NFL New Measures on Domestic Violence

[HtownColt]

@janesports: The NFL announced sweeping new measures on domestic violence in a letter to owners today; Six games for 1st offense, lifetime ban for 2nd.

@AdamSchefter: Key phrase in new domestic violence policy sent to NFL owners: "These disciplinary consequences apply to all NFL personnel." ALL personnel.

@janesports: On Ray Rice discipline: "I didn’t get it right," NFL commissioner Roger Goodell writes to owners.

[jvan1973]

The NFLPA signed off on that? Kind of surprised. This should make them think before striking their spouse

[Qwiz]

Good, this should cut down the violence by all the * out there.

[oldunclemark]

@janesports: The NFL announced sweeping new measures on domestic violence in a letter to owners today; Six games for 1st offense, lifetime ban for 2nd.

@AdamSchefter: Key phrase in new domestic violence policy sent to NFL owners: "These disciplinary consequences apply to all NFL personnel." ALL personnel.

@janesports: On Ray Rice discipline: "I didn’t get it right," NFL commissioner Roger Goodell writes to owners.

I like Goddell saying , 'I didnt get it right"

I would hope the NFLPA did sign off on this because they have been sorely lacking in all discipline issues.

Its their issue

[BloodyChamp]

Wow...the potheads got their way again.

[Warhorse]

Wow...the potheads got their way again.

Care to clarify this puzzling response?

[Warhorse]

Big applause........ 

[House]

I'm so glad the NFL came up with this all on their own. They're so forward thinking. And never wait for PR disasters to make a change.

[Valpo2004]

Still trying to figure out why people are more upset at the NFL when the NFL clearly punished him worse then the law punished him.

 

The NFL is taking away 3/16th of Ray Rice's pay for the year.

 

The law is making him take a free class and this will not go on his record because he's not being charged with any crime.

[Blackhawk4]

Hard to see this as the NFL showing they truly care when this is being done after people have complained for a bit now. The 2nd offense being a lifetime ban though...That's going to be interesting. Say there's a really good player who receives a 2nd offense, can you imagine how hard a team could ride to save that player's behind? 

 

 

Still trying to figure out why people are more upset at the NFL when the NFL clearly punished him worse then the law punished him.

 

The NFL is taking away 3/16th of Ray Rice's pay for the year.

 

The law is making him take a free class and this will not go on his record because he's not being charged with any crime.

 

Sooooooo underrated. 

[BloodyChamp]

Care to clarify this puzzling response?

They're only toughing up the rules because everybody compared them to the marijuana penalties.

If I see that "you can hit Mary but not Mary Jane" meme 1 more time...

[21isSuperman]

@janesports: The NFL announced sweeping new measures on domestic violence in a letter to owners today; Six games for 1st offense, lifetime ban for 2nd.

@AdamSchefter: Key phrase in new domestic violence policy sent to NFL owners: "These disciplinary consequences apply to all NFL personnel." ALL personnel.

@janesports: On Ray Rice discipline: "I didn’t get it right," NFL commissioner Roger Goodell writes to owners.

That stick out to me the most.  At least Goodell has integrity and can admit when he's made a mistake.  Good for him and the league for getting this done

[akcolt]

They're only toughing up the rules because everybody compared them to the marijuana penalties.

If I see that "you can hit Mary but not Mary Jane" meme 1 more time...

[Sports Central1]

Just waiting for someone in the media to call this "racist".  lol

[BrentMc11]

Well, if I am a GM or owner, that makes me look at backgrounds even more closely.  There may actuallbe some excellent players who are serious thugs....that go undrafted.  

 

A player gets in a couple of bar fights in college:  Will that person or player hit a woman at a bar or wife?

 

I have always been leery of red flags and baggage.  I would like to see how the rule is written.  I wound imagine it has print such as "Each occurrence will be judged on a case by case basis..."  As I believe it should.  Innocent until proven guilty.

[Superman]

Off topic: In the letter, Goodell mentions that they've been trying to get agreement for automatic deactivation after DUI arrests, and two game suspensions. I think that lays the groundwork for an Irsay suspension, probably 4 games.

 

On topic: Good response by Goodell. The public clearly didn't agree with the Rice suspension, and while I think a lot of people misconstrued the situation, I also believe the suspension was too light. He also says that consideration will be given for mitigating factors, meaning sometimes the suspension will be less than six games, but specifically, that a first time offense can result in greater than six games.

