Offiicial Goodhell Watch Thread

[drasconis]

Can you show me these suspension rules and fine structure? Cuz judges don't throw out suspensions for being arbitrary when they are in writing and are set policy. I agree that one would assume it should be detailed out but it keep biting Rog on the ass because he wants to keep the decision making fluid and under his control.

Simple fact is that no matter how u slice it, Rog has been screwing the pooch and you simply don't have evidence destroyed unless there is something very damning in it. If there is not then you just created a world of mistrust around you. And now it is coming out that he lied about the amount of evidence, the duration, and pretty much everything else.

And to the largest fines in NFL history, the cheating was unprecedented as well. Tell the fans and other teams that those fines are commensurate with what has been taken from them. They are not.

he is right about most of the suspensions and fines...they are set by the league and the union together. examples:
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/9/19/6559533/nfl-new-drug-policy-details-nflpa
http://operations.nfl.com/football-ops/fines-appeals/

Goodell seems to get into trouble, like most league leaders do, when a situation becomes a PR nightmare and they try to go beyond/make an example of a player. I can't blame him fully for this, look how many DA cases happened in the NFL before Rice - the league and Union probably didn't find agreement and since no one was making a big deal of it let the issue slide. Rice blows up and Goodell goes max because he has to, the union pushes back because they have to....meanwhile both wish the issue would just go away. ultimately a policy is created - and it should have been done before but business is usually reactionary (pretty much all business - not just sports leagues).

That said I think he went light on the PATS the first time around, look how quickly they accepted the punishment - that by itself tells you how deep they thought it could get - lets be clear college football championships have been vacated so everyone knows how bad it CAN get. it is only getting that far if this thing goes before congress - until that happens every9one will keep quiet and deny or use lame excuses. If congress had hearings we would hear a lot of plead the 5th, I do not remember, and all wait for that one guy that either because he feels guilty, is pissed at the organization, or isn't being taken care of that starts ratting out everything...then we wait to see if others confirm. Walsh started down that path, but then they shut him up....but you get before congress and all bets are off - note that any nondisclosure agreement they have him sign can't prevent him from lawfully testifying !!!

 

[Stranger]

Can you state that he was? Why would you think that?

Can you state that he wasn't?

Goodhell....

• squashed evidence multiple times.
  
• pursuaded others in the NFL to release false statements
  
• oversaw an office who then further modified these false statements
• did all of the above to, in-part, mislead a Congressional investigation

This doesn't just look like a guy who is trying to protect "the company". This looks more and more like a guy who is dishonest and complicit.

When does repeated "bad judgement" become "bad character"?

 

[LesBaker]

I thought part of the new rule was the "exempt list" which meant suspended until Goodell decided to let them back in. Wasn't that part of the new policy? I don't thnk it was part of the old policy was it?

 

[RamFan503]

he is right about most of the suspensions and fines...they are set by the league and the union together. examples:
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/9/19/6559533/nfl-new-drug-policy-details-nflpa
http://operations.nfl.com/football-ops/fines-appeals/

That drug policy was not in the CBA but added afterwards as a reaction. So I'll concede that they finally did something immediately prior to last season that would help define some policies and put them in writing. Why? Because the NFLPA didn't like the idea of Goodhell being "judge, jury, and executioner". Their words. The marijuana change however was more a result of public opinion on the drug itself.

The fine structure is in the CBA. But it has nothing to do with suspensions and only establishes minimum fines the players association agreed not to contest.

Since the Rice case, the NFL has established a new set of guidelines to deal with Domestic abuse. It is not in the CBA and it is not agreed upon by the players association as far as I can find. But this kind of sums up what I am talking about when I say that the NFL can establish disciplinary practices without approval of the players association. The NFLPA can appeal the actions but the NFL is totally free to structure something that would be far more likely to hold up in court. By not doing so, Goodhell is trying to hold all the cards. It's idiocy. A judge wants to see an established rule of law - not one made up as a knee jerk reaction.

