The Roger Goodell thread

I was going to post about this in the Ray Rice thread, but maybe since we have had a few discussions on Goodell in multiple threads, it might be a nice place to have one catch-all discussion about him.

I want to explain a few reasons that I have a major problem with Goodell and see him as a truly awful commissioner so that it doesn't seem like I'm just piling on to do it.

1. My biggest issue with Goodell is the inconsistency with which he approaches crises. Scottemojo put it perfectly in the Ray Rice thread, but I'll re-post what he said here:

Scottemojo":29ffs426 said:

Number two, he just released a policy where the first offense is s max 6 game suspension. Yet, he suspends the guy indefinitely on his own whim. Did Ray deserve an indefinite suspension? Sure. But that doesn't make Goodell breaking his own policies OK.

Click to expand...

2. Speaking of inconsistency, I have a major problem with Goodell doing damage control with concussions and injuries but trying to expand the amount of games in a season at the same time. In fact, they can still increase revenue as a league simply by adding a double-bye to the season. Boom, more recovery time for teams AND a longer league season that will increase the TV package value therein, and it doesn't cost more for the owners (like expanding the main rosters would).

Why doesn't Goodell champion this if he's for player safety, but he still also needs to increase owner revenue (which I get is his #1 job)? It is an obvious middle-ground solution to give players the recovery time they need in-season.

3. London is not going to happen, so stop trying, or at least wait until commercial rocket travel becomes viable.

I think he's an awful commissioner. He keeps trying to put his signature on the league like commissioners before him did with the AFL/NFL merger and subsequent successful expansions of the league (and the NFL becoming the king of TV rights deals), but London is not a reasonable attempt at this. He also continues to bungle concussions, being welcoming to female fans, and scheduling in general (why does he mollify East Coast teams that don't want to travel west twice in a row, but keep pitching back-to-back East Coast trips to West Coast teams).

He should thank David Stern for existing because without Stern, he'd be the worst major sports commissioner in modern times.

This should be entertaining.

Whatever you do, don't look at how many player suspensions there have been under all prior commissioners combined compared to under Goodell.

Also, Goodell banning him from the league makes perfect sense if Rice lied to the league about what happened in the elevator and this video wasn't seen by Goodell prior to that initial two-game suspension.

If it comes out that Goodell HAD seen that video prior to handing out the suspension, however, then he needs to go. I just don't think that's the case here, he likes suspending players and the NFL cares about its image. A lot.

I'm okay with Goodell making an exception for Rice. Special situation, special treatment.

What I am not okay with are all the other mistakes he's made, now compounded with him lying about the tape.

In all the years we've had Paul Tagliabue (1989-2006), I can't remember a single time he outraged me with his competency or lack of honesty. Sure, Goodell has had a more challenging tenure, but I pine for the days when the NFL could be drama free and safe from idiotic policies.

Shouldn't your real beef be with the league's owners, though? Roger is just a figure-head for them and an easy scapegoat for when stuff hits the fan. Ultimately, the owners run the league. Goodell is basically a mouthpiece. If he's pushing for expansion to London, it's because the owners think that's a profitable move. If he's pushing for an 18 game season, it's because the owners see money there. Nothing more, nothing less. If they thought he was doing a poor job, then he'd be out.

I feel like we're falling into this trap that the league's owners have specifically set up for us. They prop up this guy as being some sort of authority over the league to immunize themselves from any criticism. That being said, he gets compensated well for taking all the heat, so I'm not going to feel too sorry for him.

Note: I don't know enough about this Ray Rice situation to speak to his involvement in it. In respect to this situation, however, I think you have a case of a bunch of people at a private institution (the NFL) who really misjudged how to handle a situation. I think what might be overlooked is how elected and appointed government officials are the ones who really dropped the ball and deserve a lion's share of the criticism. But again, I don't know all of the available facts.

