFL in a bad light, then the NFL has the right to protect its brand.

I'm not going to promote a system that would have had OJ not receiving any league suspensions for murdering 2 people (hypothesizing that he killed while still in the league).

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

I never understood the concept of having to appeal a suspension with the same person who gave you the suspension to begin with. Makes zero sense. When would Goodell ever say, "yup, that idiot Goodell suspended you when he shouldn't have. Suspension overruled."

Sure, he might reduce the original sentence, but there's zero chance he'd ever completely reverse his own ruling.

That's another major flaw in the whole thing. It's unfair to both parties because Goodell has to uphold his own decision not to look stupid and the person appealing doesn't feel like he's getting a fair shake.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by ColoradoDarin

I went with 3 because of the money, fame, access to lawyers, and other circumstances that may affect the legal process (aka Big Ben rapey rape/Cox rapey rape). If it shows the NFL in a bad light, then the NFL has the right to protect its brand.

I'm not going to promote a system that would have had OJ not receiving any league suspensions for murdering 2 people (hypothesizing that he killed while still in the league).

Yep. NFL is a private business, and they have the right to protect their brand. Just like the right to free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever you want without repercussions from your employer, "innocent until proven guilty" applies in a court of law, but not necessarily for a private business, especially with one as high profile as the NFL.

[Drunken.Broncoholic]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

I never understood the concept of having to appeal a suspension with the same person who gave you the suspension to begin with. Makes zero sense. When would Goodell ever say, "yup, that idiot Goodell suspended you when he shouldn't have. Suspension overruled."

Sure, he might reduce the original sentence, but there's zero chance he'd ever completely reverse his own ruling.

That's what I think most players expectations are in an appeal. Even if it's just a one game reduction makes a difference. Other sports like nba mlb not so much since their seasons are saturated with too many games as it is. But only 16 games, getting even 1 game back is big

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic

That's what I think most players expectations are in an appeal. Even if it's just a one game reduction makes a difference. Other sports like nba mlb not so much since their seasons are saturated with too many games as it is. But only 16 games, getting even 1 game back is big

Ever think Goodell knows this and takes it into account when he does his initial ruling? He most certainly does. For example, he really only wants to give 2 games, but since he knows it's going to be appealed anyway, he gives 4 instead....then reduces it to 2 after the appeal.

It's stupid and there's no way to justify the process. There needs to be an independent body that can hear the appeals.

[gyldenlove]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Generally I tend to think 99% of guys getting arrested are them being stupid. Dumervil apparently is the worst driver in the world, which I was unaware of. The God-complex these players have manifests in a variety of ways.

Having said that, it bothers me that the commissioner can suspend someone who had charges dismissed, or worse, was found innocent. I think that's too easy to exploit and the player has no recourse. I guess I think there should still be something done since they probably were guilty of at least being stupid, but they should have a much more reduced penalty if there are no charges filed.

That is the reason Goodell doesn't suspend players for the first time they run afoul of the law. It could be a misunderstanding, it happens, I am sure some of us have been arrested because we were in the wrong place at the wrong time or because of a misunderstanding.

On the other hand, the NFL is a family brand and as such it must protect its image very stringently, which is difficult when the majority of your publicity is generated by young males, many of whom have backgrounds in areas rife with poverty, crime and short on education and aspirations. Consider if these individuals had worked for Disney corp or had been in the military - how do you think they would have been dealt with?

Look at a guy like Pacman Jones, he kept putting himself in bad positions, kept getting in trouble but wasn't convicted of a fellony until 2011. Should Goodell have let him play in the league for all those years and wait until all his appeal options were exhausted? He could easily have appealed for long enough to retire before the final conviction.

The system now is designed to protect the leagues image, it is not meant to punish criminals. It is simply meant to deter players and other employees from putting themselves in a position to produce negative press. Dumervil may not have commited a crime, but he put himself in a position by associating with an a-hole that generated negative attention.

[gyldenlove]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

I never understood the concept of having to appeal a suspension with the same person who gave you the suspension to begin with. Makes zero sense. When would Goodell ever say, "yup, that idiot Goodell suspended you when he shouldn't have. Suspension overruled."

Sure, he might reduce the original sentence, but there's zero chance he'd ever completely reverse his own ruling.

