I've been browsing through these off and on. Just decided to print the entire compilation. At this point, I can't disagree with the punishment that has been laid down - but I can't help but lose more and more respect for the commissioner every time a "scandal" such as this occurs. He seems to lean heavily on his own opinions, bending facts along the way.
I'll probably post more thoughts after I look at this properly. Despite the circumstances I am enjoying reading over documents officially created by an NFL team.
Excellent, easy to read powerpoint on the fine process.
http://nflhealthandsafety.files.word...violations.pdf
And look, absloutely no mention of Roger Goodell! Just one picture of him the entire slideshow.
It's amazing what ten minutes of research can do. If only NFL players could do the same thing....hey guys, there are five people specifically mentioned (none of which are Goodell) to go along with an entire officiating staff.
Sounds exactly like Nazi Germany to me!
Though I think I'll pass on reading the, "NFL Infectious Disease Newsletter".
Worst band name ever.
It was created as an image first, then converted and saved as a PDF, essentially protecting it from being edited or altered. That's why you can't copy and paste. It may be broken if you save it to your computer and open it in Adobe Reader, or right-click on the link and open it with Reader.
second slide:Seriously! Do they make sure they are awake? Absolutely no excuse for the inconsistency. NO excuse!The process for a play to be reviewed for disciplinary action starts with the NFL Officiating Department reviewing every play of every game.
As for Nazi Germany, how many did Hitler himself execute? A good dictator does not get his own hands dirty. Bravo Goodell!
Actually it was. You were saying that Goodell can't (shouldn't) be compared to Hitler because he does not sit on the committees making some rulings.
Well, I doubt that Hitler sat on every tribunal and committee in his reign. I'm sure he had his own henchmen that were well versed in towing the party line.
Link to NFLPA's Outside Council comment on evidence and procedure:
https://www.nflplayers.com/Articles/...Investigation/
The Commissioner in this proceeding—and in any disciplinary proceeding—has the obligation to act impartially in the disciplining of players. As the representative of the game of football, this duty of the Commissioner is as compelling as his obligation to protect the game of football. His interest should not be in rubber-stamping any pronouncement of punishment, but rather ensuring that justice is done.
As a servant of the game, the Commissioner’s threefold aim should be to protect the men who play the game, administer discipline in a fair and even manner and protect the image of the game. While he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. The unfair discipline of players for their alleged involvement in a pay-to-injure/bounty program violated the Commissioner’s duty to refrain from resorting to improper methods to defend an unsubstantiated pronouncement.
After four months, the following facts have now been established. The Commissioner, NFL personnel and their outside counsel:
Ran a sloppy investigation that inexplicably included a decision to not question any of the coaches about the documentary evidence used as a basis for punishment.
Punished players before they had the ability to confront, challenge or explain a single piece of evidence used against them.
Launched a public campaign in the media to support the discipline and tarnish the reputations of players before any hearing, effectively destroying any claim that the Commissioner could act as an impartial arbitrator.
Withheld any and all evidence from the players for nearly four months despite repeated requests for full information and full transparency.
Falsely characterized witness interviews to draw false conclusions about players’ involvement in a pay-to-injure scheme.
Retained a former U.S. Attorney to whitewash the investigation by employing her to conduct a media conference call affirming an investigation she was not part of.
Employed the same former U.S. Attorney to today’s hearing to read the report of an investigation she did not conduct, but prohibited her from answering any questions from the players.
Refused to make any coaches involved in preparing the supposed documentary evidence available for interviews by the players or at today’s hearing.
Provided only 200 pages out of their claimed 18,000 pages of materials and refused to provide any materials that might be exculpatory.
Without explanation, produced at today’s hearing a declaration from a team advisor who said that no bounty program existed.
Inexplicably relied upon an article and a blog post written after the investigation had concluded and punishment had been issued as ‘evidence’ even though they had supposedly collected thousands of documents proving players participated in a pay-to-injure scheme.
Refused a three-day adjournment and delay of the appeals hearing so that the players could perform a more comprehensive review of the documents.
In this matter, the conduct of the Commissioner and his representatives has undermined the fundamental process contemplated by the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Through this abuse, these players have been denied any semblance of due process and fairness.
At a time when some question the safety and integrity of the game, the failure by those charged to act responsibly and fairly have challenged our collective faith and confidence in the league.
Yeah well, none of that matters, because the Commish is always right and never, ever, ever does anything improper or questionable.
