There were no winners in the Deflategate saga, which is over for now, but I don't think we've heard the last about it. The NFL has appealed (as you knew the losing side would), so the court battle is likely to continue dragging on, even if everybody is beyond sick of this story by now.
I don't think the judge wanted to throw out Brady's suspension completely. That's why he wanted them to settle so badly. In my opinion, Brady deserved some sort of punishment for his role in the scandal, but the one levied down upon him was too harsh. I think the judge felt that way, too. So he encouraged them to settle, which was never going happen. Brady was never going to accept anything that required him to admit having a role and taking blame for it. Goodell was never going to admit he was wrong.
As a result, the decision was left in the hands of the judge. And he didn't have the option of reducing the suspension. If he did, that's likely what he would've done. Instead, he had to rule that either the NFL was right and uphold the penalty or that the NFL went too far and wipe it out completely. He went with option B. Not necessarily because he believed Brady's side of the story or thought he had nothing to do with it, but because he thought the entire process is unfair.
Roger Goodell is judge, jury and executioner, and there's nothing "impartial" about it. That's what this ruling is about more than anything else. He thinks Goodell has too much power in the area of player discipline and that Mr. Brilliant Commissioner invokes that power whenever it's convenient for him. The players don't know what falls under Goodell's jurisdiction under the personal conduct policy, which is incredibly vague. Nor are there specified penalties, which Goodell does seem to arbitrarily make up at whim.
This is just the latest in a long line of Goodell missteps in the personal conduct area. From the Saints' Bountygate, where he was right to suspend, but was too harsh in his penalties, that were all eventually either reduced or overturned. With Ray Rice, he got it incredibly wrong at first, tried to correct himself, and was called out for punishing the same guy twice for the same thing. Then there's Adrian Peterson and the indefinite suspension. Now Brady. That's four major losses on his ledger without a single major win on his resume. Not a good record to say the least.
What's been clear for a long time and was further affirmed during this case is that the NFL's system of player discipline is broken. Everyone already knew this, but it was also a position the players put themselves in when they agreed to it in the CBA. In order to get it changed, you would've figured they'd have to wait for the new CBA, where it would obviously be an important point of discussion.
But with all these highly publicized missteps, it's clear that waiting for the new CBA to make a change isn't in the best interest of anybody. In fact, the owners are already looking at an alternative method to having the commissioner have the sole decision-making voice. Unless the NFL wants to keep going to court with the NFLPA,
Goodell can't be the only one involved in the process. Should he be involved? Yes. But he shouldn't hear the appeals. Or, even better, he should only be hearing the appeals after an owner-appointed player disciplinary committee hears each case and issues a ruling first. There also needs to be a set of guidelines on which to base any punishments. That's as much a part of the problem as anything. You violate the substance abuse policy, it's four games. But with the personal conduct policy, nobody knows. It could be two, it could be six, it could be an entire year. The whole thing is completely arbitrary. The players deserve to know what type of suspension they might be looking at for violating the policy, and what kinds of violations would warrant a suspension.
The Personal Conduct Policy isn't a bad thing. The "integrity of the game" is something worth protecting. But Goodell has proven time and again that he can get way too aggressive in his attempts to protect that integrity. And in doing so, he's made a mockery of the process and turned himself into a laughingstock. Roger Goodell badly needed a win here and he didn't get one. Instead, he added to his own mistake-filled legacy.
Obviously, it goes without saying that the two biggest winners here are Tom Brady and the NFLPA. It's set a dangerous precedent, though. If you want to fight the NFL, and specifically the Commissioner, in federal court, go ahead. With Goodell's record in these cases, your chances look pretty good.
Unfortunately, until a change is made, that's the way it's going to be. So, if Roger Goodell really does care about the "integrity of the game" as much as he says he does (and I truly do think he thinks he's doing the right thing for the league), he has to know that, too. For the good of the game, he needs to step away. The man who needs ultimate control has to cede some. It'll be difficult, sure. But it's necessary.
They say power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I think we can all agree that Roger Goodell has proven that idiom true. But him having all the power isn't working for anybody. At all. The players, for the most part, think he's out to get them, and the owners can't like all these lawsuits or the fact that every time Goodell is challenged, the league loses.
In order to prevent Deflategate becoming the norm, Goodell needs to take a back seat during some part of the process. It needs to be fair and transparent. Right now it's not. And the only way to fix it is by making that change. So, in a strange way, Deflategate might've been a good thing. Because it brought the issue to the forefront and a change not only seems likely, but inevitable. And not a moment too soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment