Goodell’s Extension: Back to the Mail Room?

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
7,974
This league seems to have had no problem pissing off their fans in recent years. Are the number of fans who say they're pissed off about the protests greater in number than the total of the Saints fans they pissed off with Bountygate, the number of Patriots fans they've pissed off with Spygate and Deflategate, the Dolphins fans they pissed off with Incognito-gate, the Washington and Dallas fans they pissed off with the penalties for not adhering to the collusion in the uncapped year, the Vikings fans they pissed off with the Peterson suspension, the entire cities of St. Louis and San Diego they pissed off moving teams to a city that didn't want them, the Packers fans they pissed off with the replacement refs Fail Mary game because they were too cheap to pay the real officials, the people who are against domestic violence they pissed off with the Ray Rice incident and initial lack of penalty there, people still unsettled that Ben Roethlisberger isn't persona non grata, and so on? This is just one that appeals to the sensitivities of certain old white men, which the the owners by and large are, and it gives them a nice scapegoat for declining ratings instead of acknowledging the product has been declining in quality. At least they finally realized they've entrusted their multi-billion dollar investments to a circus clown with no vision or leadership, though it would be all too apropos if they give him the boot for the one issue he seems to be listening to the right advisers on.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,802
Maine
I guess I wonder how the players would react if Goodell and the league came down hard on Homophobic behavior? Like if "Fag" was used in a game or locker room? Or Sexist Behavior. What if they opted to Suspend Newton for a Game because of the press conference gaff. There are alot of great causes. The problem with allowing one and not another is that you prioritize them. IMHO the players need to understand that. I know I have listened to games on TV and heard the N word. I am fairly confident that the N word is used in the locker room amongst players. Sure their context may be in kinship (most of the time) but it still creates a bad scene when your platform is one of Unity.
If RK gets flak for allowing his team to be politicized (during the POTUS election) why should he or any owner allow thier billion dollar investment to be politicized based on any players individual desire and feelings? In any situation your only right to a % of the population. On major issues its usually around 50% each side. (Politics is a prime example)
I think a fair solution would "Solidarity Week" or month. Allow the players time to present their opinions and causes then move on. But allowing something to fester all season long is crazy. You cant wear Pink Socks week after week all season long or your fined. You cant wear your camo gear all season long or your fined.

Back to Goodell
I still stand by my assertion that there HAS to be at least 10 Very Competent replacements that could make less money and be better at the job.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,802
Maine
It's the proverbial rock and a hard place. Piss off the players or piss off a good portion of the fans. These are not the decisions these guys are used to making in their respective business lives. Either way, ratings are dropping and in the end players and owners will end up back in the same boat because they desperately need each other.
I dont see this as that much of a rock or hard place.
One actually provides the Revenue that pays the other. And for many getting paid , if they are not making 100s of thousands of dollars (to millions) playing football then their career aspirations are as pedestrian as yours or mine.

I am not saying that they are wrong. I know there are social issues that need attention and need to be corrected. What I am saying is that I bet the noble acts will be outweighed by peoples (players) selfishness to maintain their incredible lifestyles. Players will NOT kill their golden goose over this. You can never lose betting on people being selfish.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
29,882
Maui
I dont see this as that much of a rock or hard place.
One actually provides the Revenue that pays the other. And for many getting paid , if they are not making 100s of thousands of dollars (to millions) playing football then their career aspirations are as pedestrian as yours or mine.

I am not saying that they are wrong. I know there are social issues that need attention and need to be corrected. What I am saying is that I bet the noble acts will be outweighed by peoples (players) selfishness to maintain their incredible lifestyles. Players will NOT kill their golden goose over this. You can never lose betting on people being selfish.
“Players will NOT kill their golden goose over this. You can never lose betting on people being selfish.”

