Tiste Simeon, on 05 September 2015 - 04:29 PM, said:
Nevyn, on 31 July 2015 - 05:51 PM, said:
If he beat up his fiancee on the field during a game it would bring the game into disrepute.
There is a criminal justice system to protect the fiancee, actual laws and actual police and actual courts. The NFL tacking on punishment is simply about PR, which means they also have to collectively bargain their rights to even do anything about it.
So your comparison is like an employee complaining that he got fired for allegedly embezzling "a few hundred dollars" when Larry the wife beater still has a job.
By all means, we can argue about what Brady did or did not do. We can argue about whether there should even be a rule. We can argue about whether the standard for evidence is high enough, whether it is met. We can argue whether the punishment is appropriate.
But can we please stop comparing this to punishments under the personal conduct policy. The personal conduct policy exists because these are high profile athletes and their misdeeds are very visible. If the commissioner ignored these types of acts, the owners would get far more pressure to cut ties with the drunks and addicts and wifebeaters and brawlers and dogfighters. Giving them a league suspension lets the league look like it cares and is doing something. It is PR (and PR they handled very badly in the last year).
Those suspensions should never be viewed as the entire consequence of the crime, nor of the punishment befitting the crime. That's what the legal system is for.
On the other hand, cheating (whether steroids or ball tampering or really anything else) is entirely within the realm of the league. They need to enforce it so people believe their games are above board and fair. And their punishments are the only punishments those people are subject to.
Irrelevant. The league need to say "we abhor this action so much that on top of whatever the police do, you guys aren't playing football again."
Why?
If you work at Denny's as a waiter and beat your wife, should Denny's say you can't work there anymore? Or is it only certain jobs that qualify for mob justice. I mean, if I don't want to see a wife beater on TV playing football, do I want to see one serving me eggs?
What evidenciary standard and burden of proof needs to be applied before you take away a person's livelihood forever? There was video so the mob is happy, but note that Rice was never convicted of anything. I am sick to death of phony outrage for the sake of outrage. Football players are mostly crappy people. Athletes are mostly crappy people.
Many americans have cheered for and bought the jersey of racists, drunk drivers, assaulters, murderers, rapists, and wife-beaters going back a century or more. The teams want to sell things so if they think you won't watch/buy if that person is working, they won't hire them. But there is not nor has there ever been a moral bar for how good a person you need to be to have to be to work in football or any other sport. And there should not be.