ARTICLE: NFL to fine teams with suspended players

[Jack-Reacher]

This league has been through a murderer (Carruth) of a pregnant woman, an accused murderers in Ray Lewis and OJ Simpson (and probably others), all sorts of players involved in fraud, drugs, rape, assault, and just about any law you can throw at 'em. And yet the league has never had a problem with sponsorship dollars.





YAKUZA

True, but look at where the NBA ended up. They got a reputation as a league of thugs and lost hundreds of millions in TV dollars and they are still trying to recover from their image problem.

 

[DABOYZ]

They may not get thrown in jail for misconduct of their employees but they can be liable. Take an employee that is involved in an accident while intoxicated in a company vehicle. The company is one of the first to be named in the lawsuit.

Companies can be liable even when it isn't an actual employee, if a company sponsors a race team or vehicle and an accident happens where someone is injured they get sued.

The fine a team would pay is equivalent to this, rather than the analogy of jail time.

Aren't we talking about off the field issues? This entire post just through me for a loop. I thought I was losing it but then quickly realized it just didn't make any sense.

Of course companies can get sued for things that can be proven to be their fault. So how exactly is it a teams(department of the NFL) fault when a player gets in trouble and yet the company(in this case the NFL) is responsible for nothing?

Let's not forget there is a justice system in place in this great country we call the USA. If a player is found guilty of commiting a crime, the NFL should suspend them or in some cases simply ban them from the league.

One last thing, we are talking about professional sports. Many of these guys come from broken families or a very rough life. No one including Goodell can expect all of these guys to walk a straight line. If you want clean cut, stay out of trouble type of players your watching the wrong sport. Tennis or golf might be your cup of tea.

 

[Velvet Jones]

Goodell to fine teams for player misbehavior

May 20, 7:31 pm EDT


ATLANTA (AP)—The NFL put more teeth in its personal conduct policy on Tuesday when commissioner Roger Goodell announced he would fine teams whose players were suspended for disciplinary reasons... unless you are the Patriots

-- fixed

 

[Jack-Reacher]

Aren't we talking about off the field issues? This entire post just through me for a loop. I thought I was losing it but then quickly realized it just didn't make any sense.

Of course companies can get sued for things that can be proven to be their fault. So how exactly is it a teams(department of the NFL) fault when a player gets in trouble and yet the company(in this case the NFL) is responsible for nothing?

Let's not forget there is a justice system in place in this great country we call the USA. If a player is found guilty of commiting a crime, the NFL should suspend them or in some cases simply ban them from the league.

One last thing, we are talking about professional sports. Many of these guys come from broken families or a very rough life. No one including Goodell can expect all of these guys to walk a straight line. If you want clean cut, stay out of trouble type of players your watching the wrong sport. Tennis or golf might be your cup of tea.

We are talking about off the field issues, but a company can be sued if the employee is technically off duty. I wouldn't call the NFL the company in this analogy anyway. I look at it more like the NFL is the customer, the teams are the employers, the players the employees, and the fans as the consumer. We are splitting hairs, the entire point of my post was to say say that it isn't uncommon for an employer to be fined if they have an employee screw up while on or off duty.

I don't expect to watch a bunch of choir boys while I am watching football, but I do think that the owners need to have a vested interest in the image of the sport. If this in some way makes an owner hesitant to pull the trigger on a known character issue guy out of college, then maybe that will in turn make some of these kids smarten up a little bit if they are looking to the NFL for employment.

I get so tired of hearing the broken family and/or neighborhood excuses for poor behavior. I think that the NFL absolutely has a right to expect their players to stay out of trouble, they go to great lengths to educate the rookies about this particular issue. If a young man chooses not to walk away from his negative influences then he doesn't deserve to play in the NFL. This doesn't mean that I think guys don't deserve a second chance or they should be under a first strike and your out policy, but the teams need a vested interest int he maturation process of these young men.

 

[VietCowboy]

I get so tired of hearing the broken family and/or neighborhood excuses for poor behavior. I think that the NFL absolutely has a right to expect their players to stay out of trouble, they go to great lengths to educate the rookies about this particular issue. If a young man chooses not to walk away from his negative influences then he doesn't deserve to play in the NFL. This doesn't mean that I think guys don't deserve a second chance or they should be under a first strike and your out policy, but the teams need a vested interest int he maturation process of these young men.

Maybe it is the fact that these are 18-22 year olds with a LOT of popularity. some can handle it, others can't.