It all boils down to this.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
19,901
Newton
A person who spoke recently with Goodell said the commissioner is “furious” about Jones’ and other owners’ insistence that his next contract’s compensation should be more performance-based, including incentives that would allow him to be paid at roughly the same level of his current deal. “He feels as if the owners have made a lot of money and he should be compensated accordingly,” the source said. “The incentives thing really angers him.”
https://deadspin.com/roger-goodell-reportedly-furious-at-being-offered-non-1820289814
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,755
I don’t understand Goodell. The worst deal he can work out with the NFL still beats the best deal he could get anywhere else.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,012
Pittsburgh, PA
I don’t understand Goodell. The worst deal he can work out with the NFL still beats the best deal he could get anywhere else.
He might even agree with you, but that doesn't mean he's going to compromise his negotiating leverage by stating that to an owner. He still knows he's surrounded by childish idiots - well, a good fraction are idiots, certainly the lucky-sperm club - and that's a totally reasonable position for him to bet on himself.
 

bigq

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,726
This item from the comments section was a good point (and note that I have no affinity for Goodell):

I know fans don’t like hearing this, but Goodell has done a fine job from the owner’s point of view. Fans blame Roger for any grievances they have against the league, when he in fact is just the messenger of the 32 owners. That’s exactly what the owners want. They want you to think it’s Goodell’s fault not theirs.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
7,974
Jones' argument is apparently that the owners were mislead by Blank, who claimed the Compensation Committee would act unanimously about the extension terms, while in fact they currently are not:

In a letter sent late Wednesday by Cowboys general counsel Jason Cohen to owners on the compensation committee and NFL counsel Brad Karp, Jones claimed he "has discovered a number of very concerning issues" while engaged as a committee member, including that "the Ownership (sp) and Jerry Jones now understand that they have been unquestionably misled" by Blank and that "critical facts" have been misrepresented regarding Goodell's contract.

The letter, which was copied to all NFL owners, alleges that Blank told owners, including Jones, on numerous occasions, that the six-man committee's recommendation would be unanimous. Two ownership sources, however, said the committee is not currently unanimous on Goodell's contract, which is in its final stages. Jones' letter alleges Blank backed off his word there would be "unanimity" on the committee before the extension would be finalized.
Jones sounds like he's really pinning this on Blank:
Jones says in the letter that the compensation committee's consultants called Goodell's previous contract "the most one-sided deal they have ever seen." His current contract expires at the end of 2018 and the contract extension is proposed through 2024.

Jones also alleges in the letter that he has discovered a discretionary bonus plan that was not fully explained to ownership in a working contract proposal that includes less guaranteed compensation for Goodell. A source said that Blank has assured Goodell he will be able to make at least the same $40 million he has been paid on average under the 2012 deal. Jones believes other owners would object if they knew the discretionary bonuses that appear as incentives have been presented to Goodell as such a certainty even though Blank has told owners he will review it annually. The bonus plan, per the source, does not provide clear accountability for decline in TV ratings that could impact future broadcast rights fees, a reduction in sponsorships and a further damaged league image due to "sloppy" oversight in controversial matters, among other issues.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/21356011/jerry-jones-attorney-says-letter-nfl-owners-being-misled-roger-goodell-contract-negotiations
 
Last edited:

MuzzyField

Member
SoSH Member
Goodell's job is to be the shit magnet for his bosses and he does it beyond well. He's probably underpaid for billionaire babysitting and keeping the players in his bosses line. The NFL Commissioner position as currently defined isn't worried about the good of the game,it is all about the good of his 32 overlords.

In the general spirit of protecting the GAME there are plenty of worthy candidates to replace Goodell... the problem is this isn't a stand-alone unilateral position with any power that their talents would be of any use.
 

MuzzyField

Member
SoSH Member
Nailed it.
In real terms, nailed what? I'm not a Goodell fan but I sure hope Sally isn't carrying water for dad and the rest of Cowboy Nation here.

Rachel Nichols is the authority on all things current NFL in term or real question asking. It's nice of Sally to try and become relevant again. Maybe she should try and get her good friend Pat Summit's son back on track. It seems like a more achievable goal.
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,755
In real terms, nailed what? I'm not a Goodell fan but I sure hope Sally isn't carrying water for dad and the rest of Cowboy Nation here.
Jerry Jones has incredible business instincts and that he may be right to take this on given the current state of the league. We don’t really know what Jones’ real motivation is, and I’m sure the Zeke stuff is playing a role, but it definitely is possible that Jones is using this contract negotiation stuff as an opportunity to force out Goodell during a time when the NFL needs much better leadership from its commish.
 