 

[…..]

Can you state that he wasn't?

You don't prove innocence in America, you prove guilt. If you're hellbent on assuming Goodell was part of a corrupt organization of crime whose purpose was to tape signs and steal plays in order to wrestle the Lombardi Trophy from the Greatest Show on Turf and to steal the Super Bowl from the Rams, that's on you.

Goodhell....

• squashed evidence multiple times.
  
• pursuaded others in the NFL to release false statements
  
• oversaw an office who then further modified these false statements
• did all of the above to, in-part, mislead a Congressional investigation

This doesn't just look like a guy who is trying to protect "the company". This looks more and more like a guy who is dishonest and complicit.

No, it looks like a bumbling idiot who tried like hell but could not cover all his tracks after making a poor decision.

When does repeated "bad judgement" become "bad character"?

Never, But it makes you an idiot pretty damn fast.

 

[RamFan503]

You don't prove innocence in America, you prove guilt. If you're hellbent on assuming Goodell was part of a corrupt organization of crime whose purpose was to tape signs and steal plays in order to wrestle the Lombardi Trophy from the Greatest Show on Turf and to steal the Super Bowl from the Rams, that's on you.



No, it looks like a bumbling idiot who tried like hell but could not cover all his tracks after making a poor decision.


Never, But it makes you an idiot pretty damn fast.

So people want to claim how brilliant Goodhell is and that you don't rise to that level by not being a smart and shrewd businessman but yet he is an idiot a the same time.

I agree that it appears he is not as smart as most of us were led to believe but I also don't buy that he just bumbled his way through a decision to destroy evidence. I don't necessarily think he was part of the plan to cheat the Rams out of the Superbowl but I do believe that the Cinderella story was too perfect and too lucrative for him to allow the evidence to see the light of day. IMO - that becomes complicity once he destroys the evidence. If you know about criminal behavior and you lie about it, that is a criminal offense whether you are the one who did it or not. It gets worse as he lies about the depth of the culture of cheating. And I don't for a second think he was just trying to do what was right.

 

[drasconis]

That drug policy was not in the CBA but added afterwards as a reaction. So I'll concede that they finally did something immediately prior to last season that would help define some policies and put them in writing. Why? Because the NFLPA didn't like the idea of Goodhell being "judge, jury, and executioner". Their words. The marijuana change however was more a result of public opinion on the drug itself.

The fine structure is in the CBA. But it has nothing to do with suspensions and only establishes minimum fines the players association agreed not to contest.

Since the Rice case, the NFL has established a new set of guidelines to deal with Domestic abuse. It is not in the CBA and it is not agreed upon by the players association as far as I can find. But this kind of sums up what I am talking about when I say that the NFL can establish disciplinary practices without approval of the players association. The NFLPA can appeal the actions but the NFL is totally free to structure something that would be far more likely to hold up in court. By not doing so, Goodhell is trying to hold all the cards. It's idiocy. A judge wants to see an established rule of law - not one made up as a knee jerk reaction.

Fully agreed. The system is very reactionary! Proactive is rarely the case here. These policies are forced on them by public outrage. The only thing I will say is that it isn't just sports leagues that are this way. I think if you look at most corporations the policies are this way also. If it is officially written out clearly it is because it was forced at some point, most of it is left vague so everyone has wiggle room, and neither side really wants to discuss it. Management is scared to death that they set a hard guideline and it affects someone high up the foodchain, the unions hardly want to touch it - they are supposed to be on the workers side which is generally good but here protecting the worker makes you look and feel like slime...so these things slide.

 

[RamFan503]

Fully agreed. The system is very reactionary! Proactive is rarely the case here. These policies are forced on them by public outrage. The only thing I will say is that it isn't just sports leagues that are this way. I think if you look at most corporations the policies are this way also. If it is officially written out clearly it is because it was forced at some point, most of it is left vague so everyone has wiggle room, and neither side really wants to discuss it. Management is scared to death that they set a hard guideline and it affects someone high up the foodchain, the unions hardly want to touch it - they are supposed to be on the workers side which is generally good but here protecting the worker makes you look and feel like slime...so these things slide.

