NFL considers lifetime ban/PacMan gets a year

Didn't see this anywhere else.

Surprised the league didn't already have one, yet you have to wonder how they can keep it from becoming political or even racial (doesn't seem like baseball's ban is a fair comparison) ... you just know the first guy who gets kicked out (I'm looking at you Pacman) will file a hefty lawsuit claiming loss of income and alleging a racial or political bias.

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20070408_NFLs_new_sheriff_is_talking_tough.html

Adam "Pacman" Jones and Chris Henry met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on Tuesday, and shortly thereafter, Gene Upshaw delivered a minor bombshell.

The NFL Players Association executive director told the Washington Post that Goodell is considering adding a lifetime ban to his forthcoming player-conduct policy for players who repeatedly get into serious legal trouble.

Those were the strongest words yet linked to Goodell, who has made policing the league - and protecting, as he called it, "the shield" - an early mandate during his first year in office. And while a lifetime ban might seem a drastic measure, just about everyone agrees that the commissioner needs to have the ability to levy harsh penalties in order to discourage deviant behavior.

Then, on Friday, the NFL announced that Goodell had established a six-member council of veteran players to advise him on player conduct.

Fines haven't worked. Neither have short-term suspensions. Increased education into the pitfalls of wealth and success sounds good on paper. But stripping a player of his ability to perform on a season's worth, or even a lifetime, of Sundays? That just might work.

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

(low whistle while reading the post and story)I can wait until his decision comes down. Talk about a ripple effect.

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

Hopefully he will have a more specific definition than "serious legal trouble."

Seriously though, where do you set the bar? Does a minor infraction, like Henry's ticket issue, contribute? Does a player like Ray Lewis, who pleads to a lesser charge, get penalized heavily?

Either way, I'll agree that something has to be done. Someone needs to show these guys that they aren't above the law because their on TV each Sunday, that they aren't "special" because kids think they're cool or because 10,000 people wear their replica jerseys. If it doesn't stop, the NFL turns into the NBA and gets an image that it's a league for thugs and gang-bangers (which won't happen as fast since there are more high profile white guys in the NFL than in the NBA <---sad but true), and in turn loses its mainstream popularity and popularity among financial and corporate elites.

Good plan for Mr. Goodell.

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

Chris Henry parties with teens. He can't be all bad.

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

Hey look. Another post about teenaged girls.

Someone hasn't had an orgasm in 20-odd years.

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

[/ChuckTaylor]

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

Sorry Piotr. You're wrong there.

The Chuck Taylor defense goes like this: "If this happened in baseball, you woudln't even talk about it."

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

The lifetime-suspension punishment will be the nuclear option/death penalty Goodell will keep in store for players convicted of multiple felonies, or violent bodily-injury felonies.

Short of that, they'll probably institute massive (six-figure) fines for players arrested on violent-felony charges, and suspend them (with pay) as long as the cases are in court.

An average football player's career is 4.8 seasons long. Violent felony cases often take several years to work their way through the courts. Even if you're suspended with pay, you sit out two or three seasons, your career will be over anyway by the time you get back on the field. Plus, you won't earn any incentive clauses sitting on the sidelines.

Of course, the first player penalized under the new rules will sue. Of course.

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

I understand when the player inevitably sues. Many people with "normal" jobs file suit when they feel they have been wronged . . . or when a lawyer smells a career-making case.

But a league should have the right to have a career "death penalty" on the books. Ultimately, a league decides who can and cannot play for it. As a representative of the NFL (or NBA, or MLB, or even the NHL or MLS), a player's off-field behavior is always relevant. And the average citizen likely wouldn't mind seeing someone they perceive as a criminal, losing access to the privileged life.

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

Something has to be done. It's become such a joke that at least one football site (that I know of) has a graphic showing how many days it has been since an NFL player was arrested. Today it's at 8 days, and that's the highest it's been since they started it about six weeks ago.

Goodell has a lot of support for taking action against players, especially Pacman in light of the Vegas incident -- and the nine other times he's been questioned by the police since he was drafted.

I know Pacman can sue, but how much of a leg does he have to stand on? Player conduct is a standard clause in every NFL contract, and he passed "questionable" a long time ago...

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

I want to see Pacman's (lengthy) rap sheet before I render a judgment. Anyone got one?

 

Re: NFL chief considers lifetime ban

And Gene Upshaw gets another cookie.