Doesn't Rozelle have a kid?...Anything is better than this tool.
These people remove billions of dollars from us...yeah YOU reading this. But yet, their decisions are not only unfair in most cases, but they always offer some lame excuse...."oh, referee Leavy has apologized for the many botched calls in superbolwl XL".
Bullshit.
These assholes have reached new epic dimensions of lost control on their mega billion dollar machine. Somewhere and sometime the time has come to pay back the very people that fuel their league.

Apologies are no longer accepted. Either take action that is appropriate or lose your audience.

I'm tired of all of it.

DavidSeven":1t55nrmp said:

Shouldn't your real beef be with the league's owners, though? Roger is just a figure-head for them and an easy scapegoat for when stuff hits the fan. Ultimately, the owners run the league. Goodell is basically a mouthpiece. If he's pushing for expansion to London, it's because the owners think that's a profitable move. If he's pushing for an 18 game season, it's because the owners see money there. Nothing more, nothing less. If they thought he was doing a poor job, then he'd be out.

Click to expand...

Goodell is like the CEO that stretches his company to the MAX to gain revenue and stock value. The kind of CEO that achieves great results on paper in the short term, but undermines his company's long term health. The kind that leaves just before the company collapses into a pile of burning rubble with his golden parachute, while his employees are without their pensions or even their jobs. Goodell reminds me of that guy.

Everything he does is about the bottom line ($$$). He will never do anything to make the game better if it comes at financial expense, but will jump off the couch to do the opposite.

You make a solid point about Goodell making owners happy, but not every commissioner is so deeply in their pockets. IMO, the NFL Commisioner needs to be a steward of the game, rather than someone who acts completely with a CEO type of mentality.

kearly":y5q9bmvr said:

In all the years we've had Paul Tagliabue (1989-2006), I can't remember a single time he outraged me with his competency or lack of honesty. Sure, Goodell has had a more challenging tenure, but I pine for the days when the NFL could be drama free and safe from idiotic policies.

Click to expand...

That's because Tagliabue never DID anything. Look at the list of players and coaches suspended by the NFL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pl ... by_the_NFL

Goodell came in and started cleaning house. Also, with the massive increase in exposure from social media, I think it's safe to say things were WORSE in the NFL prior to Goodell and we simply didn't know about it or hear about it, by and large.

RolandDeschain":19hg01mj said:

This should be entertaining.

Whatever you do, don't look at how many player suspensions there have been under all prior commissioners combined compared to under Goodell.

Also, Goodell banning him from the league makes perfect sense if Rice lied to the league about what happened in the elevator and this video wasn't seen by Goodell prior to that initial two-game suspension.

If it comes out that Goodell HAD seen that video prior to handing out the suspension, however, then he needs to go. I just don't think that's the case here, he likes suspending players and the NFL cares about its image. A lot.

Click to expand...

IF, and it's a big if, Rog saw THAT video, he needs to go yesterday!
I'd lay those odds at about 50-50. Time will tell.

kearly":3ldxxm3n said:

IMO, the NFL Commisioner needs to be a steward of the game, rather than someone who acts completely with a CEO type of mentality.

Click to expand...

On this point, I agree. In the ideal world, the NFL Commish would serve as a sort of "check/balance" to the whims of the owners. It'd be someone who continually maintained a long-term vision of the league and was concerned with things like "integrity of the game."

I'm just not sure if that will ever be the reality in this day and age.

Sports Hernia":2d46awmt said:

IF, and it's a big if, Rog saw THAT video, he needs to go yesterday!
I'd lay those odds at about 50-50. Time will tell.

Click to expand...

Just remember that one of the larger complaints most people have about Goodell is how harsh he is with player punishments.

It really doesn't make sense that he'd go easy on Rice, of all people and of all cases, considering everything. Just my two cents.

If he never saw the video, he is incompetent. If he did, he is a liar. I go with the latter. Too many league sources told reporters that the league had seen it. Of course, the league chose to focus more on the fact that she attacked Ray than anything else.

DavidSeven":1n5t8j2p said:

Shouldn't your real beef be with the league's owners, though?

Click to expand...

I think a stronger commissioner isn't guided 100% by the owners. He's hired to represent their interests in part, but he's also hired to keep the game healthy.