[Blue Horseshoe]

I don't really like the idea of suspending them for this because it cuts the household income which ultimately punishes the victim for getting beaten up.  I think they should have to put in significant volunteer time at battered women's shelters or something.

[NFLfan]

Well, if I am a GM or owner, that makes me look at backgrounds even more closely. There may actuallbe some excellent players who are serious thugs....that go undrafted.

A player gets in a couple of bar fights in college: Will that person or player hit a woman at a bar or wife?

I have always been leery of red flags and baggage. I would like to see how the rule is written. I wound imagine it has print such as "Each occurrence will be judged on a case by case basis..." As I believe it should. Innocent until proven guilty.

I agree with everything you wrote, especially your last statements.

This is what Goodell wrote in the letter. (One can potentially be suspended more than 6 games for the first offense, I believe.):

"Effective immediately, violations of the Personal Conduct Policy regarding assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault that involve physical force will be subject to a suspension without pay of six games for a first offense, with consideration given to mitigating factors, as well as a longer suspension when circumstances warrant. Among the circumstances that would merit a more severe penalty would be a prior incident before joining the NFL, or violence involving a weapon, choking, repeated striking, or when the act is committed against a pregnant woman or in the presence of a child. A second offense will result in banishment from the NFL; while an individual may petition for reinstatement after one year, there will be no presumption or assurance that the petition will be granted. These disciplinary standards will apply to all NFL personnel."

http://m.espn.go.com/wireless/story?storyId=11425377

[BrentMc11]

I agree with everything you wrote, especially your last statements.

This is what Goodell wrote in the letter. (One can potentially be suspended more than 6 games for the first offense, I believe.):

"Effective immediately, violations of the Personal Conduct Policy regarding assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault that involve physical force will be subject to a suspension without pay of six games for a first offense, with consideration given to mitigating factors, as well as a longer suspension when circumstances warrant. Among the circumstances that would merit a more severe penalty would be a prior incident before joining the NFL, or violence involving a weapon, choking, repeated striking, or when the act is committed against a pregnant woman or in the presence of a child. A second offense will result in banishment from the NFL; while an individual may petition for reinstatement after one year, there will be no presumption or assurance that the petition will be granted. These disciplinary standards will apply to all NFL personnel."

http://m.espn.go.com/wireless/story?storyId=11425377

Thank you!  ;)

[Valpo2004]

I don't really like the idea of suspending them for this because it cuts the household income which ultimately punishes the victim for getting beaten up.  I think they should have to put in significant volunteer time at battered women's shelters or something.

 

Ok I'm going to give you a chance to think this one over for a min.

 

You want to allow a guy who has beat up his wife/girlfriend to volunteer at a women's shelter??

 

Think about that one for a min.  

[Superman]

Ok I'm going to give you a chance to think this one over for a min.

 

You want to allow a guy who has beat up his wife/girlfriend to volunteer at a women's shelter??

 

Think about that one for a min.  

 

Why not? Are we afraid that he's going to go on a rampage and beat up all the women? Is he automatically not supposed to be allowed within 1,000 yards of a woman?

 

That seems like an irrational concern, to me. That's like saying Michael Vick shouldn't be able to volunteer at a dog shelter. (And I'm well aware that some people feel that way, but it doesn't make sense to me.)

 

I think the previous post is silly because reducing an NFL player's salary by six weeks worth of pay isn't sending him or his family to the poor house. Even at rookie minimum, the family is still reasonably well off. So I'm not co-signing it. I just don't think there's any real concern about them being in a women's shelter at some point in the future, especially as a volunteer. More likely, the exposure to that environment will make an impact on the player about the seriousness of domestic abuse, and how many people are affected by it.

[Synthetic]

Let's see how long this goes before another controversial beating of a woman.

 

NFL players are already treated like Gods enough by society, this has been evident for a while. The modern day equivalent of the old Gladiator fighters of Rome.

 

It took them this long to give Greg Hardy a punishment. I have to think, if there wasn't a big deal made over the Ray Rice incident (as there should have been) then would this have come at all? After all, I have to constantly hear misogynists defend him

 

I feel bad for all female fans of this league. They already get harassed enough as it is, though now the NFL wants to pretend they care about them, even though the only women in football are exhibit objectified mannequins off to the sideline for men to drool at.

 

Women deserve better than this.

 

This is just the league propping up another image that they supposedly care, we know well enough they really don't.

[Synthetic]

I don't really like the idea of suspending them for this because it cuts the household income which ultimately punishes the victim for getting beaten up.  I think they should have to put in significant volunteer time at battered women's shelters or something.

