Thoughts on Ray Rice getting (only) a 2 game suspension

[David in FL]

Hmmmm, Josh Gordon gets 16 games for smoking weed twice and Rice got two games. Guess that means smoking weed is eight times worse than beating your wife. Interesting moral compass, NFL.

Exactly.

My wife is a nationally recognized expert in DV.  She just called and told me that she'll be on ESPN Live radio at 3:30 this afternoon discussing this very point.  Sorry, I don't know if it's going to be a national feed or just local.

[Golfingdad]

Okay, I'll agree but I don't think they are wild assumptions, conversely some are suggesting he should be suspended longer but are doing so based on assumptions.

Here are the facts as I know them, there isn't any public video of him hitting her, she refused to cooperate with police, she married him, he spent time in a diversionary program but wasn't convicted of assault or domestic violence and didn't go to jail.

Would you expect to be suspended from your job and lose 1/8th or more of your annual salary based on the above circumstances?

I will answer your question, but first remember:  those are only OUR circumstances.  It's been said that there is video of the incident, and there has been a meeting between Rice (and I don't know if his wife was involved or not) and Goodell.  That stuff gets added to the pile for Rice and the NFL's circumstances, so they're going off of a different, and much more comprehensive, list of circumstances.

Now, to answer your question:  No, I would not.  But that is because my company does not have a "Personal Conduct Policy" addressing this sort of thing.  The NFL does, so its not comparable.

[newtogolf]

I will answer your question, but first remember:  those are only OUR circumstances.  It's been said that there is video of the incident, and there has been a meeting between Rice (and I don't know if his wife was involved or not) and Goodell.  That stuff gets added to the pile for Rice and the NFL's circumstances, so they're going off of a different, and much more comprehensive, list of circumstances.

Now, to answer your question:  No, I would not.  But that is because my company does not have a "Personal Conduct Policy" addressing this sort of thing.  The NFL does, so its not comparable.

As I see it, Goodell runs the NFL and in theory is Rice's indirect employer.  Do you believe employers should gain access to video that is not publicly distributed for the purposes of determining employment status and policy violations?   I get that you guys are outraged by domestic violence as am I, but let's not forfeit all of our rights to due process and presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Most businesses have a "Personal Conduct Policy".  If you work for a small business they might not, but most large businesses do, so you might want to visit your HR department and check.  I am an executive and part of my employment agreement includes a Personal Conduct and Social Media policy as does all our employee offer letters.

[Golfingdad]

As I see it, Goodell runs the NFL and in theory is Rice's indirect employer.  Do you believe employers should gain access to video that is not publicly distributed for the purposes of determining employment status and policy violations?   I get that you guys are outraged by domestic violence as am I, but let's not forfeit all of our rights to due process and presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Are we still talking about Goodell and Rice, or are we talking about Donald Sterling?  Is the admissability of the evidence in this case under dispute?

Most businesses have a "Personal Conduct Policy".  If you work for a small business they might not, but most large businesses do, so you might want to visit your HR department and check.  I am an executive and part of my employment agreement includes a Personal Conduct and Social Media policy as does all our employee offer letters.

We do have a Personal Conduct Policy, but I was under the assumption that it only applied in the office.  I read it again, and it actually is more vague than that.  One of the standards that "subjects you to disciplinary action, up to and including termination" is "Fighting, threatening or attempting bodily injury to another."  I'm assuming that they mean to prevent me from punching a co-worker because he stole my wireless mouse, rather than getting arrested for fighting a drunk in a bar on a Saturday night.  But it might be open to interpretation.  Regardless, I'm not taking the chance.

[newtogolf]

Are we still talking about Goodell and Rice, or are we talking about Donald Sterling?  Is the admissability of the evidence in this case under dispute?

This has nothing to do with Sterling.  Rice wasn't not convicted of a crime and wasn't sentenced to prison.  His employer fined him 1/8th of his salary plus whatever impact the suspension has on any incentive clauses in his contract.  To the general publics knowledge there is no proof Rice was guilty of domestic violence, he wasn't tried by a jury of his peers but his employer has found him in violation of Personal Conduct Policy, what was this based on?   Did the NFL gain access to restricted video that wasn't available to the public and if so, what are the legal implications of that?

If Rice is guilty of domestic violence he should be in jail, if he's not then he shouldn't be penalized by his employer.

[jamo]

This has nothing to do with Sterling.  Rice wasn't not convicted of a crime and wasn't sentenced to prison.  His employer fined him 1/8th of his salary plus whatever impact the suspension has on any incentive clauses in his contract.  To the general publics knowledge there is no proof Rice was guilty of domestic violence, he wasn't tried by a jury of his peers but his employer has found him in violation of Personal Conduct Policy, what was this based on?   Did the NFL gain access to restricted video that wasn't available to the public and if so, what are the legal implications of that? If Rice is guilty of domestic violence he should be in jail, if he's not then he shouldn't be penalized by his employer.

Is the entrance into the diversionary program not an admission of guilt?

[Golfingdad]

If Rice is guilty of domestic violence he should be in jail, if he's not then he shouldn't be penalized by his employer.

So, OJ Simpson was unfairly found liable for the deaths of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman because he was found not guilty of murder and not put in jail?

[newtogolf]

Is the entrance into the diversionary program not an admission of guilt?

I would say no, unless he admitted to or was convicted of assault or domestic violence he isn't guilty of it and it doesn't go on his record as such.   Based on what I've read he wasn't charged or convicted of any crime.