Yes and no. (edit: Way more yes than no ) There are often set offenses that carry grounds for termination. Many are boiler plate - but maybe that is what you are talking about. They are only boiler plate because they keep happening. But in most cases - especially in "At Will" states, they are left vague on purpose. Which makes me wonder. How many times has the NFL lost one of these cases in an at will state? I honestly don't know and I also don't know how that works in regard to union contracts. Maybe union contracts supercede?

 

[Stranger]

You don't prove innocence in America, you prove guilt. If you're hellbent on assuming Goodell was part of a corrupt organization of crime whose purpose was to tape signs and steal plays in order to wrestle the Lombardi Trophy from the Greatest Show on Turf and to steal the Super Bowl from the Rams, that's on you.

First, I'm not in a criminal court of law, and neither is Goodhell. Those standards don't apply here.

Second, we're talking about whether we should trust this man, and whether he's good for the game of football. Given what we know today, I'd say it's a tough argument to show that he is honest and good for the game.

Third, I don't know exactly what Goodhell's motives were for destroying evidence and spining the words of others to squash a Congressional investigation. But he did this, and I had nothing to do with his actions, nor am I hellbent on any single explanation for his actions. This is you unfairly putting words into my mouth. But to assume that Goodhell is just being idiotic and making dumb decision after dumb decision is beyond naive to me.

 

[RamFan503]

First, I'm not in a criminal court of law, and neither is Goodhell. Those standards don't apply here.

I'm actually not so sure about this. If he lied to Congress, there may actually be criminal charges pressed. I would have to go back and look to see what exactly transpired back when Specter was raising the stink. If he gave testimony to a Senator in order to prevent a congressional hearing, it may get interesting on that front.

Regardless, Goodhell lied to a US Senator (I know - pot lying to a kettle) and I can't imagine the legislature is going to look kindly on that if this thing continues to spiral.

 

[Stranger]

I'm actually not so sure about this. If he lied to Congress, there may actually be criminal charges pressed. I would have to go back and look to see what exactly transpired back when Specter was raising the stink. If he gave testimony to a Senator in order to prevent a congressional hearing, it may get interesting on that front.

Regardless, Goodhell lied to a US Senator (I know - pot lying to a kettle) and I can't imagine the legislature is going to look kindly on that if this thing continues to spiral.

OMG. Good catch. I didn't think about this.

All it takes is one Congress member -- wanting to grand stand over this issue -- to give Goodhell a lot of heartache.

 

[LesBaker]

That drug policy was not in the CBA but added afterwards as a reaction. So I'll concede that they finally did something immediately prior to last season that would help define some policies and put them in writing. Why? Because the NFLPA didn't like the idea of Goodhell being "judge, jury, and executioner". Their words. The marijuana change however was more a result of public opinion on the drug itself.

The fine structure is in the CBA. But it has nothing to do with suspensions and only establishes minimum fines the players association agreed not to contest.

Since the Rice case, the NFL has established a new set of guidelines to deal with Domestic abuse. It is not in the CBA and it is not agreed upon by the players association as far as I can find. But this kind of sums up what I am talking about when I say that the NFL can establish disciplinary practices without approval of the players association. The NFLPA can appeal the actions but the NFL is totally free to structure something that would be far more likely to hold up in court. By not doing so, Goodhell is trying to hold all the cards. It's idiocy. A judge wants to see an established rule of law - not one made up as a knee jerk reaction.

Correct, and I was wrong, the suspensions are separate from the fines which are in the CBA. Suspensions are a separate "document". But they are still agreed to and when Rice punched his lady the "old" rules were still in place. Goodell didn't have the option to do more because the standard was two games.