MuzzyField

Member
SoSH Member
He's always been the other guy in the NFL owners tent. Is this really the the opportune time to blow it up (he did already play the soda and beer card) and land on top? He's one of 32, and he's not worthy of the throne.I enjoy the fact that he thinks he is and his he's not. Game on... it will be better than any TNF or MNF game to watch this play out.
 
Last edited:

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
3,223
We've had this discussion before but I think some of you are over simplifying Goodell's job.
Bottom line is that revenues were up. They got Thursday night football and new TV contracts.
Now ratings are down, attendance is down. Business isn't as great.
Why? You can point to several factors but I think it's safe to say that the league office hasn't helped matters.
Repeated off field issues and controversy are played out endlessly. These are not good for the brand. Its the job of the league office to minimize these and they have not been able to. Some might argue they've had the opposite effect in many cases.
One can debate all the causes that are affecting interest but I think it's a pretty tough argument to say the league office is helping to drive interest up.

Jones and others might have been willing to give Goodell a blank check when things were running smoothly but want some accountability now.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Every now and then Sally Jenkins takes a position that leaves me scratching my head. Her never-say-die, against-all-evidence, years long tantrum in support of Lance Armstrong was one such occasion. This is another.

Since when has Sally cared primarily about the NFL's commercial interests, and why does she care now?

Getting Goodell out of there is not going to result in more decent treatment of NFL players, which is my primary concern. Owners still will push for an 18-game regular season (with no roster expansion) in the teeth of the carnage we've seen on the field this year (let's see, the Packers' season is done, so is Houston's, and how about Seattle's after last night's game, a Thursday night game?). Owners will not agree to a more just disciplinary regime without attempting to extract something in exchange. Reports are that the owners still tied to Goodell remember well his "superb" performance in the last CBA negotiation and want him in place for the next one.

In addition, there is no reason to believe that another Commissioner will handle any better than Goodell the matters that threaten this enterprise's long term prosperity (and eventually, survival), principally the health dangers of playing this sport and the public's quite evident unease flowing from that, along with cultural and generational challenges.

So although I deeply appreciate Sally on Deflategate and her attention generally to player safety and fairness issues, I don't know what to take from this column other than just as she loves hard (Armstrong, Brady), she hates deeply and just wants Goodell gone.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
19,901
Newton
Goodell’s job isn’t just to be the punching bag or shit receptacle for the owners – it’s also to navigate the game through changing economics, cultural shifts and technological advances.

I think there is a good argument to be made that Goodell effectively helped the owners solidify their position in the established socioeconomic and technological norms during his first few years on the job – expanding existing broadcast deals and locking in revenues for the owners in the CBA. That success has earned him some breathing room as the NFL has tried figure out an economic model that works in a post-cable cutters landscape where Goodell’s record—Thursday Night Football, international games—has been decidedly more mixed.

This in itself wouldn’t be a death blow to Goodell but is accentuated by the fact that he has been an abject failure at helping the game respond to the serious cultural shifts – the anthem being the most obvious example but also emerging norms regarding domestic violence, health, employer/employee relations, racial equity, and individual expression.

I actually think Goodell has woken up to this with his response to the anthem stuff—he clearly is trying to find a way that is acceptable to owners and fans alike that gives players a platform to express themselves on the issue—but it all seems a day late and a dollar short. The players don’t trust him, the owners don’t see why it’s in their interest to find a solution and the fans on both sides of the issue think the league office is a unethical cesspool in bed with the other side.

This lack of capital is what Jones seems to be feeding on in his lawsuit – Goodell has no natural allies at this point. And while I disagree with Jones’s position on the anthem, he is absolutely right to lay this controversy at Goodell’s feet and the lack of leadership in the league office. Time and again on his watch problems—the anthem, player and team discipline—have ballooned into giant, festering crises that have sapped the league’s ability to address real problems like player safety and shifting demographics with any real authority or vision.

I think Goodell is in deep shit.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,802
Maine
You cant fire an owner.

My decidedly unsophisticated take is that If Jones continues to make Noise then the Other Owners will say fine, RG isnt worth the hassle of at best a loose cannon Jones and at worst a Lawsuit that could lay bare all their secrets.

Of course I have also been strong with the "It would not be hard to find another well qualified and effective replacement considering the Prestige and Compensation package they could offer". That new Candidate would not have the negative baggage that Goodell currently has and might actually engender a "Public Relations Honeymoon" while everyone figures out the new "Guy Or GAL".
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,265
Mansfield MA
You cant fire an owner.

My decidedly unsophisticated take is that If Jones continues to make Noise then the Other Owners will say fine, RG isnt worth the hassle of at best a loose cannon Jones and at worst a Lawsuit that could lay bare all their secrets.

Of course I have also been strong with the "It would not be hard to find another well qualified and effective replacement considering the Prestige and Compensation package they could offer". That new Candidate would not have the negative baggage that Goodell currently has and might actually engender a "Public Relations Honeymoon" while everyone figures out the new "Guy Or GAL".
You may be right that the owners are unlikely to go to bat for Goodell, but I don't think they're going to want to roll over and just let Jones run the show. Are they just going to let Jones threaten his way onto whatever committee he wants? Jerry is getting too big for his britches and when one owner gets too much power, the others tend to smack him down. This would be different if Blank or Mara was campaigning to get rid of Goodell, but I think the other owners will rally around the Commish as an anti-Jones position.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
5,815
New York City
I think the other owners will rally around the Commish as an anti-Jones position.
Exactly - it seems like Goodell is just the pretext in this instance for an intra-owner power struggle with Jones using the contract negotiations as an excuse to push to be a full member of the Compensation Committee and with the other owners resisting because they don't want to concede to Jones (or any other individual owner) that if you swing your dick around enough and make a lot of noise you'll automatically get more power. I'm sure Jones is truly annoyed at Goodell due to the kneeling issue and the Zeke suspension, but I'm also pretty sure that if Jones was already a full member of the Compensation Committee he wouldn't be as against Goodell as he seemingly is now.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
Don't forget there are owners that are still pissed at the last CBA negotiation and Robert Kraft (and other owners) capitulating to the players. As said above, there are probably a bunch of owners willing to jump on crusade as pre-text of getting of what they want.

Definitely are some owner fights going on.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
48,671
You cant fire an owner.

My decidedly unsophisticated take is that If Jones continues to make Noise then the Other Owners will say fine, RG isnt worth the hassle of at best a loose cannon Jones and at worst a Lawsuit that could lay bare all their secrets.

Of course I have also been strong with the "It would not be hard to find another well qualified and effective replacement considering the Prestige and Compensation package they could offer". That new Candidate would not have the negative baggage that Goodell currently has and might actually engender a "Public Relations Honeymoon" while everyone figures out the new "Guy Or GAL".
Can they not? Look at Sterling. Didn't Jones already have one sexual assault lawsuit a couple years back. Dude should be careful picking fights in this climate, I'd think.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,311
You may be right that the owners are unlikely to go to bat for Goodell, but I don't think they're going to want to roll over and just let Jones run the show. Are they just going to let Jones threaten his way onto whatever committee he wants? Jerry is getting too big for his britches and when one owner gets too much power, the others tend to smack him down. This would be different if Blank or Mara was campaigning to get rid of Goodell, but I think the other owners will rally around the Commish as an anti-Jones position.
I agree with this to an extent, but I also suspect that the other owners have a horror of the depositions if Jerrah goes ahead. So if I had to bet it would be on one of those meaningless gestures where both sides can claim victory. Put another way I will be entirely unshocked if Goodell's contract is not renewed, but Jones gets nothing else he really wants.

Can they not? Look at Sterling. Didn't Jones already have one sexual assault lawsuit a couple years back. Dude should be careful picking fights in this climate, I'd think.
I think the NFL charter is a little more owner friendly than the NBA one. If it were easy to revoke an NFL charter there would never have been a Los Angeles Raiders era.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,802
Maine
Those are good Points Marciano, but there are also some Key differences. Cowboys Vs. Kings being a major one that leaps to mind. They are totally different stratospheres of importance.

