Roger G's Wheel of Justice

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,740
AZ
singaporesoxfan said:
That may be true - and Mueller certainly is a man of deep integrity - but a lot of reporters on Twitter are already starting to question what "overseeing" means and whether that makes the investigation truly independent.
 
I actually was sort of agreeing a bit -- I do think it's a concern.  But in the end, I'm not really that worried he'll whitewash it.  I think he'll give them lip service and do what he wants to do.
 
Not to get too down in the weeds here, but while internal investigations require integrity, the most important ingredient is that you have to be good at it.  It's a distinct skill.  No idea whether Mueller is good at it.  I know for a fact, though, there are people at his firm who are fantastic at it, and I assume he will use them as lieutenants.  
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,076
Newton
From that AP article:

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) -- A law enforcement official says he sent a video of Ray Rice punching his then-fiancee to an NFL executive five months ago, while Commissioner Roger Goodell has insisted the league didn't see the violent images until this week.
And:

The law enforcement official said he sent a DVD copy of the security camera video to an NFL office and included his contact information. He asked the AP not to release the name of the NFL executive for fear that the information would identify the law enforcement official as the source.
So I guess that puts an end to the "Incompetent Secretary" theory...
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,852
singaporesoxfan said:
That may be true - and Mueller certainly is a man of deep integrity - but a lot of reporters on Twitter are already starting to question what "overseeing" means and whether that makes the investigation truly independent.
 
I think the key from an independence perspective is that Mara and Rooney, while owners, are functionally outside the commissioner's office and the rest of the NFL's executive apparatus.  They don't have any reporting line to the people being investigated and don't have to worry about being fired or censured for how they handle the investigation.  They are playing the role that in a corporation would be probably be played by an independent committee of the Board of Directors.  
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,913
Judge Mental13 said:
Soooooo........how many NFL executives are female?
A male or female executive could have a female admin (or male admin, but not helpful here) who opens the mail and confirms receipt with the sender. Or a female executive could open her own mail. This hasn't clarified the above at all.
 

Tartan

New Member
Aug 20, 2008
361
MA
Pete Williams said:
You folks are blinded by your bias.  Roger Goodell is an excellent commissioner.  The game is more popular than ever, more profitable than ever.
 
Lose his job over this?  Get over yourselves.  Ain't gonna happen.
 
Goodell being good at making money for the league is not mutually exclusive from him fucking up other aspects of his job. Football should be enjoyable. Goodell being a piece of shit hampers my enjoyment of NFL football. It stands to reason that someone can be enough of a piece of shit that it outweighs being a wiz at business. His handling of this situation qualifies, I think.
 

lambeau

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 7, 2010
1,175
Connecticut
Yes. The Board is investigating management, including the CEO--Mueller is reporting to Mara and Rooney. Goodell's clean or he's not, but the owners have taken charge.
 
I'd start with Jeff Miller, Commissioner of Pennsylvania State Police 2003-2008, NFL Chieh of Security with a few NJ contacts, and his lieutenant Deana Garner, Dir Player Security, gambling expert, formerly NCAA Dir Investigations (eg Maurice Clarett).
 

Fred in Lynn

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2013
4,905
Not Lynn (or Ocean Side)
BigSoxFan said:
Ah, yes, the "independent" investigation has finally made its appearance. Bravo, NFL, you've followed the Penn State playbook perfectly.
NFL, to self, upon the rumbling from Capitol Hill: "Do we want to commission an investigation or should we let Congress do it?" Not a tough choice. Ergo, the announcement of an investigation. Or it's a coincidence.

In hindsight, it couldn't possibly have been worse had Penn State let the NCAA conduct the investigation, since they would have had a chance to refute findings. No such luck when they took the lead. I think this is the lesser of two evils for the NFL, unless of course, Goodell is lying about what he knew and when. No winning in that case.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
It is actually important. Almost certainly the reason it's mentioned and the reason they were picked is because the league can claim attorney-client privilege with respect to the investigation. Note that only the final report will be made public.
I don't know what anticipated litigation would support cloaking the entire investigation in privilege, and I would think having an outside law firm lead the investigation would be sufficient to claim whatever privilege may be available without needing two attorney-owners to oversee the matter.

