Goodell's new player conduct policy might include lifetime bans

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
ZeroClub;1446127 said:
If an active player did what many think O.J. did, or pulled a Ray Carruth, a lifetime ban makes sense.

So I'd go lifetime with murder and particularly violent crimes. Also for proven attempts to throw games.

Steriods, drug use, DUIs, ... give them progressively more time off per offense.

I guess I think that most people who make mistakes should receive multiple opportunities to get their acts together. Sometimes it takes a few "bottoms" before a cure takes. Sometime people have to "practice" being better before they get better (for good).

If a player is getting busted for drugs time and again and still can't seem to get his act together then he does not need to be playing football. Pro Sports in general need to get their act together and these guys get plenty of opportunities to turn their lives around more than what many will ever see. I can promise you at my job you fail 1 test and your gone, end of story. The NFL pays these guys well and it is their choice do I want to play football or do I want to get high and if they continue to get in trouble then they only have themselves to blame. It is called personal responsibility these are not children they are grown men
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,709
Reaction score
12,434
Doomsday101;1446158 said:
It is called personal responsibility these are not children they are grown men

So why doesn't this apply to the teams that sign them?

Can't you say it is a team's responsibility to not sign a player who has problems after they've had several chances?
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
abersonc;1446176 said:
So why doesn't this apply to the teams that sign them?

Can't you say it is a team's responsibility to not sign a player who has problems after they've had several chances?

I agree. As I said if the league is serious about changing their image then they can. It is up to the league (owners and players union) to step up to the plate and do what is right for a change. Instead of worrying about the all mighty dollar.
 

ZeroClub

just trying to get better
Messages
7,619
Reaction score
1
abersonc;1446152 said:
If you can be reinstated from a lifetime ban then it is just for show.
Not necessarily.

You could argue that the penalty is misnamed. It could be that "lifetime ban" doesn't necessarily mean a lifetime.

But the ban would mean that the player was in significant trouble, losing a significant portion of his playing career to suspension, and would have to present compelling evidence of his recovery in order to be reinstated.

Here's another way to look at it:

Lots of people found guilty are sentenced to jail for a certain period of time (let's say 25 years) but are able to have their time reduced for good behavior (let's say out in 13 years). I guess you could say that the 25 year sentence "was just for show," but that doesn't mean that the 13 years isn't a significant penalty.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,709
Reaction score
12,434
Doomsday101;1446186 said:
I agree. As I said if the league is serious about changing their image then they can. It is up to the league (owners and players union) to step up to the plate and do what is right for a change. Instead of worrying about the all mighty dollar.

I have no problem with the league coming up with a reasonable policy here -- but I do think they are just blowing smoke with the "lifetime ban thing" -- I also think you have to allow guys to make a mistake without it destroying their career. Something like the drug policy where each subsequent suspension is more serious would go a long way.

Unfortunately, criminal activity is far more difficult to prove than drug use - guys might get arrested but that doesn't mean they committed a crime (or that they'll be convicted) -- however, if you only base this on convictions then you've got another problem as we all know that folks with $$ have a major advantage in the justice system.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,709
Reaction score
12,434
ZeroClub;1446203 said:
Not necessarily.

You could argue that the penalty is misnamed. It could be that "lifetime ban" doesn't necessarily mean a lifetime.

and my point was that is just blowing smoke. by "misnaming" the penalty, the league does exactly that -- blows smoke
 

ZeroClub

just trying to get better
Messages
7,619
Reaction score
1
abersonc;1446211 said:
and my point was that is just blowing smoke. by "misnaming" the penalty, the league does exactly that -- blows smoke
If the typical career in your chosen profession were 5 years, and you lost two of your years to suspension ....

... you might call those two years many things, but "smoke" probably wouldn't be one of them.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,709
Reaction score
12,434
ZeroClub;1446221 said:
If the typical career in your chosen profession were 5 years, and you lost two of your years to suspension ....

... you might call those two years many things, but "smoke" probably wouldn't be one of them.

So why call it a lifetime ban? To make a splash. That's why.

Guys who get suspended for drugs have a year off - and another if they violate again after that.

League could do exactly the same thing with conduct suspensions.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
abersonc;1446208 said:
I have no problem with the league coming up with a reasonable policy here -- but I do think they are just blowing smoke with the "lifetime ban thing" -- I also think you have to allow guys to make a mistake without it destroying their career. Something like the drug policy where each subsequent suspension is more serious would go a long way.

Unfortunately, criminal activity is far more difficult to prove than drug use - guys might get arrested but that doesn't mean they committed a crime (or that they'll be convicted) -- however, if you only base this on convictions then you've got another problem as we all know that folks with $$ have a major advantage in the justice system.

A guy who is constantly failing a drug test is doing that to himself so if his career is destroyed then he did that himself and has no one to blame but himself. Also they can go to the CFL, if getting high is as important as playing the game under set ruled of the NFL. As for other criminal activity again if the same guy is constantly getting into trouble with the law then he is to blame no one else, most people manage to live their life without any problems with the law. I get tired on no responsibility and tired of Pro Sports being a safe haven for thugs. I’m all for giving people a another chance but that person has to be willing to help themselves and if they are not then again that is their problem we are not dealing with a child who may not know better they damn well know what they are doing and they know it is wrong. I truly hope the NFL sets an example for pro sports that image does matter and that certain behavior will not be tolerated any longer.
 