 

[DABOYZ]

We are talking about off the field issues, but a company can be sued if the employee is technically off duty. I wouldn't call the NFL the company in this analogy anyway. I look at it more like the NFL is the customer, the teams are the employers, the players the employees, and the fans as the consumer. We are splitting hairs, the entire point of my post was to say say that it isn't uncommon for an employer to be fined if they have an employee screw up while on or off duty.

I don't expect to watch a bunch of choir boys while I am watching football, but I do think that the owners need to have a vested interest in the image of the sport. If this in some way makes an owner hesitant to pull the trigger on a known character issue guy out of college, then maybe that will in turn make some of these kids smarten up a little bit if they are looking to the NFL for employment.

I get so tired of hearing the broken family and/or neighborhood excuses for poor behavior. I think that the NFL absolutely has a right to expect their players to stay out of trouble, they go to great lengths to educate the rookies about this particular issue. If a young man chooses not to walk away from his negative influences then he doesn't deserve to play in the NFL. This doesn't mean that I think guys don't deserve a second chance or they should be under a first strike and your out policy, but the teams need a vested interest int he maturation process of these young men.

A company can only be sued for an employees action's if that employee is officially on the clock or representing their company. I would like to see an example of a company getting sued for an employee who was on personal time. No company can be held accountable for their employees 24/7 as some might suggest.

The NFL sends these players to a rookie orientation. I wouldn't call this "going to great lengths." Yes, ex-players and professionals are brought in to share their stories but this isn't preventing anything. Very similiar to mom and dad telling you not to have unprotected sex for the first time. Some listen, most don't.

As many have stated here, some players are mature enough to walk away from bad influences and some aren't. For those who can't stay out of trouble ban them from the league or suspend them, end of story. Fining teams will just make it much harder for the owners and players to agree on a new CBA.

I don't know about you guys but I could care less about the NFL's image. I don't watch the NFL because it has a better image than other sports. The NFL wasn't built with image in mind anyway. I for one will continue to cheer for my Cowboys regardless of who is wearing the uniform. Image=cop out.

My main point is: players should and can be dealt with without having to fine their respective teams.

 

[Jack-Reacher]

A company can only be sued for an employees action's if that employee is officially on the clock or representing their company. I would like to see an example of a company getting sued for an employee who was on personal time. No company can be held accountable for their employees 24/7 as some might suggest.

That is just not true, but I am sure some of the lawyers that frequent this board can attest to this much better than I can.

We got sued because my brother was working on his car in our shop and sent his friend to the parts store for parts. The friend had a seizure while driving and ended up crossing the lane and killing an elderly couple. Now I personally had nothing to do with either the accident or the repairs that were going on on my brothers vehicle, who didn't have permission to use the facility and yet here I am being dragged into court.

Another example is the Monster Truck that drove into the crowd last year in Illinois. He had a NAPA auto parts logo on the side of his truck and was doing a display for a local independently owned jobber yet Genuine Parts Company was sued because they own the name NAPA. Neither of these cases involve employees yet the company was sued in both cases.

The lawyers go after the deep pockets. Anybody can be sued. The family of the Cardinals pitcher who was killed while driving drunk is suing the restaurant, the tow truck company and the owner of the broken down vehicle even though their son was drunk and struck the parked vehicle.

I disagree that the image is meaningless, while you may not care about it, I can assure that the NFL does. I know that the NBA cares a great deal more than they did.

 

[DABOYZ]

"That is just not true, but I am sure some of the lawyers that frequent this board can attest to this much better than I can.

We got sued because my brother was working on his car in our shop and sent his friend to the parts store for parts.

Another example is the Monster Truck that drove into the crowd last year in Illinois."

Both of these examples have to do with liability issues. In the first example you got sued because the guy you sent for parts was not covered by your shops insurance.

Anyhow I won't go into the particulars of the second example as it is way off topic and in no way should it be compared to the NFL's fining of teams. The original idea behind the thread has to do with teams being fined. I say yes in severe cases such as Cinci, and no in cases where a team has 1 player creating all the issues.

