All Hail Roger Goodell ... Or Else: A Look At the NFL Personal Conduct Policy

As reported earlier, Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports cites sources suggesting that Michael Vick and Plaxico Burress could be sitting out for a long time, due to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell's concerns about their legal matters.

Though the happy talk from the NFL is that the personal conduct policy is working (Donte Stallworth's victim notwithstanding, I guess), the players are not terribly comfortable with a system that has no specific rules and has no neutral arbiter.

Upcoming Labor Issues

According to the NFL Players Association, league discipline is going to be an issue in the upcoming labor talks:

League discipline is appealed to the NFL Commissioner or his appointee, and it is not likely that the league is going to disagree with itself when appeals are heard. It is clear from our ongoing team meetings that players see league discipline as becoming more and more excessive, and that the best way to address the problem is to insist that the next CBA require neutral arbitration for league discipline as well.

Michael David Smith wrote that one of the most unreported stories in the NFL is how much resentment the players have towards the commissioner, in regard to how he has handled disciplinary issues.

The cynic in me thinks that maybe Goodell wants to make the policy as harsh as he can, because he can then use that as a bargaining chip in the negotiations.

As a fan, I'm not sure I'm comfortable with Goodell being police, judge, jury and appeals court regarding player discipline. Are there are no rules for what discipline is going to be other than whatever side of the bed Goodell wakes up on? Or him sticking his finger in the wind and seeing what the mob of public opinion says?

Here's a review of the NFL Personal Conduct Policy for those of you who either like it or hate it.

History of the Personal Conduct Policy

The biggest change from the old policy to the updated one currently in place is that it is now easier for the commissioner to discipline players, even if they were innocent in the eyes of the law -- "innocent" meaning that there hasn't been a final disposition of their case in a court of law.

Repeated offenders can be disciplined on an "expedited basis." And first-time offenders can be disciplined immediately if the matter involves "significant bodily harm."

The policy came to be because of Pacman Jones -- the Titans barely disciplined their own player because they wanted to keep him on the field. Teams disciplined their star players differently than their non-star players (which still happens under the new personal conduct policy).

On top of that, Goodell clearly was concerned that the legal system didn't punish players fast enough or hard enough. Goodell also didn't want to have to wait for the legal system to take its course before he effectuated league punishment.

He wants to hold the players to a higher punishment than just what the law requires.

I understand that some people don't like the American criminal justice system. They get concerned that celebrities get special treatment, and they hate how slow the process tends to go. Some people believe that proving "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" is a foolish standard that should be replaced with "everybody knows he's guilty."

But I'm not sure that it helps the NFL's image any by coming up with their own extra-legal discipline beyond what happens with the justice system or punishing innocent people. It just turns the focus of the league into Court TV.

Unintended Consequences

I've repeatedly written on this subject. When the policy was first enacted, I was concerned about the "Unintended Consequences of NFL Personal Conduct Policy:"

I'm the last one to be an apologist for lawbreaking NFL players, but I've been wondering lately if the NFL's new personal conduct policy actually INCREASES the amount of attention given to NFL player badness....Ultimately, at least in the short term, it seems as though the NFL personal conduct policy designed to get players to stop damaging the NFL's reputation may actually be bringing more attention to player's misdeeds.

And, I believe, this is what happened. It seems like so much NFL talk is now dedicated to trying to figure out appropriate punishments for different player actions. I'm not sure how much it improves the image of the league when newspapers, blogs and sports talk have to spend large amounts of time discussing players' criminal activities and wondering about vague suspension rules instead of what happens on the field.

The talk associated with the uncertainty of Goodell's punishment puts more attention on player misdeeds and less on the majority of players who don't get sideways with the law.

Extra Punishment Leads to Strange Outcomes

When a league decides to create its own form of punishment beyond what the legal system does, without any guidelines other than what is in Goodell's brain, it can lead to weird outcomes.

Should league punishment of DUI Manslaughter be worse than punishment of DUI? Mike Florio at PFT.com suggests the answer should be no. Dumb luck is the only difference between drunk driving that kills someone and doesn't.

Should DUI or dog fighting or shooting yourself in the leg lead to harsher punishment than domestic violence?

You can make all sorts of arguments for different punishments, but it seems to me that it becomes convoluted trying to come up with an ad hoc system that leads to outcomes that will satisfy the NFL's image concerns.

Revisions in the Policy for 2009 and Gaming the System

Rumors suggest that the 2009 Personal Conduct Policy is going to be rewritten in a way to make it easier to quickly discipline first-time arrested players. This has become an issue in the Plaxico Burress case because of perceived gaming of the system. According to the Yahoo! report, Goodell is angry that Burress is not accepting a plea deal that involves jail time. The thought is that, by not accepting a plea, he is purposely delaying an outcome so he can still play this season.

Of course, it may be that Burress is not accepting that sort of plea due to his lawyer's belief that jail time is a harsher sentence than what non-celebrities would receive in similar circumstances.

So What Should the NFL Do?

