The Ray Rice Elevator Video

Yep. I agree with due process, but I also believe each case is different. Depends on the police report/what the team can find out/etc. I'd prefer the guys keep playing, but have no issue if teams choose to sit them. I just don't think paying them makes it all OK. Sitting them with pay is still punishment. It's up to the teams to decide if/when they deserve that.

 

It's hilarious that the NFL has gotten so many people to bite on the "due process" idea. That is a legal and constitutional concept addressing your rights within the government.

An athlete doesn't have any more right to play because of due process than he has to keep his job because of the First Amendment after spouting off racist comments.

 

Not even close to the same thing. Presumably these racist comments were recorded/printed/heard by multiple witnesses. An accusation is merely that. And I doubt you'd get fired for a racist comment based on an accusation. Nobody here (I don't think) is advocating waiting until the entire legal process plays out to mete out punishment. But it depends on the accusation/seriousness/evidence. In other words, case by case.

 

All right, but when a team says a guy still plays "because of due process," they might as well say "because we feel like it." Both hold the same logical weight.

 

I see your point. I guess due process isn't really the right term. But you get what I am saying, at least.

 

Laws are based on ideals. There is nothing wrong with teams choosing to allow those ideals to be a guideline in these situations.

Also, given that I'm still waiting for you to tell me what is lost by waiting for more information in the case of McDonald and others that you cannot answer the question. I have brought it up repeatedly and you continue to dodge it. The league and the individual teams can take the knee-jerk response approach and punish a possibly innocent player as soon as there is an accusation or they can wait for the legal case to play out or at least for enough information to come to light to have some confidence that the person is actually guilty before acting.

In the former option, there is a very real chance that an innocent person will be punished. In the latter, no harm is done except in the realm of public relations.

 

To be fair, the harm in public relations is probably of more concern to the NFL and its franchises than whether they punish an innocent player.

When it comes to deciding when/how to punish an athlete the formula is simple: W > PR > Player.

 

I wonder if the NFLPA is trying to accomplish anything other than trying to get Rice paid any guaranteed money left on his contract beyond this year. But he was suspended indefinitely by the league, so I'm not sure how that would really work.

 

Primarily, I'd say they're trying to establish that you cannot be punished once, then punished again for the sane thing. Whether Rice is a piece of s--- is sort of secondary to the idea that the commish should have unilateral power to handle disciplinary matters with no oversight. I doubt DeMaurice Smith or Eric Winston care if Rice plays again as much as they care about establishing further precedent that Goodell can do whatever he wants without pushback.

 

But, to prove that he did that, they'll have to prove that he had seen the video before he gave the first suspension.