 

 

Seriously?

 

You do know that NFL players make millions and millions of dollars to play a stupid game that consists of slamming bodies into one another and throwing a ball?

 

They have it set for life. No one on here is ever going to be as well off with money as these guys are.

 

Losing a few weeks pay isn't going to hurt these guys unless they aren't that smart and blow all their money all the time.

[BloodyChamp]

This coming from the guy whose favorite player sued his own mother.

[jvan1973]

Seriously?

You do know that NFL players make millions and millions of dollars to play a stupid game that consists of slamming bodies into one another and throwing a ball?

They have it set for life. No one on here is ever going to be as well off with money as these guys are.

Losing a few weeks pay isn't going to hurt these guys unless they aren't that smart and blow all their money all the time.

Yes, every player that ever played is a multi millionaire Do you ever think before you post?

[southwest1]

Here's my question: Why is there a lifetime ban for the second offense? How about 3 strikes & you're permanently out?

 

Go from 6 games with the 1st offense, 10 games with the 2nd offense, & 3rd offense = Gone from football forever. 

[LordHelpOurColts]

The lifetime ban really isn't a lifetime ban. It's a year-to-year kind of thing. Which, is moronic. It's either a lifetime ban or it's not.

[DougDew]

Still not good enough...never can get the political things good enough.

After all, the new policy makes no mention that when a white guy hits his black girlfriend it should also be considered a hate crime.

Extra suspension for that. The policy simply doesn't go far enough.

Why doesn't Goodell just come out and say "we want to champion all social issues in a way that we think will increase merchandise sales"...and spare us all of the righteous blather.

[southwest1]

The lifetime ban really isn't a lifetime ban. It's a year-to-year kind of thing. Which, is moronic. It's either a lifetime ban or it's not.

Well said LHOC. 2 years does not constitute a lifetime ban that's for sure. Is this like an indefinite suspension until the league welcomes a player back to be picked up by an interested team? I don't know. I'm asking. 

 

I'm just stunned that the Commissioner admitted he was wrong. Now is the time to approach him & ask him for confirmation of a direct link between concussions & CTE brain damage & dementia while his guard is down & he's feeling guilty. JMO.

 

So if Pete Rose played for the NFL vs MLB he'd be not playing again but accepted into the HOF? LOL! Coopers Town vs Canton Ohio. Just Kidding! 

 

I just hate rules that are up to Roger's overall discretion I guess. 

[jvan1973]

Still not good enough...never can get the political things good enough.

After all, the new policy makes no mention that when a white guy hits his black girlfriend it should also be considered a hate crime.

Extra suspension for that. The policy simply doesn't go far enough.

Why doesn't Goodell just come out and say "we want to champion all social issues in a way that we think will increase merchandise sales"...and spare us all of the righteous blather.

Are you serious? Just because a white person hits a black person doesn't make it a hate crime. If the only reason he hit black person is because he/she is black, that's a hate crime. I'm guessing that wouldn't be the case if he was in a relationship with a black girl.

Would you consider a black player hitting his white girlfriend a hate crime?

[LordHelpOurColts]

Well said LHOC. 2 years does not constitute a lifetime ban that's for sure. Is this like an indefinite suspension until the league welcomes a player back to be picked up by an interested team? I don't know. I'm asking. 

 

I have no idea. I just heard something on the radio today about how if a player received a "lifetime ban", it would be evaluated on a yearly basis. I haven't really looked into it.

[southwest1]

I have no idea. I just heard something on the radio today about how if a player received a "lifetime ban", it would be evaluated on a yearly basis. I haven't really looked into it.

Interesting. Thanks for the heads up LHOC. I need to look into this situation further in a few weeks as more people discuss & write about this new NFL wrinkle. 

[DougDew]

Are you serious? Just because a white person hits a black person doesn't make it a hate crime. If the only reason he hit black person is because he/she is black, that's a hate crime. I'm guessing that wouldn't be the case if he was in a relationship with a black girl.

Would you consider a black player hitting his white girlfriend a hate crime?

I was being sarcastic.

But how about this as just a blanket press release by Goodell so he never has to address these issues by the piece...just sort of get it all out of the way with one statement..

" From here on out, the NFL will allow organized community social groups to use our power, money, and exposure, to champion all issues they believe we should. And we will do this by continuously affirming, via hovering over our employees personal lives, that we believe the world should exist they way the organized community groups tell us it should exist, or else face extortive practices by said groups"

A bit of sarcasm there too. Not much, but some.