The only reason people even cared was the video. Nothing was really ever made of any other player in the NFL hitting a woman..........the media didn't care and most fans weren't outraged. And domestic violence may be the one area where the NFL has a higher rate than the general population.

As far as the union and the new policy on domestic violence and sex crimes I think they filed a grievance because they didn't like the new policy and I don't know if it's been heard by a judge. As long ago as all this happened I would assume it has but I haven't looked.

 

[LesBaker]

I'm actually not so sure about this. If he lied to Congress, there may actually be criminal charges pressed. I would have to go back and look to see what exactly transpired back when Specter was raising the stink. If he gave testimony to a Senator in order to prevent a congressional hearing, it may get interesting on that front.

Regardless, Goodhell lied to a US Senator (I know - pot lying to a kettle) and I can't imagine the legislature is going to look kindly on that if this thing continues to spiral.

Nah, they won't do a thing and don't forget the players who lied about steroid use to congress.

No charges will get filed against Goodell.

And I still think that the smart thing to do was destroy the evidence. Had it leaked out the results of that could have, and probably would have, been far, far worse. Look at cheating scandals in sports..........and the shit that hits the fan. No way Goodell was going to let that happen when he could make sure the NFL would take less heat by destroying everything and saying "nothing new was there, it's all good now thanks everyone and goodnight". Of the options available deswtroying everything was the smart play for the NFL in my opinion.

 

[RamFan503]

Correct, and I was wrong, the suspensions are separate from the fines which are in the CBA. Suspensions are a separate "document". But they are still agreed to and when Rice punched his lady the "old" rules were still in place. Goodell didn't have the option to do more because the standard was two games.

1 - 4 games was the rule in place that covered domestic violence. Does this look like a consistency of two game suspensions?

As the league faces a firestorm of outrage over how it handled recent cases, USA TODAY Sports looked at every case in which an NFL player was accused of domestic abuse since NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell took office eight years ago.

Three trends emerged:

--A brief suspension: In at least 14 cases, the league or the team suspended or deactivated the players, mostly for just one game. Only one of those was suspended more than two games prior to the league's recent controversy involving then-Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice, who was suspended indefinitely after video surfaced that showed he punched his now-wife in the elevator of an Atlantic City casino.

--No suspension: In 16 cases, the league did not suspend the player, often in accordance with how prosecutors viewed those cases. Seven of those cases resulted in legal charges being dropped, plus one acquittal. Six others entered diversion programs to avoid prosecution.

--Grandstand justice: In 15 cases, players were released or not re-signed by their teams soon after their arrest and then never played another NFL game. These players often had marginal talent, but teams could make a show of their release by appearing to have a zero-tolerance policy toward domestic violence
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...c-abuse-history-under-roger-goodell/16566615/

The only reason people even cared was the video. Nothing was really ever made of any other player in the NFL hitting a woman..........the media didn't care and most fans weren't outraged. And domestic violence may be the one area where the NFL has a higher rate than the general population.

True dat.

As far as the union and the new policy on domestic violence and sex crimes I think they filed a grievance because they didn't like the new policy and I don't know if it's been heard by a judge. As long ago as all this happened I would assume it has but I haven't looked.

Yeah - they filed a grievance with the NFL Management Council back in January. I don't think it has gone much of anywhere from there. The union pretty much had to as they do with anything not negotiated with them. Doesn't mean most of them actually go anywhere - they just have to show the decision was made without a vote of the union even if (as is apparently the case here) they gave input on the new policy.

 

[LesBaker]

Was the 1-4 games for a first offender?

I recall reading that 2 games was the "standard".

The grandstand thing is sadly very true.

But it's not just domestic violence. It's across the board, if you're a good to great player you're not getting cut.

 

[RamFan503]

Nah, they won't do a thing and don't forget the players who lied about steroid use to congress.

No charges will get filed against Goodell.

