Welcome to goTitans.com! Log in or sign up to be a part of the best Tennessee Titans fan site available.

League Conduct Policy Appears Arbitrary

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by goTitans.com, Jul 22, 2007.

Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 4 users.
  1. TNThunder Guest

    Messages:
    0
    If you will just somehow grasp that the CONDUCT POLICY has nothing to do with the legal system you will sleep easier. Yes, in most cases it is tied to it, but it is NOT the final judgement. An organization such as the NFL, NASCAR or pick many companies out there, has a right to set its own standards. These players are NOT employees, they are independant contractors. The Titans (nor any other team) have any player that is an employee. Your arguement is as weak as a player trying to sue a team because he got cut. Charges or convictions in the legal system can add to a players suspension, and in the Vick case, he had already been suspended from preseason, so there was no reason for Goodell to step in and add further sanctions, as I am sure he will later, if he feels the legal system didn't do enough. Why should Goodell get in the middle of all this right now, then possibly have to change what he said? Goodell could also risk bringing on prejudice.....if he suspended Vick for three years, the judge might figure that since he can't play, he should get three years in jail. I can think of many reasons for the NFL to wait on this decision, but not one good reason to act in a rush. Not only does Goodell need to wait to see what the courts do, but he also has to address other charges that Vick avoided by taking a plea agreement...gambling being the biggest. The bottom line is the policy is there to punish players for not conducting themselves as per NFL standards. It does NOT have to be used, if the courts are going to do the same or worse to a player, but it is in place where it can be used if need be. Why you expect things to be so very simple, and ignore the complex nature of some of these problems is beyond me.
  2. Riverman Dread the red

    Casey
    Messages:
    8,061
    Moolah:
    $3,494

    You are obviously conscientious and educated and I appreciate your efforts with your posts and what you have to say. However, I strongly disagree when you reference that the league is somehow not liable to execute its conduct policy in accordance with fair labor practices. The league can be held liable on virtually on any array of discriminatory charges if they have executed their policy inconsistently toward one league player (independent contractor as you say) versus another. My contention has always been that Goodell deviated from the past execution of the policy with Pac by suspending him on the basis of charges alone. You can't deny that was unprecedented. It put Goodell in uncharted territory AND more importantly to avoid a discrimination suit (not just race), required him to execute the policy in a similar fashion in the future. He has not done it with Porter, Vick, Henry, or Johnson and thus as it now appears, was an isolated incident with Pac.

    So quite simply, we have a different opinion on Goodell and how the policy has been administered. I have a real problem that he suspended one of our players with an unprecedented (and now apparently isolated) method of executing the conduct policy. Most people didn't care or recognize this inconsistency occurred because they didn't really care if Pac kicked off the team/ out of the league.

    I think you should realize that the league CAN be held liable for discriminatory activity. The policies must be administered in a consistent manner to insure that no biases, prejudice, or hidden agendas can effect the individual's rights. Will Pac sue the NFL? I think that was a major discussion at the meetings when he "dropped" the appeal. I think there was some unspoken concession by the commissioner to encourage Pac to drop it. Speculation- hell yes. Conspiracy theory- no not really. Just how business is often done.

    So again, I certainly do respect your time, energy and efforts you put in your posts. I enjoy the dialogue, even though we are on opposite ends on this one.
  3. TNThunder Guest

    Messages:
    0
    In plain language, I don't know how you can call anything inconsistent, when you are breaking new ground. Maybe he was too severe with Pac, maybe not. I have posted before, that I believe in the long run if someone hadn't of stepped in, Pac could be where Vick is going to be soon. All Pac had to do was keep his nose clean for 10 games and he is a Titan again..a small price to pay for all his antics. Now with his inability to keep a low profile, who knows if he gets back on the field this year? One thing is for sure, compared to Vick he is looking good. Pac may have been one of the players that was singled out to send a message, but face it, what better person? While he wasn't convicted of anything, he was making headlines monthly. What better person to use this new policy on to get other players' attention? Translation: "Wow, if Pac can be suspended for 10 games with no conviction, the NFL is getting serious about cleaning up the league. I better watch what I do." As far as Goodell, I highly doubt he is making any of these decisions on his own, but he does have to take the heat. I would not be surprised to hear he consulted with the Titans before handing out Pac's punishment. Obviously Pac was not listening to Fisher anymore. I will finish this up by saying I have played team sports all my life, and while it hurts to lose a stud player, if he is causing disharmony on a team, sometimes the team is better overall without that person. I still contend we either get a better football player back, or we rid ourselves of a cancer.
  4. Riverman Dread the red

    Casey
    Messages:
    8,061
    Moolah:
    $3,494
    Whether or not Pac was causing disharmony on the team is a whole topic unto itself. I'm doubtful, however, that even if he returns we will ever see the same production out of him as we did before the suspension. Too bad for the Titans that Goodell had to use our player as an example for the rest of the league and a "guinea pig" when he steered the policy in an unprecedented direction.
  5. TNThunder Guest