Having two owners oversee the investigation is better appearance-wise than having Goodell in charge of approving WilmerHale's invoices. Beyond that, I have no idea why Mara and Rooney are involved, and I have no idea why the league's PR hacks decided to include that detail about their professional backgrounds.

Btw, having dealt with PR folks professionally, I'm amazed at how many of them get handsomely paid to suck at a job that only requires common sense and a working knowledge of grammar.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,740
AZ
maufman said:
I don't know what anticipated litigation would support cloaking the entire investigation in privilege, and I would think having an outside law firm lead the investigation would be sufficient to claim whatever privilege may be available without needing two attorney-owners to oversee the matter.
Probably running the risk here of boring the crap out of anyone reading this, but internal investigations conducted by lawyers are generally privileged if part of the representation includes giving legal advice. (Easy to structure this one so it does.). Having the two owners involved be lawyers doesn't make the privilege claim stronger. What it does is avoid making it weaker.

If the internal details of the investigation are shared with non lawyers, the privilege can be waived. That's why the NFL picked lawyers. If Arthur Blank and Jerry Jones were involved in or "overseeing" the investigation, privilege would be much harder to claim.
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
24,539
The 718
Rooney and Mara are the most respected and respectable owners in the NFL. It's a sign that the League wants this investigation to have gravitas in the eyes of the public.

It remains to be seen if they will put the hammer to RG if that's where the evidence leads. Since they and their families have been pillars of the league since Rog was doing loop-de-loops in his dad's bag, I am optimistic that they're not shills for him . We will see.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,314
I'm bad at this stuff - if the owners are the ones hiring WilmerHale, then won't communications between the owners and the investigators be privileged regardless of whether the owners are attorney's themselves?  What's the difference between NFL owners hiring LawFirmX to conduct an investigation and me retaining LawFirmY to do the same?
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,413
Southwestern CT
Marciano490 said:
I'm bad at this stuff - if the owners are the ones hiring WilmerHale, then won't communications between the owners and the investigators be privileged regardless of whether the owners are attorney's themselves?  What's the difference between NFL owners hiring LawFirmX to conduct an investigation and me retaining LawFirmY to do the same?
There is no difference. People are slicing the onion too finely here.

Beyond this, the fact that the NFL has promised to release the report means (as a practical matter) that invoking privilege on the work product itself would be yet another titanic PR blunder. So they're kind of boxed in regardless.
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
Average Reds said:
There is no difference. People are slicing the onion too finely here.

Beyond this, the fact that the NFL has promised to release the report means (as a practical matter) that invoking privilege on the work product itself would be yet another titanic PR blunder. So they're kind of boxed in regardless.
Agree. The underlying facts are aren't privileged in the first place, and, if the report is released, the workproduct is unprotected.

For example, if there are smoking gun emails showing that RG has lied about watching the video, it doesn't matter who uncovers them, they're clearly discoverable. You can't cloak facts in the a/c privilege by laundering them through inside or outside counsel.
 

Fred in Lynn

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2013
4,905
Not Lynn (or Ocean Side)
Average Reds said:
There is no difference. People are slicing the onion too finely here.

Beyond this, the fact that the NFL has promised to release the report means (as a practical matter) that invoking privilege on the work product itself would be yet another titanic PR blunder. So they're kind of boxed in regardless.
Yup. Like he wrote, if they go near the draft product they'll contaminate it in the eyes of the public, even if their comments were minor and editorial in nature. It's customary to review draft documents but they're dealing with a torch-wielding mob here.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
OilCanShotTupac said:
Rooney and Mara are the most respected and respectable owners in the NFL. It's a sign that the League wants this investigation to have gravitas in the eyes of the public.
 
I agree. In the "when is Goodell going" pool, I guessed that a Rooney would be the owner who goes on a broadcast partner for the obligatory "why Roger was fired" interview. 
 
Pittsburgh and New York are also two of the few ownership groups not compromised by other PR/legal issues (Colts, Browns, Patriots) and without a player/employee under investigation/indictment for DV (SF, Arizona, Carolina, etc.) That leaves few choices and I doubt they'd ask Shad Khan to be the frontman on this due to tenure/length of ownership. 
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,438
koufax32 said:
Multiple posters have mentioned that everyone in the CJ system they have talked to have all said that the handling of the case went along with SOP. Unless you're strictly bemoaning the actual prescribed punishment (which is embarrassingly small IMO) there's nothing to see here.
True but the government should be looking into how to change the SOP. But it's easier and you get a nice PR boost by attacking the NFL. Not that I mind strong arming the NFL a little here. They deserve it.