Wasnt there something with Sterling too? Like he had no kids or they had no interest in Running the team? Jones of course is setting up to be a "multi generational" ownership family (at least on the face of it). It wouldnt surprise me if a skeleton did emerge that was bad enough to "take down Jurrah" that his kid(s?) take over as the face....while he continued to exert the true influence. (And be a thorn to the NFL)

Plus while Sterling was old and senile, Jones is old and Crazy and arrogant enough to go to the mattresses if pushed.

Not saying this would/will devolve into that but Jones certainly seems like a more likely character to do that then Sterling was.
Being the conspiricist I am I also wouldnt bet that any of these guys (owners) are angels. And I would bet that Jones knows at least some of the dirt and would use it in a fight that got that personal.

I'll never know and could be reading this totally wrong. But if JJ has decided this is his Hilltop, I bet Goodell goes before Jones does. The owners always know that at the end of the day and for a principle worth fighting (Which Goodell doesnt seem to be) they can and would close Ranks on Al Davis 2.0
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,265
Mansfield MA
I agree with this to an extent, but I also suspect that the other owners have a horror of the depositions if Jerrah goes ahead. So if I had to bet it would be on one of those meaningless gestures where both sides can claim victory. Put another way I will be entirely unshocked if Goodell's contract is not renewed, but Jones gets nothing else he really wants.
I don't think the other owners want to be deposed, but I can't imagine Jones wants to, either. Smart money says he's bluffing.

Re: the bolded, I will be shocked, because if Jerry threatening to sue here gets what he wants, why wouldn't he just threaten to sue every time he doesn't get what he wants? I don't think Goodell's ouster is his end game. Jones wasn't on the committee studying the move to LA, but he dominated the post-committee discussion and got everyone to ignore the committee recommendation (FWIW, it seems like the committee was happy to let him do the dirty work here, but still). He wasn't included as part of the owner / player meetings on the anthem protests, so he's making public statements and leaking stuff through his buddy / partner Papa John. He wasn't included as part of the compensation committee, so now he's suing to get on there. If the other owners want to stop Jones from getting other stuff he truly wants, they need to start telling him no.

If Jones gets Goodell ousted, do the other owners put him on the search committee for the new Commissioner? If no, what happens if they don't nominate his favorite candidate? Won't he just muscle the other owners like he's doing here?
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
19,901
Newton
Peter King with his take on this. Lots in here about the conference call and details about the “incentives” in Goodell’s proposed contract but also this:

There were other things that Jones and some owners didn’t like about Goodell’s recent performance. Why didn’t this commissioner have the juice to make the approximately 16 current players who have not been standing for the national anthem—only 1% of the league’s active players, but enough to drive fans and major sponsors batty—end their demonstrations? Why was Goodell so suspension-happy, particularly in cases (Tom Brady, Elliott) that had significant doubt?

According to someone close to Jones, the suspensions, even before Elliott’s, riled him. The Hall of Fame owner has been angry that Goodell came down hard on players even when overwhelming evidence did not exist. Still, in that fateful conference call Nov. 2, after Jones’ threat, the source with knowledge of the call said Patriots owner and committee member Robert Kraft told Jones words to this effect: Jerry, my franchise got killed for a BS incident with so-called deflated footballs. We lost our quarterback for 25% of the season. We got fined a million bucks. We lost first- and fourth-round picks. For hogwash! But I took it. My fans killed me for it, but I try to be a good partner.

Jones was unmoved.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/11/12/jerry-jones-roger-goodell-new-contract
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
25,445
Jones' hypocrisy on suspensions is breathtaking, but it doesn't make Roger any less wrong on either of them.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,785
Fuck his hypocrisy. I'll echo a statement another member made earlier.

This is how you defend your team and fans. Wheb push came to shove, Kraft fell in line. Good for Jerry.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
48,734
deep inside Guido territory
Goodell presented a proposal for his contract: $50 million/yr, lifetime use of a private jet, and lifetime health insurance for him and his family per ESPN.

Outrageous. So he wants health care for his family for life. Given the climate of health care in the sport that’s rich.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,012
Pittsburgh, PA
As if he couldn't buy that with his $50M/yr. Or the private jet.