    Messages:
    0
    It had to be someone.....and come one...it's not like he wasn't warned MANY times over. I am sure you are educated enough to see what road Pac was taking, and it had to be stopped. Most of the league knew a "get tough" policy was in place, and I am sure Fisher had several talks with Pac about it. It came down to Pac placing more importance on being a thug than being a Titan. You are blaming the wrong person here. I really believe you are speaking as more of a fan concerned about winning games. Well, I am a fan too, and want the same, but would like to be able to say I am a Titan fan and not be ashamed of one of our players.
  6. Riverman Dread the red

    Casey
    Messages:
    8,061
    Moolah:
    $3,494
    Well this opens another can of worms. The league is rife with examples of "bad boys". I try to avoid using terms like "thug" because it suggests I rely on stereotypes to judge people. When you actually boil down what Pac was "guilty of" you are left with much less than what is on the 14 pages of conduct policy violators (MANY with multiple and more than Pac) provided to the commissioner in Pac's appeal.

    In regards to your shame of Pac- just why are you so ashamed of him? Did plead guilty to beating his wife or girlfriend? Was he convicted of a DUI or handgun possession? Did he stomp on another team members' head during a game? Did he violate the league's substance abuse policy? He had several allegations against him, and I honestly can think of only 1 incident which he admitted guilt to. Everything else is pending. Do you believe "where there is smoke there is fire?" Might be, but I believe the only fair way to judge somebody's guilt is by due process- not my own conclusion or speculation.

    I don't think Pac was as much of a team distraction and locker room "cancer" as has been suggested by some. In fact, Bulluck has offered positive and supportive commentary in the past, as have other players.

    Why did Goodell select Pac to take the conduct policy in a new direction? Small market player, generally "unpopular" guy? Bad timing for Pac? His defiant attitude? Probably all of the above. But honestly, the charges against him were NOT enough to warrant an entire year's suspension, when convicted criminals got 8 games or less.

    So even despite all the arguments you and others have made (especially about the league not needing "legal guilt")- the facts still remain:

    1. Goodell elected to begin administering the conduct policy in a new fashion
    2. Goodell suspended Pac without legal guilt (plea or conviction)
    3. Goodell did wait for legal guilt for others (Henry, Johnson, Vick)
    4. Pac received a suspension of greater severity than others who had been proven guilty in a court of law.

    Policy as administered- arbitrary when reviewing legal guilt basis for conduct policy violation.
  7. MsTitan Camp Fodder

    Messages:
    620
    Moolah:
    $0
    You contradicted yourself in the same post. You start by stating that the conduct policy has nothing to do with legal system, you even typed conduct policy in caps. But the then later you state that "Gooddell needs to wait and see what the courts do."

    I vote for the policy being arbitrary. Simple because if you remove the presumption of innonence or guilt, Pacman was treated more harshly than any other player and that makes it arbitrary. My understanding from listening to Goodell's explanation regarding PacMan was that it didn't matter if he was guilty. He had brought the NFL into negative light and had to be suspeneded. Okay, in my opinion Vick, regardless of whether or not he is guilty, has brought the NFL into a more negative light than Pacman but yet he has not been supsended. He was asked not to report to training camp but I still don't think he was "supsended." Goodell even went further to state that in Vick's case he was going to wait for due process. That is contradictory to what he said regarding Pacman.

    just my two cents
  8. TNThunder Guest

    Messages:
    0

    Nice try...but you failed to comprehend my entire post. Basically I am saying that there is no need for Goodell to step in at this point and hand out any punishment...there is no rush in this matter. Vick has been suspended from training camp, and now he is going to jail, so Goodell has plenty of time to sort out what he wants to do in this matter. Even Riverman understands the NFL conduct policy is not tied to the legal system, regarding conviction. It's not contradictory at all. Pac's offenses were enough for Goodell to give him a 10 game suspension, not an entire year. This did not happen until Pac was associated with a man being paralyzed by one of his entourage. 10 games will seem light if it turns out it was one of Pac's friends.
  9. TNThunder Guest

    Messages:
    0

    It's sad you even have to ask that question. The fact his actions don't bother you explains your myopic view of the conduct policy, and how it is administered. Our debate is over, because I suspect somewhere there is a notion of "40 acres and a mule" in the back of your mind also. Good luck.
  10. MsTitan Camp Fodder

    Messages:
    620
    Moolah:
    $0
    Actually, most of us that think that the policy is arbitrary have been stating this case months ago, before Vick was even indicted. What would make it not arbitray is if Goodell had suspended Vick as soon as the word was out which is what he did with Pacman. In my opinion, by him waiting to for due process in the Vick case he is essence tying it to the legal system. Vick's offense was enough for him to be suspended even before he was indicted so it is arbitrary.

Share This Page