But I'd prefer to see politicians use this as a catalyst to review DV laws and punishment a well as how cases are handled. Hopefully that is still done. Perhaps it is already happening at a more local level in NJ.

If you aren't going to prosecute a case with video of the act, what do you prosecute?
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,559
Somewhere
Cellar-Door said:
I think it is amazing how the fact there is video colors people's perceptions.
Not sure I agree entirely with where you're going here, (an accusation of hypocrisy?) but the issue isn't just that Ray Rice is clearly guilty of assaulting his wife, but that the NFL has decided to adjudicate all sorts of non-football related matters (i.e. smoking marijuana) and as such has made itself a form of parallel law enforcement. And in that world of parallel law enforcement, they decided that smoking marijuana a couple of times deserves a year's suspension, whereas indisputable evidence of beating your wife requires a 2 game ban. Imagine if the criminal justice system worked that way...
 
Oh.
 
 
MLB has never suspended a single player for domestic assault.
 
Famously so, as Bobby Chouinard not only threatened to kill his wife by holding a gun to her head, his jail sentence was specially constructed so that he would only have to serve time in the offseason. I believe he played two seasons under this arrangement.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,192
Cellar-Door said:
I think it is amazing how the fact there is video colors people's perceptions.
 
Even the clearly inadequate 2 game suspension is the harshest response to domestic violence by any of the major sports leagues.
MLB has never suspended a single player for domestic assault.
NBA suspensions have been a few games, but never 1/8th of the season.
The NHL doesn't suspend players for domestic violence.
 
Do I think Goodell is a weasel and probably lying about the league never seeing the tape? Yep
Do I think a 2 game suspension was inadequate? Yep.
 
At the same time, Goodell has been the most proactive commish in punishing players for unacceptable and criminal behavior in any league, that people are saying he should be fired because he screwed up the original Rice suspension is ridiculous.
 
This isn't getting enough attention.
 
I imagine NBA/MLB/NHL will change their policies going forward though.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,322
Van Everyman said:
From that AP article:



And:



So I guess that puts an end to the "Incompetent Secretary" theory...
Not really. Many of these executives have administrative assistants who go through the mail for them. The door is still wide open to throw someone under the bus or find a fall guy.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,070
New York City
twibnotes said:
Not really. Many of these executives have administrative assistants who go through the mail for them. The door is still wide open to throw someone under the bus or find a fall guy.
 
I feel like it's too late for that now. The fall guy is going to be The Sheriff.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,833
Deep inside Muppet Labs
BigSoxFan said:
Here's what I don't get. Organizations like the NFL hire crisis management firms all the time. Is Goodell even listening to his PR consultants? Like at all? He has fallen down the same path as A-Rod where he's trying to get off on some technicality despite the fact that public opinion is squarely against him.

It really amazes me how people let their pride get in the way like this. Goodell has had so many recent examples to learn from and, yet, he's still a massive failure.
 
He's never had a job outside of the NFL offices and he's the son of a Senator. My guess is that he's a spoiled narcissistic little twat who lacks any and all larger perspective and who totally buys into the invincibility mythos of the NFL.
 
It's hardly any surprise he's such a failure.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,314
BigJimEd said:
True but the government should be looking into how to change the SOP. But it's easier and you get a nice PR boost by attacking the NFL. Not that I mind strong arming the NFL a little here. They deserve it.


But I'd prefer to see politicians use this as a catalyst to review DV laws and punishment a well as how cases are handled. Hopefully that is still done. Perhaps it is already happening at a more local level in NJ.

If you aren't going to prosecute a case with video of the act, what do you prosecute?
All true, but if a congressman proposes action on this, it'll be through federal law, not by criticizing the policies and actions of a state he doesn't represent. Federalism and all. Of course, any federal DV statute will need a jurisdictional hook learned from the VAWA misadventure.
 

jose melendez

Earl of Acie
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2003
31,074
Geneva, Switzerland
I know Rooney has this impeccable reputation, but you'll have to forgive me for not exhaulting his willingness to do the right thing.  Ben Roethlisberger remains his star employee.  Yes, with any NFL owner you could find that they've kept some awful people in their employ, but the Roethlisberger was incredibly odious.
 

