Pacman Suspended entire season

Avvie ---- I agree 100%

 

I have got to keep saying this:

The arbitrary nature of this policy is VERY dangerous. Allowing the perception of "shield damage" by league officials and/or players to dictate punitive action is inequitable, difficult to reproduce, and puts the league at legal risk for a civil suit. Yes- employers such as the NFL can release employees on any number of grounds, but they are subject to labor laws and they can be held accountable if there are clear acts of discrimination (not just racial).

PacMan has/will suffer millions of dollars of actual damage which could easily escalate to 20+ million in lost future earnings. The league has committed itself to equitably enforce punishment in the future. If not, then they could be held liable for unfair employment practices in a civil suit.

It is indefensible to say that Pac was not targeted. No convictions, a full year suspension. Clearly the league was "protecting the shield" from Pac's bad image. In short, the league has elected to allow the COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION to serve as the standard as opposed to THE COURT OF LAW. This is an extremely vulnerable (and IMO unwise) position to take. Nonetheless, Goodell felt the urgency for action and couldn't resist using Pac (for various reasons) to set the tone of his platform for the league. Unfortunately, Titans fans pay the price.

Now for my real gripe. Where does it stop with the conduct policy? What constitutes conduct detrimental that should result in similar punishment? For example- Tom Brady has fathered 2 illegitimate children in the past 2 years with 2 different mothers. Does that tarnish the shield? The short answer is no because it doesn't invoke the same negative response as Pac's "incidents". The media doesn't run it, the damage is minimal. No punishment.

In short, the new policy allows the media, the public and perceptions to dictate punishment. The new policy has abdicated the court of law as a standard. Get ready- this dangerous precedent will result in legal controversy down the road. Many of you will be outraged when a major market player who is well liked gets CONVICTED of a crime and receives less punishment because the media, the public and the league officials don't PERCEIVE the offense to tarnish the shield as much as Pac's "incidents".

You know- it really is not much different than the Salem witch system of justice.

 

An employer does not need a conviction to fire or punish their employees. He did violate league rules, that is not debateable.

Plus, keep in mind, that we have no idea what he told Goodell in the meeting. Goodell knows more about this than the rest of us, he just might not be disclosing it to the public.


So, hypothetically, if Imus was fired for his controversial phrasing do you think he would win a lawsuit? He wasnt convicted of a crime, so by your logic he shouldnt be punished either right?

And where do you get $20 million in future earnings? If he gets reinstated then the most he will lose is 3.1 million, and that only includes if the Titans decide to recover the pro rated portion of his signing bonus. So where in the world does the $20 million figure come from?

 

Best quote of 2007.

 

You are correct that the league (or any other employer) doesn't need a conviction to fire somebody. However, you are wrong to think that this makes the league immune to a legitimate civil suit. With this new policy, the league has elected itself the judge and jury of conduct detrimental and with that comes the obligation to judge and punish equitably. Anything short of that that inflicts damages increases their liability for wrongful employment practices. Make no mistake, the league can be sued. It is very important for them to have an equitable track record.

In regards to Pac and 20+million, in a civil suit, future or potential earnings can be referenced as damages. There is solid evidence that Pac was a premiere CB in the league and the premiere CB's are currently fetching mega-contracts. This suspension no doubt has damaged his future contract value.

 

I understand that the league can be sued, any employer can be sued and often times it is a legitimate case. But Im not sure there is a legitimate case here. He did violate league rules, that is a fact. Is it up to our legal system to now decide what is a fair and unfair punishment for breaking company rules?

 

I think the 4 game normal suspension drawn out to a season would be the case.

 

My point is- the league is obligated to impose the same punishment for similar offenses. The league has set a precedent with Pac that legal convictions are not necessary. The league has accepted a huge responsibility to evaluate EVERY incident equitably. It can be persuasively argued that the next first time conduct detrimental violation should receive a one year suspension. Anything short of that sets up a record of bias or prejudice. The arbitrary nature of the "10 incident" component that was considered would be exposed and also set up an easy argument of wrongful employment practice.

 

Here is the thing though. I dont think we know all about Pac's off field problems. Chris Mortenson said on ESPN that it is possible he has had up to 15 run ins with police since he has been in the league. Where he got this information I dont know, but if you read his wikipedia page it says he got arrested in Oakland for punching a fan. Has anyone heard of this? But to my larger point, is that Goodell has more information than any of us, and we have no idea what he found out in the meeting.

Edit to say, that I dont think the Oakland thing is accurate since the date that Wikipedia has isnt a date that the titans and raiders played each other.

 

Wikipedia is not a reliable source, the sooner you learn this the better