Yeah, I don’t get the very recent outrage at Goodell over this. I don’t understand why people think he would try to cover for Rice by discarding/ignoring the video. It’s not his style.
What Rice did is pretty inexcusable and the outrage should be pointed at him, not Goodell.
His excuses are either incompetence, not caring, or some sort of active cover-up. Even if it’s not the cover-up (and I agree with you, that it’s not) the other two options are equally damning.
A talking head on the TV claimed that the rate of domestic violence for NFL players is lower than the rate in the general population for the same age group. I don’t know if that’s true, but it highlights the problem that the NFL has with all the publicity around their players. I doubt many other businesses feel it is imperative to act when one of their employees is convicted of a crime with no jail time because the public doesn’t know and it may not affect the business in any way. So it’s the publicity that makes the difference here.
Just to get this off my chest, I think they should either fire the guy or stay out of it. A two game suspension makes no sense. He is essentially fired now, this is the NFL and not the same situation as most employer/employee relationships, but I don’t see the point of a limited suspension for an act unrelated to the game. Either you want a convicted criminal in your employ, or you don’t.
I don’t think most businesses are big on employing violent offenders.
good
I think most people are outraged that he isn’t standing trial. Run a poll and I bet you see exactly that.
Yes, If that exact same video showed up online but showing you instead of Rice, I’d bet dollars to Donkey Kong that you’d be out on your arse before you could yell “help, I’m being oppressed!”
Probably not most. I don’t want to mischaracterize the situation, but a lot of businesses don’t care about the criminal records of their employees. You can find some low skilled positions where they don’t even bother to check.
But that’s my point, either the crime is severe enough to get rid of the person, or not. There’s no point in the halfway measures.
The problem with “Hollywood” is that there’s no Hollywood Corporation that employs all show business guys. For top level sports you’re either in or out, and there’s a quasi-monopoly organization that can decide if you’re in or out. If Charlie Sheen goes off the rails, he can be fired from his TV show, the major networks might take a pass on working with him again, but there are other ways he can work as a celebrity/actor.
If you’re a top football player you either work in the NFL, or you’re nobody.
But the history of pro sports is been players can get away with anything. Asshole behavior, drug use, domestic violence, rape, and even in some cases murder are all forgiven as long as the player plays well.
Look at the reception Rice got when he returned to the team (and Ray Lewis as well). Some of those people cheering were likely women who could become (or are!) victims of domestic violence, who you think would be sympathetic to the victim. But nope, they love their players more than life itself.
So any sport commissioner would try to do whatever it takes to keep the money flowing in, to provide a “quality” product. And having it become known that, instead of nice guy role models, NFL players are thuggish wife beaters, well, that’s not good for the bottom line. Jersey sales might slump!
What reception? Rice never returned to the team. He was suspended for the first two games of the season and was cut this week (before the second game).
Sure, but the NFL isn’t really comparable to a labor pool or even a McDonald’s. The players are making millions, are highly visible, and represent the NFL and its teams. If the COO of Ford punched out his wife on video he’d be shitcanned too, and if he was alleged to have done so he would certainly have been suspended or reassigned pending an investigation or whatever.
Anyway, even those low skilled businesses (I represent a number of them) pretty much invariably fire employees who are convicted of serious crimes, notwithstanding the fact that they don’t conduct pre-employment background checks.
The NFL takes the position that its personal conduct policy is a progressive disciplinary system that is designed to help players reform themselves and so on. Cris Carter credits the Eagles for helping him overcome his drug addiction (by cutting him). Pacman Jones has apparently been a model citizen after returning from a yearlong suspension, prior to which he was a walking crime scene.
I agree. And it’s complicated with the NFL, but I don’t think suspensions are the right thing to do, they should just terminate the contract. If he can come back later as a reformed man they can hire him again. Other businesses might do the same thing. Suspensions seem like they are adding additional punishment for the crime. I think the crime either disqualifies the person or not.
Who is “they”? The NFL can’t terminate anyone’s contract. The contract is between the player and the team.
I don’t really get your point about a suspension being “additional punishment”. I think you’ll find most players would rather be suspended than out of the league entirely.
It was open practice.
“No matter how heinous an athlete’s actions, if he can help the home team win, he’s going to hear the cheers.”
Of course they’d rather be suspended. Or fined. But not terminated. I’m looking at this in light of a more typical job. If I was convicted of a crime I’d expect my employer to either fire me or not. I don’t see the point of them demoting me, cutting my pay, or putting me on a finite leave of absence. IMHO a business should either get rid of criminal employees or keep them, not punish them in some limited way. They can pick and choose the employee or the crime if they want but I’m not seeing the sense in an employer punishing an employee for a crime. If they fire the guy it should be on the general principle that they don’t want convicted criminals in their employ, not as a form of punishment.
I’m just going to add - the NFL isn’t the only employer held responsible for the actions of its employees. The military is usually held to a higher standard and we are often asked “What are YOU going to do about it?” when members behave badly (or commit a crime).
Ah, okay. The strange thing there is that Rice was probably not going to help the team win; he was the worst RB in the league last year (who started a significant number of games).
And here, in just over 20 words, is what is wrong with hardcore sports fandom in our culture.
The NFL is in the entertainment business which is not a normal employer. More still, they are in a business that puts them in a position of being role models for children, like it or not. These things change the equation.
But even if the NFL just made widgets and you take all of the above out of the equation, not firing Ray Rice after seeing that video (and FWIW I believe they did see this video back when they first investigated but let’s pretend they are telling the truth) is saying “I’m okay with working with a guy who did that.” I would guess most work places wouldn’t be.
Didn’t know that. It does make it all seem stranger. Of course to the Ravens maybe domestic violence seems insignificant compared to obstructing justice in a murder case.
As others have amply demonstrated, saying that the NFL is unique in that regard couldn’t be further from the truth. A few years ago a technician at my company was fired pretty much immediately after he was convicted of a domestic violence charge. This is standard practice these days.
If that was me on youtube in a company t-shirt, I’d be fired by morning.
Purely legal question: is it standard procedure for the police to hand over evidence to a non-governmental body?
New Jersey police are saying they gave the relevant video to the NFL.
Now, if that’s true, Roger Goodell is a damn liar and will probably lose his job in the next few months.
BUT… what business did a police agency have handing over evidence to the NFL? Or to ANY civilian entity?