Dan Murfman

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2001
4,213
Pawcatuck
Jerry Richardson "cares" about DV.This is at the event that Goodell cancelled last night.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gp56K8uTE4
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,660
NOVA
Dan Murfman said:
Jerry Richardson "cares" about DV.This is at the event that Goodell cancelled last night.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gp56K8uTE4
 
I can't watch it but I assume it includes an announcement about how he's taking a principled stand and immediately suspending Hardy.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,076
Newton
I said this on the Ron Washington thread, but inside of a single week you have:

Ray Rice/NFL Clusterfuck
Jerry Jones sexual assault case
Wilpon sexual harassment case
Oscar Pistorius acquittal
Ron Washington sexual assault allegations

No, that's not all football (or even America). And some of it is still allegations. But that's a lot of bad PR with three things in common: women, sports and violence and/or aggression.

Or put another way:

@bigjimmurray: Oscar Pistorius, cleared of all murder charges.
This week's been one big middle finger to women.
As for Congressional involvement, there is absolutely a place here for public hearings – both insofar as the NFL has a broad antitrust exemption from Congress and that DV is clearly a big societal issue that institutions like the NFL are not fighting but actually using the shield of that exemption to perpetuate, intentionally or otherwise.

Also, as if we didn't have concerns about the independence of the NFL investigation already, there is this:

@BenVolin: Who is Robert Mueller? His law firm helped NFL negotiate its deal with DirecTV. And he may have granted Whitey Bulger immunity in the 1980s

@BenVolin: Here’s the story describing Mueller’s ties to Bulger http://t.co/s9jsFgKfNY
Get ready, people.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
He's never had a job outside of the NFL offices and he's the son of a Senator. My guess is that he's a spoiled narcissistic little twat who lacks any and all larger perspective and who totally buys into the invincibility mythos of the NFL.
 
It's hardly any surprise he's such a failure.
 
 
Could you explain why you think he's a failure? Because, honestly, he's been pretty awesome at his job--making NFL owners richer. The fucking Bills just sold for 1.4 billion dollars.
 

Fred in Lynn

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2013
4,905
Not Lynn (or Ocean Side)
BigJimEd said:
True but the government should be looking into how to change the SOP. But it's easier and you get a nice PR boost by attacking the NFL. Not that I mind strong arming the NFL a little here. They deserve it.


But I'd prefer to see politicians use this as a catalyst to review DV laws and punishment a well as how cases are handled. Hopefully that is still done. Perhaps it is already happening at a more local level in NJ.

If you aren't going to prosecute a case with video of the act, what do you prosecute?
Wasn't the outcome of the case a guilty plea from Rice with a sentence of no jail time should he complete the program? Doesn't that categorically constitute, qualitatively speaking, a successful prosecution? Those are not rhetorical questions.

I saw a statistic yesterday during a TV interview with the previous Atlantic County DA that nearly 8,000 persons in a similar situation in NJ have been remanded to that program this year in lieu of a trial (feel free to assist verifying this). I don't know if harsher penalties are good or not, and I suspect few others do, also (I realize you suggested a REVIEW of policies, not necessarily action at this time, would be appropriate). I am not enthusiastic about NJ doing anything at all to modify its laws and policies based on one occurrence of something without a boatload of supporting data.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,833
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Shelterdog said:
 
 
Could you explain why you think he's a failure? Because, honestly, he's been pretty awesome at his job--making NFL owners richer. The fucking Bills just sold for 1.4 billion dollars.
 
Because his quest to consolidate power to himself has taken on the process of ruining the game. He was so anxious to show that there was a new sherriff in town that he's run downt the league he's supposed to protect. Harsh penalties doled out with no pattern or explanation as he acts as judge, jury, and executioner. Screwing around with the defensive rules to the point where it's nearly impossible to play defense and the players themselves don't know what's legal and what's not. Constantly overreacting to the last thing he saw with kneejerk judgements and sweeping generalizations. Years of minimizing the CTE question before player deaths forced him to act, and then the amount offered was pitifully small and he refused to advance helmet technology. And then we have this little issue where his handling of it has been ATROCIOUS. where he's just apparently been caught lying in public, where he really thought that the NFL could just sweep the incident under the rug and that no one would see the video.
 