"Refused a three-day adjournment and delay of the appeals hearing so that the players could perform a more comprehensive review of the documents"
I'm not so sure this one is accurate. According to Peter King's article
"Summing up the day: The four players -- Vilma, linebacker Scott Fujita (now with Cleveland), defensive end Will Smith and Hargrove (now with Green Bay) -- due to have their appeals heard at NFL headquarters left in the morning because of a procedural issue. They felt they hadn't had the 72 hours the Collective Bargaining Agreement mandated to examine the evidence in the case, and the NFL offered to adjourn the case until the afternoon, by which time the 72-hour window would be valid. Vilma and Ginsberg chose to leave and not return, protesting the forum. Fujita, Smith and Hargrove returned for the afternoon session, just long enough to hear White's case against them. Then they left, apparently because they considered the probe unfair."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1yNy5Xcy5
If what King wrote is accurate, I have to begin to question the validity of all the other complaints made by the NFLPA.
Well there's the whole, worked out a new CBA to prevent any more labor disputes for the next ten years while only missing one preseason game at a time when many thought we could lose an entire season. We've seen strikes in baseball and in the NFL multiple times and lockouts in hockey and basketball. Goodell was able to help avoid that.
To me, he has done a lot of good in advocating player safety. With all the money poured into research and working at all levels of the game to increase the awareness of concussions, the league has taken great steps. Most notably outside the NFL, its involvement in passing the Zack Lystedt law, or something similar, in many states. I think he has a much more competent group of medical experts to work with him in making these decisions. He is changing the culture of concussions from something swept under the rug to being brought to the surface. The effects won't be felt now but 40 years from now, the players will be thankful.
And while I would be inclined to say this would have happened regardless of who was in charge, the league is still the most popular sport and continues to grow. Revenue will continue to increase with the new TV deals too, record for the league.
So to put it bluntly, what gives?
Who is telling the truth?
To me, it comes down to this. Who is more likely to lie?
The NFLPA, trying to protect itself and its players after a nasty labor dispute just a year ago or....
Peter King, a respected reporter who can not, or at least should not, write a false report. What incentive does he have to lie?
And by the way, this attempted adjourment offer by the league is the reason why Vilma left.
So the NFL is screwed both ways. Don't try to adjourn to fall into compliance with the rules and the NFLPA will complain about how they don't have the time. Adjourn and the players leave.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...than-it-seems/As it relates to his power over issues like player discipline,Goodell flatly refused to surrender that power during negotiations occurring after the players and the league worked out a deal on the manner in which the money gets divided.
Neither one has to be lying. If the NFLPA had requested a delay in the start of the proceedings on Friday or over the weekend, and the NFL refused, the report is accurate. The NFL may have reconsidered their position and decided to delay the meeting the few extra hours so that the letter of the agreement was met, 72 hours. Peter King is validated. Not a big deal, in my mind either way.
Peter King wrote his article with the knowledge of the proceedings from Monday. The Outside Opinion was PUBLISHED Monday, probably written before the commencement of the hearing.
Let's be clear that when it says "player discipline", it is regarding the personal conduct policy. Not sispensions/fines from on the field action.
And that ability of having full power was given to him by Gene Upshaw and the union years ago.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...onduct-policy/
"...the players generally have decided after several years of incidents and enforcements that they want someone other than Goodell or an employee of the league office to have final say over each and every fine or suspension imposed."
"Goodell already had the power, obtaining it not from the current NFLPA leadership but from former union boss Gene Upshaw, via past labor deals"
What the players wanted was to have a person not associated with the NFL make these decisions. To take the decision entirely out of Goodell's hands. For a guy who has made it his mission to clean up player's off the field actions, I can fully understand him wanting to keep that power. Because if someone else comes in and doesn't do a good job of it, the egg is still on Goodell's face because it's his policy.
Again, the commissioner has to have some power. It's the same in every other sport. Does the league office in the NHL handle player discipline? Yes. Brendon Shanahan hands down the discipline (just like Hanks/Anderson in the NFL). And if a player wants to appeal, they go to Gary Bettman. That's worse than what the NFL offers.
David Stern hands down suspensions in baseball. Seling suspends in the MLB (though I think their appeals process is pretty fair like the NFL's. Shyam Das, the gentleman who just heard one of the Saints' appeals and the one I referenced earlier, was one of the main arbitraitors in the MLB for a long time before being fired).
Let me ask you guys this. What powers should Roger Goodell have? Delegate powers for me.
May not be plausible to you, however they requested a delay to Thursday.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/18...ds-prematurely
Goodell requested the session reconvene at 1:45 p.m. ET, and it began almost on time following the NFLPA motion to delay the session to have evidence reviewed until Thursday.