Given that Goodell has decided that, for image reasons he needs to take over the role of the courts, I'm thinking one of two things happen: 1. He keeps tweaking the policy for each nasty case that comes down the road; 2. The players, at some point, rebel against it in the labor talks.

I don't know. I kind of preferred it when our imperfect legal system dealt with player misconduct, and the commissioner primarily dealt with sports stuff. And that the only speculation was going to be what would the courts do, instead of what random thing the commissioner might do, and whether his actions were going to favor or hurt a particular player or team.

Who needs blackballing and collusion when the uncertainty of what Goodell might do will keep players from being signed by anyone?

You might think my concerns are overblown, but not likely if your team is the one that got their salary cap destroyed because of an accusation against a player, or is in limbo trying to find out the fate of a key player. If the goal of the policy is decrease player criminal acts and to improve the league's image, I am not sure it is working. There's too much talk about player bad acts, and partially it's because the policy puts the focus on whatever Goodell might be thinking.

The American legal system isn't perfect, but at least there are actual rules.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

7-01-2009 @ 1:01PM

Yohncc said...

I agree with you Stephanie. For awhile I thought it was just me whop thought that Roger Goodell was being overly harsh. It's bad enough that there are all of thse criminal offenses taking place before during and after the season. It doesn't justify the commissioner trying to make a name for himself by trying to become the NFL "czar" and bigger than the N.F.L. itself. He has done some crazy things (like excessively fining touchdown celebrations i.e playing a musical instrument or making a snowangel). I understand why endzone dancing had to go (although I have to admit that I loved it), but come on, get real with this stuff and let the players have fun during the games. That's what's sports is supposed to be about. The next thing you know Rog will start fining the fans for excessive tailgating!! Ugh!!

7-01-2009 @ 1:04PM

If the players were allowed to have more fun on the field, maybe there would be fewer crimes during the offeason.

7-01-2009 @ 1:19PM

malt said...

Yes I agree with the other people who have posted. Why can't football players go to strip clubs, get in fights,engage in illegal dog fighting, oh yeah;drunk driving and vehicular manslaughter whenever they want to. What business is it how many times they shoot themselves in the leg with illegally concealed weapons. Wait a minute,never mind.

7-01-2009 @ 9:07PM

Stephanie Stradley said...

This post is not suggesting that the NFL do nothing. I'm trying to start a reasoned dialogue on whether what the NFL is doing is the best way of handling discipline.

Also, it is worth noting that most people who get in trouble of the law, athletes and otherwise, never believe that they could ever be an accused criminal. Criminals are always the other guy.

What is interesting about the NFL policy is how it deals with athletes who are accused of crimes but not yet convicted and how there is no real appeals process. That is unusual in a sports league.

It ends up being a big media deal because it will always be the high profile players caught up in this. If the player is no good, the team will likely just cut them.

7-02-2009 @ 2:44PM

Jake said...

As a society, we are used to being judged by juries, panels, boards or at least a group of people rather than one person. I think this is why Goodell is coming onto the radar lately.
On the one hand, he SEEMS to be meting out "sentences" with SOME sort of sliding scale (You kill = jail = long NFL suspension
You don't kill = you plead and get probation = shorter suspension).
On the other hand, people night be more comfortable with at least a 3-person panel- say Goodell, the head of NFL officiating ( Mike something) and a retired judge ??

Certainly not perfect, but maybe better than one-man rule?

7-01-2009 @ 2:46PM

Mark said...

"According to the NFL Players Association, league discipline is going to be an issue in the upcoming labor talks:

League discipline is appealed to the NFL Commissioner or his appointee, and it is not likely that the league is going to disagree with itself when appeals are heard. It is clear from our ongoing team meetings that players see league discipline as becoming more and more excessive, and that the best way to address the problem is to insist that the next CBA require neutral arbitration for league discipline as well."

The best way to address the problem is not break the rules! Man, what a bunch of lowlife losers, trying to make things easier when they do something wrong.

7-01-2009 @ 2:54PM

I shouldve added dont break the law either. If the players didnt do something wrong they wouldnt have to worry about what the commissioner was going to decide. Personally I think it's good he is cracking down on them. Anyone seen the movie "Liar,Liar" when the repeat criminal held up someone at knifepoint and called Jim Carrey for legal advice to stay out of trouble? "STOP BREAKING THE LAW A$$HOLE! "

7-01-2009 @ 3:57PM

HL CULVER said...

Roger is right on the money. I get sick and tired of these high paid, high maintenance guys that haven't got a clue about the real world. They think they are above the law. They are finding out now that they are not. What society needs is more Roger Goodell's!

7-01-2009 @ 6:18PM

rodbellinc said...

I agree with most of you all. The NFL players are allowed to many breaks and leniencies. The problem starts in middle and high school when students can skip classes and are given grades to stay eligible. No wonder they feel like it is unfair to receive a punishment for a crime. wait, these are the same guys who get paid millions of dollars and cry to management that their contract is unfair. Well, hopefully you guys can save some money, because Goodall will be the least of your problems, if you have to get a real job.