[BloodyChamp]

I was being sarcastic.

But how about this as just a blanket press release by Goodell so he never has to address these issues by the piece...just sort of get it all out of the way with one statement..

" From here on out, the NFL will allow organized community social groups to use our power, money, and exposure, to champion all issues they believe we should. And we will do this by continuously affirming, via hovering over our employees personal lives, that we believe the world should exist they way the organized community groups tell us it should exist, or else face extortive practices by said groups"

A bit of sarcasm there too. Not much, but some.

His response sums up what you were trying to say better than you did because it was exactly what you were talking about.

[Bobbycovert]

I was being sarcastic.

But how about this as just a blanket press release by Goodell so he never has to address these issues by the piece...just sort of get it all out of the way with one statement..

" From here on out, the NFL will allow organized community social groups to use our power, money, and exposure, to champion all issues they believe we should. And we will do this by continuously affirming, via hovering over our employees personal lives, that we believe the world should exist they way the organized community groups tell us it should exist, or else face extortive practices by said groups"

A bit of sarcasm there too. Not much, but some.

 

I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from at all.  I really hope I'm misunderstanding you.

 

Are you implying that setting an expectation for NFL players to not beat their families/significant others is the result of some "PC" agenda? Really?

 

Is creating a harsh penalty for players who beat their loved ones too intrusive for you?  

 

I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood.  If not, you really need to rethink some things (probably more than a few).

[amfootball]

So this is the Ray Rice rule.

[Valpo2004]

Why not? Are we afraid that he's going to go on a rampage and beat up all the women? Is he automatically not supposed to be allowed within 1,000 yards of a woman?

 

That seems like an irrational concern, to me. That's like saying Michael Vick shouldn't be able to volunteer at a dog shelter. (And I'm well aware that some people feel that way, but it doesn't make sense to me.)

 

I think the previous post is silly because reducing an NFL player's salary by six weeks worth of pay isn't sending him or his family to the poor house. Even at rookie minimum, the family is still reasonably well off. So I'm not co-signing it. I just don't think there's any real concern about them being in a women's shelter at some point in the future, especially as a volunteer. More likely, the exposure to that environment will make an impact on the player about the seriousness of domestic abuse, and how many people are affected by it.

 

You do realize that the very location of women's shelters is a very closely guarded secret.  If a woman needs to go to one of these places they don't just show up asking for a place to stay.  They call a help line and a person picks them up, with help of police if necessary and takes them to the shelter.  

 

And that the women who live in these shelters would be EXTREMELY uncomfortable with an abuser volunteering there.

 

I actually used to work for an organization that among other things maintained some women's shelters for a while. (My job wasn't in the shelter, my job was to give presentations to kids about domestic violence and abuse.)  I guarantee they arn't going to be allowing someone who's hit his wife/girlfriend to be volunteering there.  http://www.thecaringplacenwi.org/

[House]

I was being sarcastic.

But how about this as just a blanket press release by Goodell so he never has to address these issues by the piece...just sort of get it all out of the way with one statement..

" From here on out, the NFL will allow organized community social groups to use our power, money, and exposure, to champion all issues they believe we should. And we will do this by continuously affirming, via hovering over our employees personal lives, that we believe the world should exist they way the organized community groups tell us it should exist, or else face extortive practices by said groups"

A bit of sarcasm there too. Not much, but some.

Can you name a single business entity that enjoys an employee being publicly advertised as a woman beater?

[The Old Crow]

So this is the Ray Rice rule.

Unfortunately , it is, and Ray knows it.

[House]

Why not? Are we afraid that he's going to go on a rampage and beat up all the women? Is he automatically not supposed to be allowed within 1,000 yards of a woman?

That seems like an irrational concern, to me. That's like saying Michael Vick shouldn't be able to volunteer at a dog shelter. (And I'm well aware that some people feel that way, but it doesn't make sense to me.)

I think the previous post is silly because reducing an NFL player's salary by six weeks worth of pay isn't sending him or his family to the poor house. Even at rookie minimum, the family is still reasonably well off. So I'm not co-signing it. I just don't think there's any real concern about them being in a women's shelter at some point in the future, especially as a volunteer. More likely, the exposure to that environment will make an impact on the player about the seriousness of domestic abuse, and how many people are affected by it.

that is a god awful idea Supe. I can't think of a single instance where I've seen a known abuser allowed to, A) know the location of the shelter, or B) be allowed to interact with the women there.

Doesn't happen.