It has happened on some on-field fines that the original fine was completely overturned after the player gave his input. In many cases the original suspension is handed down without the player getting a chance to give input or provide evidence.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by gyldenlove

It has happened on some on-field fines that the original fine was completely overturned after the player gave his input. In many cases the original suspension is handed down without the player getting a chance to give input or provide evidence.

A fine is one thing. A suspension is another.

And to my knowledge, the only fines that have been overturned were due to trivia sideline things, like Troy Polamalu calling his wife to tell her he was ok after he was removed from a game with a concussion; and someone else for removing one of the nfl network microphones because it shifted around and was irritating him or something. In those types of cases, Goodell can reverse his own decision and not look bad. But unless I'm mistaken, he's never fully overturned a fine for an on field incident like a hit to the head. He may reduce the amount, but he won't overturn it.

[razorwire77]

I might be in the minority, but I don't really have a problem with it. Employers fire or discipline subordinates for arrests without convictions all of the time. I'm a school teacher and if I made the front page of a newspaper for being arrested on aggravated assault charges, I would be fired before the criminal trial. Think about how many Joe average careers where the person would be fired for what NFL players get away with. Do you think a truck driver could have multiple DUI arrests and still drive a truck? Would a manager at Denny's keep his job if he made the news for assaulting his Mom? It wouldn't matter if the charges were dismissed. He'd be ****-canned. Most professional athletes have been coddled since high school because they could run the fastest, jump the highest etc. Add to that mentality youth and a significant bank roll and you get lots of dumbassery. Just because a good attorney like Harvey can plea out or get said dumassery dismissed, it doesn't mean an employer doesn't have the discretion to discipline an employee. Goodell tends to punish patterns of inappropriate behavior, it's not like he's handing out 10 game suspensions for disorderly conduct or outright barring players from the league.

[Drunken.Broncoholic]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

Ever think Goodell knows this and takes it into account when he does his initial ruling? He most certainly does. For example, he really only wants to give 2 games, but since he knows it's going to be appealed anyway, he gives 4 instead....then reduces it to 2 after the appeal.

It's stupid and there's no way to justify the process. There needs to be an independent body that can hear the appeals.

Exactly. It's a sham and I don't know why the NFLPA hasn't demanded they change this format(at least i don't know if they have or not)

[GoBroncos DownUnder]

Originally Posted by bronco militia

no it's not...players have been suspended even after being found innocent (see Big Ben)

Here's my take on Ben's suspension:
Big Ben was called in to see the Commissioner, and told to "spill it" ... with the Michael Vick suspension fresh in his mind, Ben fessed up to EXACTLY what happened - in the college bar bathroom, with the underage girl, as his security barred the door.
You figure it out!
He was suspended for 3 games, took it WELL, and NEVER complained ... oh, and stopped making stupid decisions off the field! Congrats to Ben!


ADDITIONAL NOTE: The video tapes of that night were recorded over, oops! And the possible "scene of the crime" was wiped clean by an overly enthusiastic cleaner that night ... not saying that it was a cover up, but IMO that's what a PERFECT cover up looks like!

[boltaneer]

The league/Goodell normally waits until the legal process goes through before they take action, which is a good thing.

The NFLPA negotiated the league's and Goodell's power in the CBA, so the league and Goodell do not have to and will never have an independent entity review cases as long as it's in the CBA.

I like Goodell's tough stance on conduct. I actually wish he would be stricter with it.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by GoBroncos DownUnder

Here's my take on Ben's suspension:
Big Ben was called in to see the Commissioner, and told to "spill it" ... with the Michael Vick suspension fresh in his mind, Ben fessed up to EXACTLY what happened - in the college bar bathroom, with the underage girl, as his security barred the door.
You figure it out!
He was suspended for 3 games, took it WELL, and NEVER complained ... oh, and stopped making stupid decisions off the field! Congrats to Ben!


ADDITIONAL NOTE: The video tapes of that night were recorded over, oops! And the possible "scene of the crime" was wiped clean by an overly enthusiastic cleaner that night ... not saying that it was a cover up, but IMO that's what a PERFECT cover up looks like!

I see what you're saying, but on the Big Ben note (and completely unrelated to the subject of the thread), I knew two girls in college at UC who said that QB in Oxford love to parade his junk around at parties and intimidate smaller girls into getting into compromising situations with him, and that was common knowledge all before this stuff came out.

Where there's smoke there's fire, and in Big Ben's case there was a hell of a lot of smoke.