He's not doing that latter thing in my estimation.

RolandDeschain":1n5t8j2p said:

Just remember that one of the larger complaints most people have about Goodell is how harsh he is with player punishments.

Click to expand...

This is an oversimplification.

Complaints about Goodell re: punishments are that he a) has too much unilateral power to punish players and b) that what is being punished is out of whack, which reflects changing values in society, particularly those on marijuana use and domestic violence.

Smelly McUgly":2eu3fcgk said:

Complaints about Goodell re: punishments are that he a) has too much unilateral power to punish players and b) that what is being punished is out of whack, which reflects changing values in society, particularly those on marijuana use and domestic violence.

Click to expand...

The players gave him that increased power in the new CBA, and the league also said they're considering medical marijuana exemptions. They just drastically increased the penalties for domestic abuse. They are clearly listening at least to an extent.

What do you want to see? The same kind of "zero tolerance" policies that many public schools use, where a kid who eats parts away from a Pop Tart to make it look like a little pistol gets expelled? That's the kind of unilateral "fair punishment" given out you want, with never any mitigating circumstances?

Good one, bro.

RolandDeschain":35a6n6oz said:

Smelly McUgly":35a6n6oz said:

Complaints about Goodell re: punishments are that he a) has too much unilateral power to punish players and b) that what is being punished is out of whack, which reflects changing values in society, particularly those on marijuana use and domestic violence.

Click to expand...

The players gave him that increased power in the new CBA, and the league also said they're considering medical marijuana exemptions. They just drastically increased the penalties for domestic abuse. They are clearly listening at least to an extent.

What do you want to see? The same kind of "zero tolerance" policies that many public schools use, where a kid who eats parts away from a Pop Tart to make it look like a little pistol gets expelled? That's the kind of unilateral "fair punishment" given out you want, with never any mitigating circumstances?

Good one, bro.

Click to expand...

**sigh**

What a weird either/or fallacy that you present here. "Zero tolerance" policies are not the only position to support if I don't support Goodell's unilateral jurisdiction over penalizing players. Furthermore, I never argued for a zero tolerance policy, so you can stop pretending that I actually did. Your assertion is so illogical and poorly considered, even for you, that it almost doesn't bear a response.

I think there should actually be a bi-lateral commission when it comes to meting out punishments. The owners are represented by Goodell; the players should be represented by a non-NFLPA-affiliated commission, as one possible example. A three-man commission of former players, for example, that shares its findings with Goodell and comes to a decision on punishment in conjunction with him.

I think that it does help that the NFLPA and the NFL are re-considering how players are penalized for the use of illegal substances that would not typically be thought of as PEDs, but that doesn't absolve Goodell's inability to consistently punish players (nor does it absolve the awful NFLPA leadership, but a thread about how awful De Smith is would just have everyone nodding their heads in agreement).

RolandDeschain":p4sexhc4 said:

kearly":p4sexhc4 said:

In all the years we've had Paul Tagliabue (1989-2006), I can't remember a single time he outraged me with his competency or lack of honesty. Sure, Goodell has had a more challenging tenure, but I pine for the days when the NFL could be drama free and safe from idiotic policies.

Click to expand...

That's because Tagliabue never DID anything. Look at the list of players and coaches suspended by the NFL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pl ... by_the_NFL

Goodell came in and started cleaning house. Also, with the massive increase in exposure from social media, I think it's safe to say things were WORSE in the NFL prior to Goodell and we simply didn't know about it or hear about it, by and large.

Click to expand...

I think Goodell's propensity to suspend players far more often has become a monster in of itself. Even though I am fine with the Rice ban, I think the new suspension policy for domestic violence is problematic to say the least. I agree with Scotte, a blanket punishment for an issue with so much context and variance is asking for trouble, and it will also likely discourage violence from being reported or prosecuted effectively.