[newtogolf]

So, OJ Simpson was unfairly found liable for the deaths of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman because he was found not guilty of murder and not put in jail?

OJ went to civil court after the criminal case.  The evidence from the criminal case was used to make the civil suit.  The NFL isn't part of the legal system.

[MS256]

This has nothing to do with Sterling.  Rice wasn't not convicted of a crime and wasn't sentenced to prison.  His employer fined him 1/8th of his salary plus whatever impact the suspension has on any incentive clauses in his contract.  To the general publics knowledge there is no proof Rice was guilty of domestic violence, he wasn't tried by a jury of his peers but his employer has found him in violation of Personal Conduct Policy, what was this based on?   Did the NFL gain access to restricted video that wasn't available to the public and if so, what are the legal implications of that?

If Rice is guilty of domestic violence he should be in jail, if he's not then he shouldn't be penalized by his employer.

To have a debate about whether the NFL can discipline a player for off field matters would take way more delving into the by-laws, contracts, and case law than I intend to do.

The fact is that the NFL disciplines players all the time for off field matters. That horse left the barn a long time ago. If somebody wants to fight their legal ability to do so they should go for it.

The issue that we can debate without committing ourselves to months of studying the pertinent law is the shockingly low number of games Rice was suspended compared to other suspensions doled out by the NFL.

As it stands the commissioner disciplines players for matters such as this one. His job as it stands is to give what he believes is an appropriate punishment for the offense. If that is what he did in this case he evidently doesn't place the weight on this offense that many other people would.

[Abu3baid]

To have a debate about whether the NFL can discipline a player for off field matters would take way more delving into the by-laws, contracts, and case law than I intend to do. The fact is that the NFL disciplines players all the time for off field matters. That horse left the barn a long time ago. If somebody wants to fight their legal ability to do so they should go for it. The issue that we can debate without committing ourselves to months of studying the pertinent law is the shockingly low number of games Rice was suspended compared to other suspensions doled out by the NFL.  As it stands the commissioner disciplines players for matters such as this one. His job as it stands is to give what he believes is an appropriate punishment for the offense. If that is what he did in this case he evidently doesn't place the weight on this offense that many other people would.

Or maybe he jus suspended him because his name got out into public with this bad media coverage with the possibility of being guilty, and the circumstantial evidence he has, which is the same as we have dictates that he gets two games only.. For very bad publicity, but he if he were to get convicted in sure it would be more than a year.. I don't think it is fair to judge Rogers action when the two situations are different!

[newtogolf]

To have a debate about whether the NFL can discipline a player for off field matters would take way more delving into the by-laws, contracts, and case law than I intend to do.

The fact is that the NFL disciplines players all the time for off field matters. That horse left the barn a long time ago. If somebody wants to fight their legal ability to do so they should go for it.

The issue that we can debate without committing ourselves to months of studying the pertinent law is the shockingly low number of games Rice was suspended compared to other suspensions doled out by the NFL.

As it stands the commissioner disciplines players for matters such as this one. His job as it stands is to give what he believes is an appropriate punishment for the offense. If that is what he did in this case he evidently doesn't place the weight on this offense that many other people would.

We can put the legal issue to the side for now.

The degree of punishment is based on the infraction and the number of infractions the player has had over his career.  Josh Gordon has been disciplined multiple times for marijuana use.  Justin Blackmon has also been disciplined numerous times for drug test failure and problems with the police.  My guess is the NFL didn't have enough proof of domestic violence nor cooperation from Rice's now wife to justify a longer suspension without risking a legal battle with the NFLPA.  Rice is probably happy to put the incident behind him and move on.

[JetFan1983]

Josh Gordon has been disciplined multiple times for marijuana use.

It was only twice with the weed for Gordon. 16 games was way too harsh. His appeal will be coming up soon though so we'll see how that turns out.

Blackmon deserved what he got IMO. Multiple DUIs are horrible obviously because you can kill someone that way.

But, you're right all the facts aren't really out there. I respect your opinion.

[RH31]

I heard on sports talk radio that no first time offender has ever gotten more than a 2 game suspension. I can't quote a source and don't even know who was doing the talking so take it fwiw.....

[saevel25]

It was only twice with the weed for Gordon.

I believe they count it as a 3rd because he came into the league with multiple instances during college of having drug use.

[newtogolf]

It was only twice with the weed for Gordon. 16 games was way too harsh. His appeal will be coming up soon though so we'll see how that turns out.

Blackmon deserved what he got IMO. Multiple DUIs are horrible obviously because you can kill someone that way.

But, you're right all the facts aren't really out there. I respect your opinion.

Thanks, same here.  We're all speculating unless someone here works for the NFL and can provide the inside scoop.

Gordon has the two weed incidents and I thought an additional DUI or police incident that occurred after the 2nd weed incident.  Both guys helped me win my fantasy leagues and I hate to see individuals self destruct, especially highly talented ones.

[Slice of Life]

It was only twice with the weed for Gordon. 16 games was way too harsh. His appeal will be coming up soon though so we'll see how that turns out.

Blackmon deserved what he got IMO. Multiple DUIs are horrible obviously because you can kill someone that way.

But, you're right all the facts aren't really out there. I respect your opinion.

You've got to think his agent/lawyer is going to be bringing up Ray Rice getting two games for knocking out his woman...

[newtogolf]

You've got to think his agent/lawyer is going to be bringing up Ray Rice getting two games for knocking out his woman...

I think the drug policy / PED's suspensions are pretty specific in terms of number of games based on failed tests / incidents, where as player conduct is more subject to interpretation by the commissioner.