BTW he made $44 million last year.
 
I don't give a fuck about the owners' pockets, I do care about the game itself. I think he's trying his best to kill it with his ham-fisted incompetence. I would argue the game succeeds on in spite of his efforts.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,322
Fred in Lynn said:
Wasn't the outcome of the case a guilty plea from Rice with a sentence of no jail time should he complete the program? Doesn't that categorically constitute, qualitatively speaking, a successful prosecution? Those are not rhetorical questions.

I saw a statistic yesterday during a TV interview with the previous Atlantic County DA that nearly 8,000 persons in a similar situation in NJ have been remanded to that program this year in lieu of a trial (feel free to assist verifying this). I don't know if harsher penalties are good or not, and I suspect few others do, also (I realize you suggested a REVIEW of policies, not necessarily action at this time, would be appropriate). I am not enthusiastic about NJ doing anything at all to modify its laws and policies based on one occurrence of something without a boatload of supporting data.
The optics are still F'd. We have congressmen bashing a sports league that did more than a fellow govt entity (the state of NJ) so to speak. The least these demagogues could do is make mention of the fact that we need to do some serious thinking about how the criminal justice system handles domestic abuse. NFL and its billionaire owners are an easy target, and pols are just looking to score some points.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,076
Newton
I think you could make the argument that while he has helped owners take in money during his tenure, Goodell has done a poor job positioning the NFL for a future that is more open, transparent and tolerant.

The only thing I would say in his defense is that changing a culture is about 1000x harder than opening new markets, finding new revenue streams and consolidating old ones, etc. The problem is, football's culture is odious, violent and antiquated (just look at Harbaugh's pathetic press conference the other night for evidence) – and the game itself is bad for your health.

These would be enormous challenges for anyone but having worked there his whole professional life, Goodell is too much a part of the culture to do anything to change it.

Perhaps the Rooneys, Maras and Krafts have recognized this over the years – but it is probably hard to make much of a stink about things when you see a laughingstock of a franchise like Buffalo sell for $1.4B. So they've tried to make a difference in other ways – through CBAs, rules committees, leading by example with the Holmes trade and Hernandez release. But it's really not enough at the end the day
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,070
New York City
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
I don't give a fuck about the owners' pockets, I do care about the game itself. I think he's trying his best to kill it with his ham-fisted incompetence. I would argue the game succeeds on in spite of his efforts.
 
Agreed. The NFL is dominating despite The Sheriff.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,833
Deep inside Muppet Labs
He's never going to be able to change the culture: he's an NFL lifer. He literally has no other work experience. It's the classic General Motors issue where they are so wedded to their own structure they're unable to change or fix their blind spots from within.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,322
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
He's never going to be able to change the culture: he's an NFL lifer. He literally has no other work experience. It's the classic General Motors issue where they are so wedded to their own structure they're unable to change or fix their blind spots from within.
My sense is that the owners knew this when they hired him too. They don't want that outside perspective.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,076
Newton
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
He's never going to be able to change the culture: he's an NFL lifer. He literally has no other work experience. It's the classic General Motors issue where they are so wedded to their own structure they're unable to change or fix their blind spots from within.
twibnotes said:
My sense is that the owners knew this when they hired him too. They don't want that outside perspective.
This may impact their thinking.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,322
BigSoxFan said:
Making owners money is not his only job. It's obviously the most important one but avoiding PR shitshows is also part of his job. And he obviously is terrible at that. Also, there are plenty of reasons for the rise of popularity in the NFL that have absolutely nothing to do with Goodell. The Sunday Ticket on Directv had nothing to do with him. The booming fantasy football market had nothing to do with him. I give him full credit for striking while the iron is hot but I think you're giving him too much credit for the rise of the NFL.
Worth noting also that Kraft was a major factor in getting labor issues settled. If I'm one of the owners, I'd expect my $44 million to get me a guy who doesn't need that rescue intervention in the biggest negotiation of his tenure.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,882
Washington, DC
Van Everyman said:
Also, as if we didn't have concerns about the independence of the NFL investigation already, there is this:



Get ready, people.
 
