Except this argument completely falls apart when this same logic is applied to other infractions. The NFL shouldn't suspend drug users because it will financially hurt the wives? The NFL shouldn't suspend any player for any crime because of spousal financial considerations?
NFL isn't following the same procedure. NFL should absolutely suspend anyone after they have been found guilty. That is what they are doing in drug and crime cases. However, they are suspending them in some cases of domestic abuse before they are found guilty. I know the majority of the players are likely guilty, you know the majority (if not all) of the players are guilty but until they are proven guilty they shouldn't be suspended or banned from the league if they want to stay consistent. P.S. I want to make it very clear (not that I should have to) that I don't condone violence at all. It is despicable and once proven the player should be dealt with VERY harshly.
But in the rice case, if she isn't pressing charges, then there's no legal ruling to wait on. With Peterson, he admitted to doing what he is accused of.
Rice case is fairly cut and dry. There is video and he doesn't dispute what happened. Problem with what they did with him is they disciplined him twice. Double Jeopardy. They had a rule in place of what the discipline is and already charged him with that and then went outside of that to do more to him. Peterson hasn't been charged last I looked. He admitted what happened but the law is actually deciding if what he did is illegal. NFL should let them do their work before anything is decide imo.
Ha! I agree. Doing whoop ass on your kid is loosing your cool after a failure to communicate. A slap on the ass may jump start the communication when it doesn't take on the first try.
It's my understanding that all of the players except for Rice have been suspended with pay. Rice's case is different because after he went through the legal process and was in no further legal jeopardy he lied to the NFL as to what really happened in that elevator. Personally I think the NFL was all too happy to swallow his fiction of events and have been playing CYA ever since the tape came out.
But the NFL can have their own policies in place outside of legal or not. Unless I'm missing it and you're saying they shouldn't. It's legal to smoke pot in Colorado and Washington, but not for NFL players in those cities. I think it's ok for them to have their own code of conduct. And I think deactivating with pay while reviewing, versus suspending, makes sense in a lot of cases.
I have not seen anything that proves that Rice lied. In fact, everything I have read says Rice told the truth and the NFL is the one lying about how much they knew. Rice said right up front everything that happened according to reports and the NFL claims they hadn't seen the tape even though there is proof they received it and that at least one person watched it.
Ya, no I understand they can. I saying if Sly thinks they should be consistent in their efforts like he stated above then they shouldn't have a policy that differs from their other cases where they suspend or ban someone. Also I was just piggy backing on lawyer quote I provided above but the NFL isn't the one suspending with pay. That is the teams and I think that is smart. It has only been 1 case so far (the Rice case) but the NFL needs to get the policy in order where they aren't providing Double Jeopardy and basically kicking someone out of the NFL on their first offense even though their policy states that is only a 6 game ban. Rice has a huge grievance against the NFL and I think he would win any legal fight personally.
Not only has Peterson been charged; he's been indicted. And since the NFL's policy is titled "personal conduct", not "criminal conduct", there is no reason for them to wait for anything, considering he has already admitted to bruising and cutting his own child with a stick. Criminal or not, that "personal conduct" is undeniably deplorable.
Was unaware on that. Agreed on the deplorable but oddly the NFL isn't enacting their policy in his case. The team has taken action but not the NFL. A lot of inconsistencies on their end. Very weird times. I guess they are learning as they go as we all are. Roger Goddell is out in no time I believe.
Rice told a story of "Mutual Combat" in the elevator. She may have swung at him when he spit on her but that was far from "Mutual Combat."
Well, the NFL had to approve placing him on the exempt list, but outside of that, you're right, they haven't done anything. And the team isn't really punishing him in any way, other than by not putting him on the field, which they could choose to do for any reason. In this case, it had nothing to do with the actions themselves; it was all about the opinions of the sponsors.
Once again, I have heard another story and it laid out everything he did and it didn't come directly from Rice either. Regardless though the NFL (or someone at the NFL) seen the tape before they gave him the first suspension. I think Rice is deplorable and should have been handled swiftly but I don't believe anyone should be subject to double jeopardy which is exactly what happened to him.
There are definitely women that choose to maintain their relationship with an abuser. That is their personal choice. I just worry that what is going to happen as a result of the new NFL policy is that in some cases you will get deafening silence because of the fear that it will affect the family financially, and in some cases you will get blackmail attempts. Ultimately the abuser should be held accountable. I just don't know what the best solution is for a discipline policy by the NFL. They are probably doing the best they can at this point with utilizing the exempt list.
Is that really a problem, though? If to avoid "deafening silence," there have to be no meaningful repercussions, and the woman is remaining with her partner, what exactly are the value of the reports that you are concerned won't come out? In that circumstance, the woman isn't being protected and there's no deterrent...so what good would the reports do? Further, women who don't want to report for fear of cutting off their partner's earnings will still not do so, because being arrested and potentially jailed will also stop the paychecks.
You guys aren't even looking at this right. It's not even necessarily staying in the relationship, but they won't get any money if they divorce them either. Can't get blood out of a turnip. If they go to the police and the player is banned, they get a divorce and no money because the player will be broke. So the fiscally smart thing to do would be divorce them or leave them, collect alimony or child support, and let the guy keep collecting checks. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