 

[BrassCowboy]

that is because the child is a juvenile and as such, the parents have a legal responsibility to take care of them. If that child turned 18 and killed someone, unless you can prove that the parent forced/coerced their kid into murder, a parent will never get charged for their kid's crimes.

ok when the kids are like this :bounce: and you are like this to them :nono: and all they do to you is give you this while they keep doing this :bounce: , then as parents you need to try and put them to work like this :mouse: just to find out a few minutes later, they go back to being like this :war: :tongue: :bounce:. Well now I would be like :whip: and watch those little pissants be like :eekmouse:
before I going about doing this :spanking:until they are like this :zipit:. Don't worry, soon they will do this -> :worthy2:

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

They may not get thrown in jail for misconduct of their employees but they can be liable. Take an employee that is involved in an accident while intoxicated in a company vehicle. The company is one of the first to be named in the lawsuit.

Companies can be liable even when it isn't an actual employee, if a company sponsors a race team or vehicle and an accident happens where someone is injured they get sued.

The fine a team would pay is equivalent to this, rather than the analogy of jail time.

That is vicarious liability in a civil case so someone can be compensated. That is so not the same thing as this situation.

 

[kojak]

Goodell to fine teams for player misbehavior

May 20, 7:31 pm EDT


ATLANTA (AP)—The NFL put more teeth in its personal conduct policy on Tuesday when commissioner Roger Goodell announced he would fine teams whose players were suspended for disciplinary reasons.

“We want to continue to emphasize personal conduct and personal responsibility,” he said at the end of a one-day league meeting. “One way to do it is to hold teams responsible for the conduct of their players.
Goodell instituted a tougher policy during the 2006 season, his first as commissioner, after a series of arrests, nine alone affecting the Cincinnati Bengals.

Two Bengals, wide receiver Chris Henry and linebacker Odell Thurman, received lengthy suspensions—Thurman for two years. Both were cut by the team after being reinstated.

Goodell also said he would meet soon with another major offender, cornerback Adam “Pacman” Jones, who was suspended for all of last season following a series of run-ins with the law. Jones was traded last month from Tennessee to Dallas and has petitioned for the right to work out with his new team, something he will need permission from the league to do.

So what now the teams are responsible for what the players do during there personal life? Good grief how the heck can you monitor someone 24/7 to make sure they stay out of trouble. Unreal

 

[DallasEast]

So what now the teams are responsible for what the players do during there personal life? Good grief how the heck can you monitor someone 24/7 to make sure they stay out of trouble. Unreal

The answer is you can't. However, a team can make examples of players who willingly break the NFL personal conduct policy before the commissioner decides to step in and do it for them. If players witness that they will receive zero latitude from the entire league and not just from the commissioner, it may cause some to second guess themselves when they contemplate doing something that violates the policy.

It will not hinder everyone. Some people are natural idiots, who will do just about anything in spite of the dangers of losing personal wealth, fame, etc. Like Mama Gump used to say: "Stupid is as stupid does".

 

[kojak]

The answer is you can't. However, a team can make examples of players who willingly break the NFL personal conduct policy before the commissioner decides to step in and do it for them.

Yeah but I read it as he will fine teams who's players have been suspended for disciplinary reasons. Teams don't have very many options they can do with players. So you either suspend them and get fined from the league or you cut them and have losses from salaries. Your screwed either way you go unless I'm just over reacting and reading it wrong.

 

[Sarge]

ok when the kids are like this :bounce: and you are like this to them :nono: and all they do to you is give you this while they keep doing this :bounce: , then as parents you need to try and put them to work like this :mouse: just to find out a few minutes later, they go back to being like this :war: :tongue: :bounce:. Well now I would be like :whip: and watch those little pissants be like :eekmouse:
before I going about doing this :spanking:until they are like this :zipit:. Don't worry, soon they will do this -> :worthy2:

.............. good stuff.

 

[Kevinicus]

Being sued is not equivelant to being fined. Just not a good analogy.

This would be like the government fining Microsoft because one of their janitors decided he'd go to a 7/11 some night and hold the place up for a few extra dollars. In other words, it's stupid, much like most of Goodell's decisions. He is the one who needs to be fined and suspended.

If a player is suspended the team is already penalized, especially if it's a good player, by losing that player on the field.

 

[Chuck 54]

Sorry, I can't see any logic in this either. I've been totally supportive of the commish punishing players for actions that embarrass the league, even if not unlawful, but I don't see holding a team responsible for a player's conduct.

It's not all about drafting or signing guys with bad reps either. I guess we'd have been hit with plenty of penalties when Irvin was getting arrested or embarrassed...what about several others? What about steroid abuse?

I don't see how you can punish the team.