ZeroClub

just trying to get better
Messages
7,619
Reaction score
1
abersonc;1446233 said:
So why call it a lifetime ban? To make a splash. That's why.

Guys who get suspended for drugs have a year off - and another if they violate again after that.

League could do exactly the same thing with conduct suspensions.
An advantage to issuing an indefinite (a.k.a. lifetime) suspension is that it places the burden of proof on the player during an appeal. The player must be contrite and provide evidence that he is rehabilitated and living right.

That's different from telling someone that they are out for X number of games.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,709
Reaction score
12,434
ZeroClub;1446251 said:
An advantage to issuing an indefinite (a.k.a. lifetime) suspension is that it places the burden of proof on the player during an appeal. The player must be contrite and provide evidence that he is rehabilitated and living right.

That's different from telling someone that they are out for X number of games.

Actually it is exactly the same thing. Players have to apply for reinstatement and need to demonstrate they've complied with the terms of their rehabilitation. See policy below:



Criteria: After the completion of the one-year banishment period, the Commissioner, in his sole discretion, will determine if and when the player will be allowed to return to the NFL. A player’s failure to adhere to his Treatment
Plan during his banishment will be a significant consideration in the Commissioner’s decision of whether to reinstate a player. A player seeking reinstatement must meet certain clinical requirements as determined by the
Medical Director and other requirements as set forth in Appendix B.

APPENDIX B

Procedures for Making Application for Reinstatement by a Player Banned Under Stage Three of the Intervention Program

Any player who has been suspended under Stage Three may apply formally in writing for reinstatement no sooner than 60 days before the one-year anniversary date of the letter so suspending him.

The application should include all pertinent information about the player’s

(a) Treatment;

(b) Abstinence from substances of abuse throughout the entire period of his
suspension;

(c) Involvement with any substances of abuse related incidents; and

(d) Arrests and/or convictions for any criminal activity, including substances of abuse related offenses

Set forth below are the procedures to be used when an application is received by the Commissioner.

1. Within 45 days of receipt of the application, the player will be interviewed by the Medical Director and the Medical Advisor after which a recommendation will be made to the Commissioner with regard to the player’s request for reinstatement.

2. The player will execute appropriate medical release forms that will enable the Commissioner’s staff and NFLPA Executive Director’s staff to review the
player’s substance abuse history, including but not limited to attendance at
counseling sessions (individual, group and family); attendance at 12-step and
other self-help group meetings; periodic progress reports; and all diagnostic
findings and treatment recommendations.

3. The player will submit to urine Testing by an NFL representative at a frequency determined by the Medical Advisor.

4. The player will agree in a meeting with the Commissioner or his representative(s) to comply with the conditions imposed by the Commissioner for his reinstatement to the status of an active player.

5. All individuals involved in the process will take steps to enable the Commissioner to render a decision within 60 days of the receipt of the application.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,709
Reaction score
12,434
burmafrd;1446327 said:
told ya Abersonc thinks he is a lawyer.

If you need a lawyer to understand this information then you clearly aren't as smart as you think
 

ZeroClub

just trying to get better
Messages
7,619
Reaction score
1
abersonc;1446288 said:
Actually it is exactly the same thing. Players have to apply for reinstatement and need to demonstrate they've complied with the terms of their rehabilitation. See policy below:
You are confusing a 16 game suspension with a banishment period of at least one year (secondary to drug use). There is a difference.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,709
Reaction score
12,434
ZeroClub;1446394 said:
You are confusing a 16 game suspension with a banishment period of at least one year (secondary to drug use). There is a difference.

Umm, no. The penalty for an offense in stage 3 is banishment of at least one year -- eligible for reinstatement after that time. There is no "16 game suspension." You are confusing the banishment with a 4 game suspension in Stage 2
 

big dog cowboy

THE BIG DOG
Staff member
Messages
103,155
Reaction score
116,590
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Roughneck;1445813 said:
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell's to-be-unveiled player conduct policy might allow him to issue lifetime bans for players involved in serious criminal activity, according to a published report.
Good. There needs to be a clearly defined line players know they can not cross.
 

ZeroClub

just trying to get better
Messages
7,619
Reaction score
1
abersonc;1446454 said:
Umm, no. The penalty for an offense in stage 3 is banishment of at least one year -- eligible for reinstatement after that time. There is no "16 game suspension." You are confusing the banishment with a 4 game suspension in Stage 2
I'm not confused anything. At best, we are talking past each other and have reached the point where the work of this discussion outweighs any rewards. I'll just leave it there. Happy trails.
 

FuzzyLumpkins

The Boognish
Messages
36,618
Reaction score
27,878
big dog cowboy;1446589 said:
Good. There needs to be a clearly defined line players know they can not cross.

But where do you draw that line?

1 felony = 3 misdemeanors = ??????
 
Top