My bigger problem with Goodell... the man's an idiot. Nearly all of the changes he's proposed are fundamentally stupid ideas that hurt the game. And the reason they are so consistently stupid is because he doesn't have what's best for the game close to his heart. He cares about making the NFL more profitable, not about making the game better.

RolandDeschain":9va3tdwi said:

kearly":9va3tdwi said:

In all the years we've had Paul Tagliabue (1989-2006), I can't remember a single time he outraged me with his competency or lack of honesty. Sure, Goodell has had a more challenging tenure, but I pine for the days when the NFL could be drama free and safe from idiotic policies.

Click to expand...

That's because Tagliabue never DID anything. Look at the list of players and coaches suspended by the NFL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pl ... by_the_NFL

Goodell came in and started cleaning house. Also, with the massive increase in exposure from social media, I think it's safe to say things were WORSE in the NFL prior to Goodell and we simply didn't know about it or hear about it, by and large.

Click to expand...

This - Also, we are in a much more SENSITIVE era compared to the Tagliabue era. More sensitivity combined with the immediate-ness of social media and how much exposure EVERYTHING gets. I would imagine the same stuff went on then. Hell, I bet it was MUCH MUCH worse as far as PEDs, violence, racism, bounties, etc go, than it is now, we are just so exposed to it immediately from 50 different angles and mediums, that it feels worse.

People don't complain that he's a harsh punisher of crimes and infractions of NFL policy; at least not nearly as much as they do that he's wildly random and unpredictable in his punishments. Huge penalties for smoking weed, and a couple of games off for beating a woman unconscious. (Even without the elevator video we knew he'd beaten her unconscious.) That's folks' biggest gripe with him.

I don't mind him coming in and cleaning house. It's just that when he cleans house, he leaves the parlor sparkling and shiny new, like you could eat off the floor, while ignoring the nasty dishes piling up in the sink in the kitchen, and the layers of dust bunnies, cobwebs, and carpet stains in the back rooms.

He is in the owners' pockets, and that is absolutely not what a commissioner is for. He needs to be an impartial job, charged with maintaining the integrity of the game. He needs to be concerned with making sure the league remains competitive and fair, and he is not doing that. He caters to the owners, and favors east coast teams over the ones further west. He slams some players for nothing and others he taps on the wrist for more. He is biased and random at the same time, and most of his moves have done more to hurt the integrity of the game than any of his predecessors, all in the name of a few more television bucks.

Tagliabue may have let his players get away with far more, but he was consistent in doing so. The complaints during Tagliabue's reign as commissioner centered largely around players doing things that were already illegal, not how the league reacted to them.

He's doing okay so far but I don't like the idea of London expansion, increase play offs and also worry that there may be rule changes in future that cause unwatchable flag fests. There is always the danger that the NFL gets too greedy and turns people off similar to WWF and NBA in the 90's and UFC as a recent example where they milk the cash cow too much.

Everyone here understands the relationship between Gooddell and the owners. So, to me, the real question is: Will the owners force him out?

Gooddell will want to keep his job. He can show numerous examples of how he's strengthened the league. (I think Kearly has a good point, however, that his actions have improved profit but not necessarily improved the League longterm). It will take a few vocal owners to call for his severance. I would think, if a few owners insist on it publically, it would be difficult for him to stay. No one could defend him or his staff at this point. We know Gooddell values the League's profit over its integrity. Do the owners?

I really admire Paul Allen. I want to believe that he could be someone that would demand a change. I understand that it's best for all the owners to get together and agree on an action. I would also guess there wouldn't be consensus on this decision. That would result in a time lag and even more damage; to the League, the image of both the owners and players, the public acceptance of Domestic Violence, the authority of the legal system and many people's love of the game.

I'm anxious to see what happens. I'm also dubious that we'll end up in a situation where everyone is satisfied that this type of cover-up won't happen again next season. I hope I'm wrong.

kearly":2tucnteq said:

,,,,,,,,,,,Everything he does is about the bottom line ($$$). He will never do anything to make the game better if it comes at financial expense, but will jump off the couch to do the opposite...........

Click to expand...

My number one complaint about the him. Well said.