Guess you have to start with some throwaway items that you can "give" on.

he source with knowledge of the call said Patriots owner and committee member Robert Kraft told Jones words to this effect: Jerry, my franchise got killed for a BS incident with so-called deflated footballs. We lost our quarterback for 25% of the season. We got fined a million bucks. We lost first- and fourth-round picks. For hogwash! But I took it. My fans killed me for it, but I try to be a good partner.
This has the ring of truth to it: I totally believe Robert Kraft would use the word "hogwash" unironically in normal conversation.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
I expect to have to say this about 1000 times. JJ has leverage Kraft didn’t — the contract negotiation. If JJ sued over the Elliott suspension, he’d have gone down in flames, and Kraft would have as well had he sued over DFG.

At the end of this, I don’t believe JJ will sue. I think this is a bluff.

JJ and RG deserve each other. I am happy Kraft let JJ have it.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
48,734
deep inside Guido territory
When it comes to the lingering dispute regarding the Roger Goodell contract extension, much has been written and said about the potential nuclear option possessed by Cowboys owner Jerry Jones. But the rest of the owners (or, more accurately, those who oppose Jones) have a nuclear option of their own.

They could, in theory, attempt to trigger forfeiture of the Dallas franchise.

A league source with knowledge of the situation tells PFT that multiple owners already have been discussing the possibility, which flows from Article VIII of the NFL’s Constitution & Bylaws. Specifically, Section 8.13 authorizes the Commissioner to determine that an owner “has been or is guilty of conduct detrimental to the welfare of the League or professional football.” If the Commissioner believes the available sanction (a $500,000 fine) is “not adequate or sufficient,” the Commissioner may refer the issue to the NFL’s Executive Committee, which has the power to compel “[c]ancellation or forfeiture of the franchise in the League of any member club involved or implicated,” with a directive to sell the team.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/11/12/owners-have-their-own-nuclear-option-for-dealing-with-jerry-jones/
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
When it comes to the lingering dispute regarding the Roger Goodell contract extension, much has been written and said about the potential nuclear option possessed by Cowboys owner Jerry Jones. But the rest of the owners (or, more accurately, those who oppose Jones) have a nuclear option of their own.

They could, in theory, attempt to trigger forfeiture of the Dallas franchise.

A league source with knowledge of the situation tells PFT that multiple owners already have been discussing the possibility, which flows from Article VIII of the NFL’s Constitution & Bylaws. Specifically, Section 8.13 authorizes the Commissioner to determine that an owner “has been or is guilty of conduct detrimental to the welfare of the League or professional football.” If the Commissioner believes the available sanction (a $500,000 fine) is “not adequate or sufficient,” the Commissioner may refer the issue to the NFL’s Executive Committee, which has the power to compel “[c]ancellation or forfeiture of the franchise in the League of any member club involved or implicated,” with a directive to sell the team.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/11/12/owners-have-their-own-nuclear-option-for-dealing-with-jerry-jones/
If the owners open that can of worms for Roger Goodell, they are bigger morons than I thought.

He's not worth the headache or legal fees that would result from that move.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I expect to have to say this about 1000 times. JJ has leverage Kraft didn’t — the contract negotiation. If JJ sued over the Elliott suspension, he’d have gone down in flames, and Kraft would have as well had he sued over DFG.

At the end of this, I don’t believe JJ will sue. I think this is a bluff.

JJ and RG deserve each other. I am happy Kraft let JJ have it.
Kraft is participating in the same contract negotiation. Nothing to stop him from going the same route Jones is going.

That said, Jones is either going to get run over or win the battle to oust Goodell while losing his power on league owner circle and he’s not getting Elliott back a day earlier no matter what he does.
 

sunoff

Member
SoSH Member
This is definitely going to be a fun ride to watch though. You now have several billionaire owners that have a hair across their respective assess (whether that be public or private) . Whoever is dropping the anonymous media "nuclear option" on jerry made me smile.

The lifetime insurance bit might end up being what bites him in the ass.

I think the airplane is just there to give up in negotiations.