NFL's Players Conduct Policy

[KLHJ2]

Recently I have been thinking that commissioner Goodell has been a little over enforcing the NFL's Players Conduct Policy.

Sure, I understand the rules to suspend players who have had more than one run in with the law, but there are first time offenders out there that have been suspended with 1st time offenses. Donte Stallworth and Michael Vick both come to mind. There may be others however. As far as I know the law dictates that a person is allowed to have employment until actually convicted of crime. I also believe that once a person has paid his/her debt to society that they are able to be re employed. If this is the law then why does the commissioner justify suspending first time offenders and furthermore those who have already paid their debt to society? I thought that the policy was to affect multiple offenders.

The reason that I ask this is because he is already beginning to investigate Plax, who I believe to have no other offenses prior to shooting himself. While I am certainly not a Giants fan, I am trying to understand how he can pass such judgment without Plax having any prior offenses and before the actual LAW makes a judgment on him.

I feel the commish may be overstepping his bounds and the NFLPA is doing nothing about it.

Sure the players have to agree to it, but is it actually being utilized the way that it is supposed to be. IMHO I believe that the Goodell is abusing his power.

NFL, Players Are Expected To Agree on Conduct Policy - washingtonpost.com

http://www.nflplayers.com/images/fck...icy%202008.pdf

[jamf]

I agree with you.

I think the intention was to suspended players like Pacman Jones and even Brandon Marshall. Unfortunately he has backed himself into a corner and must come out swinging whenever anyone is involved in a criminal case.

The problem I think he is trying to address is most players get preferential treatment or can simply get the best legal team money can buy and never have to face consequences for their actions.

[BringBackJoeT]

Originally Posted by Angry

Recently I have been thinking that commissioner Goodell has been a little over enforcing the NFL's Players Conduct Policy.

Sure, I understand the rules to suspend players who have had more than one run in with the law, but there are first time offenders out there that have been suspended with 1st time offenses. Donte Stallworth and Michael Vick both come to mind. There may be others however. As far as I know the law dictates that a person is allowed to have employment until actually convicted of crime. I also believe that once a person has paid his/her debt to society that they are able to be re employed. If this is the law then why does the commissioner justify suspending first time offenders and furthermore those who have already paid their debt to society? I thought that the policy was to affect multiple offenders.

The reason that I ask this is because he is already beginning to investigate Plax, who I believe to have no other offenses prior to shooting himself. While I am certainly not a Giants fan, I am trying to understand how he can pass such judgment without Plax having any prior offenses and before the actual LAW makes a judgment on him.

I feel the commish may be overstepping his bounds and the NFLPA is doing nothing about it.

Sure the players have to agree to it, but is it actually being utilized the way that it is supposed to be. IMHO I believe that the Goodell is abusing his power.

NFL, Players Are Expected To Agree on Conduct Policy - washingtonpost.com

http://www.nflplayers.com/images/fck...icy%202008.pdf

While I'm inclined to agree with the spirit of your point here (sort of), the fact is that, no, it is not the law that you are entitled to keep any particular job you have until you have been convicted of a crime, or that, once you have completed your sentence for a particular crime, you are entitled to any previous position you had prior to your commission of the crime.

The scope of the commissioner's authority to punish players is generally based on the terms of the currently-operating collective bargaining agreement the player's union has with the league.

[wolfeskins]

alot depends on the crime also. like a felony charge versus a misdemeaner(sp) charge.

[wolfeskins]

goodell has decided to rule with an iron fist and thats fine, as long as he stays somewhat consistant.

[MTK]

I don't see anything wrong with it personally. He's protecting the shield. The last thing anybody needs is the NFL turning into the NBA or MLB.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I don't see anything wrong with it personally. He's protecting the shield. The last thing anybody needs is the NFL turning into the NBA or MLB.

[CRedskinsRule]

First. As far as I know, no one is "guaranteed" a job, and certainly if you have committed a crime many employers will say see ya, rather than risk any potential liability on their end.

Second. Specific to Plaxico, as far as I understand it, right now he is unemployed. He is not signed with any team. If you go to an interview and have pending charges, I am positive your potential employer would consider that in his/her decision process. If the commissioner wants to put a ban on Plaxico, then I am sure the teams would prefer to know that sooner rather than later.

3rd, like Matty said, the NFL tries to protect its integrity, and generally speaking that is a good thing.

[tryfuhl]

I think that sometimes it's a bit harsh, but integrity isn't a bad thing.

[Daseal]

I'm not against enforcing strict penalties against players who bring shame to the shield, but I have an issue with the way Goodell handles things. My first major gripe, is that there isn't any sort of consistency with punishments. Shouldn't two players convinced of the same crime get the exact same punishment from the NFL? Make it like the steroid policy. Make tiers of offenses, and clearly label what the punishment will be from the league.

Secondly, I don't particular like that he rules on issues before the courts see them. NFL players are targets to a lot of people looking for a quick payday. It's important to make sure that the individual is actually guilty of a crime before punishment. I don't need this to be confirmed by a court of law because the NFL employees their own investigative team that does a great job. If they see strong evidence saying the player committed the crime, then by all means proceed with the process, just let the public know.

I feel like repeat offenders and folks that just damage the integrity of the shield by putting themselves in bad situations (Pac-Man and strip clubs) also need punishments. Put a tier in that includes legal activities that still damage the shield and go from there, and make up to three offenses, then you're out. Make each offense a harder and harder suspension. If you don't get it by the 3rd issue, you probably won't.

I guess all I'm really asking for from him is consistency, and the fact that the commissioner is judge, jury, and executioner makes me uneasy. Too much power. When a player appeals, who does he go in front of, the same guy that gave him the suspension. Something about that process is fishy to me. It's time to hire an independent group to deal with appeals, and perhaps suspensions.

[firstdown]

I get your point what was he thinking when he suspended MV. By law people who do their time have the right to go out and get a job but they don't have a right to a job. Its stupid that we even have to have conduct policies to keep these a$$ hole players in line.

[wilsowilso]

I don't get the "it was a first time offense" argument with regards to Stallworth and Vick?

If the first time you have a run in with the law is when you kill somebody or you slaughter helpless dogs while running an illegal and inhumane gambling den and then you proceed to lie to the Feds as well as the commissioner's face you need to pay. Big time.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

I don't get the "it was a first time offense" argument with regards to Stallworth and Vick?

If the first time you have a run in with the law is when you kill somebody or you slaughter helpless dogs while running an illegal and inhumane gambling den and then you proceed to lie to the Feds as well as the commissioner's face you need to pay. Big time.

Obviously you do not feel that it is a case of "Double Jeopardy", but I do. These men are not only being punished by the Law, but they are being punished again by the commissioner. Is once not enough? We all know that they have to live with those things the rest of their lives...but whatever sure, yeah, just kick a man when he is down, spit in his face and take advantage of his wife while you are at it. As soon as somebody screws up once they should be punished continuously over and over because the rest of us are so all effin perfect.

[joethiesmanfan]

Matt Jones end of argument

[saden1]

We have an employee conduct policy at my company and my continued employment hinges on adhering to this policy. I see no reason why the NFL couldn't have a similar policy. You are more than welcome to play in the CFL or XFL, or Burger King if you don't wish to follow the rules. If you feel there has been an injustice carried against you, please feel free to sue.