I've been as critical as anyone of the NFL's actions here, but the appointment of Robert Mueller is the one thing I don't have any problem with, and Ben Volin is way out of his depth here if that's his understanding of Mueller. There's a big reason why Mueller was the only FBI director to reach the full 10-year term limit and have it extended since J. Edgar Hoover - he's good and well-respected. If we're talking sports experience, it was Mueller's FBI that investigated NBA rigging and steroids in baseball.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,700
I said this on the Ron Washington thread, but inside of a single week you have:

Oscar Pistorius acquittal
Wait a minute. Everything I've seen said that Pistorius was acquitted of murder - which in SA means premeditated. As far as I know, there are lesser charges that still need to be decided and the judge even said that Pistorius was negligent and his conduct unreasonable.

I've not followed the Pistorius trial extensively, but I have looked into it and I can't say that clearing him of premeditation is clear error.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
So the Mueller announcement now has me thinking that Goodell will survive quite a bit longer, if not indefinitely.
 
They will now slow down and every call for him to go will be met with "we need to wait until the investigation is complete".
 
Absent a new bombshell (maybe whomever was on that voicemail will speak up), this is now giogn to get the freeze out treatment in hopes that public sentiment will calm down over 6 months.  I doubt they finish their investigation before the SB.
 
Aside: the investigation should take about 4 hours, BTW.  Check the phone and mailroom records... find out if that tape was delivered... if it was, shitcan Roger.
 

JayMags71

Member
SoSH Member
Shelterdog said:
Could you explain why you think he's a failure? Because, honestly, he's been pretty awesome at his job--making NFL owners richer. The fucking Bills just sold for 1.4 billion dollars.
What has Goodell done that's caused franchise values to increase? What initiatives has he spearheaded? What actions has he taken that helped increase profits? Like others have said, the term "empty suit" was invented for people like him.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,882
Washington, DC
86spike said:
So the Mueller announcement now has me thinking that Goodell will survive quite a bit longer, if not indefinitely.
 
They will now slow down and every call for him to go will be met with "we need to wait until the investigation is complete".
 
Absent a new bombshell (maybe whomever was on that voicemail will speak up), this is now giogn to get the freeze out treatment in hopes that public sentiment will calm down over 6 months.  I doubt they finish their investigation before the SB.
 
Aside: the investigation should take about 4 hours, BTW.  Check the phone and mailroom records... find out if that tape was delivered... if it was, shitcan Roger.
 
Which means the possibility of pink October being awkward has increased significantly.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,700
Wasn't the outcome of the case a guilty plea from Rice with a sentence of no jail time should he complete the program? Doesn't that categorically constitute, qualitatively speaking, a successful prosecution? Those are not rhetorical questions.

I saw a statistic yesterday during a TV interview with the previous Atlantic County DA that nearly 8,000 persons in a similar situation in NJ have been remanded to that program this year in lieu of a trial (feel free to assist verifying this). I don't know if harsher penalties are good or not, and I suspect few others do, also (I realize you suggested a REVIEW of policies, not necessarily action at this time, would be appropriate). I am not enthusiastic about NJ doing anything at all to modify its laws and policies based on one occurrence of something without a boatload of supporting data.
I've stayed out of this thread but I'm just going to echo this. I know there is a vocal position of advocates who push for mandatory arrest and mandatory trial policies, but it seems to me that DV is way more complicated than this. Aside from the Rice case, it most instances, there are two very conflicting stories; no eyewitnesses other than the participants; and accusations of criminal behaviour against both parties. Plus, after the incident, often the case is that none of the parties want to go forward because jail time or even diversion programs cost money that the families don't have.

You can arrest the guy and throw him in jail and try to prosecute him and you will hear stories about the family going bust because the guy lost his job or other stories about women who lied because they know that's how the authorities are going to handle it.

You can arrest both the parties but then you have to figure out what to do with the children.

You can send the parties to some diversion program but for every 100 or 500 people you send there, a couple of them are going to end up killing their spouses.

There' no easy answer to this. Well at least I certainly don't have one.