Look, I don't want to defend a child beater. But I fail to see how the NFL's punishment here is anything but arbitrary, and creating a mess of a precedent. For a league run by lawyers, I don't understand how they could botch this so badly.
The NFL had a 2-game policy for domestic abuse last summer. Peterson beat his kid and was under investigation. At some point after that act, the NFL announces a new 6-game policy. Peterson is put on the exempt list, misses 9 games (with pay) and in lieu of trial pleads to a misdemeanor.
So...assuming the new 6-game standard even would apply here (a leap of an assumption), how can anything beyond fining him the 6 game checks comport with the policy? You can say "well, the policy allows for extenuating circumstances"...well this was merely a misdemeanor under the law, so what WOULDN'T be extenuating then? You can say, "well, he was paid for those other 9 games so it's not punishment"...well, it sure as hell is punishment for the team, the fans, and even for the player who is chasing individual goals and (bearing in mind the next guy won't be Peterson) trying to build his career. And it's beyond disingenuous IMO for anyone to suggest that being forced to miss games, even "with pay," isn't punishment. Of course it's punishment. That's not to say he shouldn't have to pay back 6 game checks, but to use the exempt list to more than double the ordinary suspension just seems laughably unsupportable IMO.
I'm shocked at Goodell's hubris on this. Gone way too far. I will say at this point he has to go.
This post was edited on 11/18 8:35 AM by deep_six
The NFL had a 2-game policy for domestic abuse last summer. Peterson beat his kid and was under investigation. At some point after that act, the NFL announces a new 6-game policy. Peterson is put on the exempt list, misses 9 games (with pay) and in lieu of trial pleads to a misdemeanor.
So...assuming the new 6-game standard even would apply here (a leap of an assumption), how can anything beyond fining him the 6 game checks comport with the policy? You can say "well, the policy allows for extenuating circumstances"...well this was merely a misdemeanor under the law, so what WOULDN'T be extenuating then? You can say, "well, he was paid for those other 9 games so it's not punishment"...well, it sure as hell is punishment for the team, the fans, and even for the player who is chasing individual goals and (bearing in mind the next guy won't be Peterson) trying to build his career. And it's beyond disingenuous IMO for anyone to suggest that being forced to miss games, even "with pay," isn't punishment. Of course it's punishment. That's not to say he shouldn't have to pay back 6 game checks, but to use the exempt list to more than double the ordinary suspension just seems laughably unsupportable IMO.
I'm shocked at Goodell's hubris on this. Gone way too far. I will say at this point he has to go.
This post was edited on 11/18 8:35 AM by deep_six