And I still think that the smart thing to do was destroy the evidence. Had it leaked out the results of that could have, and probably would have, been far, far worse. Look at cheating scandals in sports..........and the crap that hits the fan. No way Goodell was going to let that happen when he could make sure the NFL would take less heat by destroying everything and saying "nothing new was there, it's all good now thanks everyone and goodnight". Of the options available deswtroying everything was the smart play for the NFL in my opinion.

History would dictate that you are right on the bolded.

Time will tell on the rest. This could become a much bigger scandal depending on what evidence comes forward.

Goodhell could have buried the patsies and he would be looked at as an honest guy running an organization that doesn't allow cheating. The NCAA has stripped several titles over the years including the national title for far less and I don't see college football going down the tubes.

 

[RamFan503]

Was the 1-4 games for a first offender?

I recall reading that 2 games was the "standard".

The grandstand thing is sadly very true.

But it's not just domestic violence. It's across the board, if you're a good to great player you're not getting cut.

On conduct I believe it was 1st offense but still discretionary. I'd have to read back through.

But yeah - no tape = no outrage. Limited talent = little to no help from the union and you are an afterthought.

The NFL's problem is that this all spells inconsistent and arbitrary enforcement. If you are going to come in as the enforcer (Goodhell) then you better have your ducks in a row. He clearly did not and even when repeatedly overturned, didn't do anything about it.

When he went after Brady for the footballs it was almost a, "we know you did it and you know you did it so here's what you are going to take and be happy about it." He then had a shitty ass investigation carried out followed by throwing a dart at the board of penalties.

But I can never EVER forgive him for destroying the tapes and files and will go to my grave KNOWING that the cheating involved cost my team a Superbowl - a game that we "lost" by a last second FG. Even the slightest advantage is worth 3 fucking points.

 

[Stranger]

On conduct I believe it was 1st offense but still discretionary. I'd have to read back through.

But yeah - no tape = no outrage. Limited talent = little to no help from the union and you are an afterthought.

The NFL's problem is that this all spells inconsistent and arbitrary enforcement. If you are going to come in as the enforcer (Goodhell) then you better have your ducks in a row. He clearly did not and even when repeatedly overturned, didn't do anything about it.

When he went after Brady for the footballs it was almost a, "we know you did it and you know you did it so here's what you are going to take and be happy about it." He then had a crappy ass investigation carried out followed by throwing a dart at the board of penalties.

But I can never EVER forgive him for destroying the tapes and files and will go to my grave KNOWING that the cheating involved cost my team a Superbowl - a game that we "lost" by a last second FG. Even the slightest advantage is worth 3 freaking points.

Great posting, 503.

 

[RamFan503]

Great posting, 503.

Thanks.

I get a little emotional, I admit, when it comes to the whole patsies cheating our team thing. When people try to say it didn't happen or couldn't have been the difference, I can't accept that. If it wasn't worth the difference, why do it? Three freaking points! I believe it was worth more but to say it wasn't worth a 3 point advantage is IMO BS. And sorry but the story was already out about the Rams Superbowl before it was scuttled by the NFL. You can't put horse shit in the feeder and say it's still alfalfa.

Now more is coming out about it and I'm supposed to either act surprised, pretend it still didn't matter, or act like something couldn't possibly be done about it? Screw that. Do what the NCAA has done and strip those asshats of their titles. Issue the equivalent of a death sentence in banning them from the playoffs for a few years and stripping them of their first round picks for 5 years. Send a real message that this kind of crap is ultimately detrimental to the game and you are not going to take it. The WORLD would be in your corner.

But have someone besides Roger freaking Goodhell or the NFL itself conduct the investigation. Then ban that hoodie wearing POS and put an asterisk next to his butt buddy QB.

Goodhell has been a complete destructive force for the game we all love.

 

[Stranger]

A new commissioner, if he is to gain credibility, is going to have to finally deal with Spygate in a transparent, thorough and judicious manner ... laying down apprpropriate penalties for everyone involved, no matter who.