7-01-2009 @ 11:01PM

morristimmy24 said...

to those who are saying that mostly yall just jealous of them do you really know how hard it is to make the nfl overpaid thye arent paid enough for putting there bodies on the line to play a sport they love

7-02-2009 @ 9:45AM

Faboy said...

The NFL can be viewed as a single company, with Roger Goodell as the president. He should be allowed significant discretion on who can stay and work for the NFL, players and teams' front office personel alike. Would Bill Gates be criticized if he rid himself of employees that committed the same alleged crimes as Buress and the others? Further, if Buress brought an illegal gun to a night club, who is to say he does not bring one to team meetings and other NFL related events. From a safety standpoint, it makes sense to get rid of Buress. What if the gun went of at a United Way benefit? There is still the UFL, Arena Football, and the CFL in which these players can earn a living. Too bad for them it doesn't pay as well. They all had their chance as an employee of the NFL. Now it's time to get a new job. In this economy (I see it at my job) several people are fired for the flimsiest of reasons. The NFL should be no different. The accused players should be happy to have a strong union help with their case, a luxury most Americans don't have. Lastly, the Union would do better in the public relations department if it helped get these players OUT of the league. The Union should focus its attention on the majority of players that are hard working and law abiding: Get better pay and quicker free agency for late round draft picks that succeed quickly in the NFL, so they don't have to wait four years to cash in; Help bring down the cost of signing first round draft picks, and get the money to veteran players instead; and revise the franchise tag, as it is a good concept but the cost of two first round picks is too high.

7-02-2009 @ 1:02PM

wildasu said...

This article is thoughtful and points out a potential problems that the NFL (and fans) will face at some point.

Placing the power in one individual to investigate, prosecute, determine guilt, sentence and determine appeals is a solution that has never worked well over history. We are asking too much in the expectation that Goodell can correct flawed legal decisions, balance the player rights, protect the league image, investigate offenses, and retain authority over football related matters.

I am not sure what "football" punishments are appropriate when comparing drug usage (criminal act), performance enhancement drugs (cheating), alcohol offenses (personality disorder), domestic disputes (violence toward less strong), lifestyle (association), gambling (integrity of game), and criminal acts (from dogs to homicides). A framework needs to be put in place for deciding all of these types of punishments or there will be reasonable disagreement on what sanctions are proper.

It is only a matter of time before the Commissioner's discipline decisions will start to be questioned by players, owners, media, and fans. (Example: why is a hard hit on a QB equal in suspension time to beating up a girl? or why is cheating by performance enhancers less of an offense than DUI?)

Some panel of representation decision makers, similar to a jury or court, must be set up or the Commissioner will lose authority to act on important football matters.

[As an aside thought just for fun, if the Commissioner making these decisions were someone else, would we have the same confidence in this system? Example of commissioner possibilities: Al Davis (once a Commissioner), Gregg Levy (didn't get the job in 2006), Bud Selig (anyone have confidence he could handle this?), Jim Finks (what ever happened to?), George Bush (baseball man well sort of) or Condoleezza Rice (rumored to have interest in baseball commissioner job) After all it is an election of 32 and Mike Brown, Al Davis and Jerry Jones all get votes].

7-02-2009 @ 2:36PM

Matt Snyder said...

Good comment. Unfortunately most people are too busy denigrating the entire league due to a few bad examples -- as witnessed from some of the comments above -- to see the problem is with how Goodell is proceeding with this "policy."

7-02-2009 @ 6:52PM

packerbf4tb said...

Burress was so dumb and irresponsible with
a gun he shot himself...better him than somebody
else...what was he thinking?...somebody needs
to get the guy some help because this isn't the
first time he was in trouble off the field.....
same goes for Vick, Pacman, any other player....
the only thing is any off field problems when
the law is involved should be treated equally...
doesn't matter if you shoot yourself, torture
and kill animals, domestic abuse, DUI, whatever
.....it is inappropriate behavior period.......
especially for persons where everybody knows
your name.....players are held to a higher
level ...idolized by millions of people all over
the world...Goodell is probably disgusted by
it all when he has to figure out how to punish
grown men who don't play by the rules of the
game or society.....take away the money, the
season, and if they get into any kind of trouble
again then kick them out of the league.....
nobody cares until they get caught...just like
any other lawbreaker.....then the "I am so
sorry" stories begin......I hope Goodell does
what he doesn't enjoy and that is trying to
get these players to own up to their mistakes
and bad choices .........................

7-02-2009 @ 10:38PM

I don't see how there is a problem with how Goodell is proceeding with the "policy". If didnt break the laws or the rules wouldn't have to worry about it.

7-03-2009 @ 5:13PM

s0380mr said...

most nfl players make more at the min than most of us will over a number of years. how is it fair for star power or money to get them a slap on the wrist? talent and ability doesn't equal intellegents. at the end of the day they are still people like us, so they should be held accountable for what they do. if goodell is trying to make up for the legal system at least we should give him credit for that much. the laws should be equal for all. too bad it's not the case.