“I AM THE LAW!”

Kazzy 10 Comments


Today, the NFL heard the appeal of players suspended as a result of the New Orleans Saints’ “bounty” program.  A primary criticism levied against the NFL throughout this ordeal (and even predating it) was that appeals are heard by the man who initially instituted the penalties: Commissioner Roger Goodel.  Today, Jonathan Vilma, who received the stiffest penalty doled out to players (suspended for one full season), left the appeal early, stating that he felt the process was unfair and a sham, likening Goodel to “judge, jury, and executioner”.

I don’t intend to use this space to litigate whether or not Vilma and the other players participated in the program and, if they had, whether or not this was wrong and, if it was wrong, what penalties make sense (though please feel free to threadjack if that floats your boat!).  

Instead, I’m more curious about the process itself and the impact it has on the perception of the NFL. Is such a structure the right one for the NFL? On the one hand, it allows him to institute almost-unilaterally penalties for actions that he feels jeopardize the league.  On the other, it leads to the criticism being foisted on him today, by none other than the gentlemen that make his game what it is.  (It is important to note that the appeals process, as currently constructed, is something negotiated in the Collective Bargaining Agreement between players and owners, and thus is something to which the players agreed.)

Is it wise for the Commissioner of the most successful American sports league going to insist on playing “judge, jury, and executioner”?  Is it wise for him to have this power? Would you want to work for an institution that had such a structure for discipline and appeals?  Does the system, as it is setup, make you view Goodel or the NFL any differently, either positively or negatively?  What are the implications and consequences of such an arrangement?  What would an ideal process for such matters look like in an institution like the NFL?

Is that enough questions to get the hivemind buzzing?  Hopefully.  Ready, set, GO!

Kazzy

One man. Two boys. Twelve kids.

More Posts

10 Comments

  1. 1. What is the record of reversals on appeals that are procedurally similar to this one? If the Commissioner has a track record of always affirming himself, then this certainly does look like a sham. But if the appeal is a meaningful process which in reality has produced results at variance with the status before the appeal, then you’ve got your answer right there.

    2. Lots of administrative agencies at both the federal and state levels have appeals processes that work like this. Their track record for reversals, in my experience, is not high enough to inspire faith that these are meaningful processes — unless a third-party arbitrator is brought in to serve as the actual decision-maker.

    3. The fact that the NFLPA agreed to this procedure is significant. I haven’t noticed any particular coziness between union and management in this particular labor situation.

    • Burt-

      Great, great comment! Exactly the type I was looking for! Which is why it embarrasses me a bit to acknowledge I don’t know all the answers to your questions. I’m pretty confident to say that none of the suspensions surrounding the bounty program have been overturned. And I haven’t heard of any others, but I’m sure there are tons of decisions that Goodel makes that undergo appeal and never get reported on because they are small potatoes and/or don’t involve my local or favorite teams.

      As to why the NFLPA agreed to it, I don’t know. My hunch is that there would be less grumbling about the “judge, jury, executioner” meme if the process was open and transparent. I could imagine that the NFLPA agreed to the appeal process with one understanding of what it would look like while the League had another understanding, which likely will take a court case or two to ultimately settle, if it goes that far. Of course, we are also only hearing one side of the story (right now) and it is possible that the process is open and fair and that Goodel has handled everything appropriately. His track record does not inspire much confidence in that possibility, but we’ll see.

      I’ll see if I can dig up more info on your first question. Of course, others are welcome to weigh in with what they know…

  2. AFAIK, this type of procedure just about never results in any kind of change. I suppose it’s comparable to a motion to reconsider, just without any evidence being presented until the reconsideration, though. If that’s the case, then it wouldn’t be entirely out of the question- i’ve seen judge grant motions to reconsider.

    This whole ordeal gets more and more bizarre by the day, though. The league leaks for months that there’s tens of thousands of pages of evidence supporting the punishment against the players here, and then only provides about 200 pages, none of which indicate that any payments were made, much less for “bounties”? Then, after the hearing today, it shares a bunch of evidence with reporters that is supposedly overwhelming, meaning that they (to paraphrase Mike Florio) either showed the reporters a bunch of evidence they didn’t actually use at the hearing, or put those reporters under a magical spell. Weird stuff.

  3. A sidenote, perhaps: Goodell stands upon his soapbox, declaring that the Saints bounty programs put players at grave physical risk, and for that reason if no other, his draconian punishments were required. Then he jumps from those suds to another box of them, demanding that the players be subjected to two additional full-speed, full-impact regular season games that will do more to endanger their long-term health than any bounty program ever could. He’s not litigating the existence of a bounty program in other words; he’s objecting to one that he didn’t control. It’s an absurdity. Vilma is right to be furious.

  4. likening Goodel to “judge, jury, and executioner

    Hr does say a lot of things that can’t be proved.

    • Really, anything that allows me to make a “Judge Dredd” reference is post-worthy…

Comments are closed.