Matt Prater Suspended

[HOF-ELWAY-7]

Mind finding that particular bit for me?

Hmmm how did they suspend him at all then if there isn't a general PC rule in the CBA?

He comes in to plead his case, he's extremely apologetic, he admits he screwed up badly and throws himself on the mercy of the court. And the woman he knocked out is there too, speaking on his behalf, pleading for him. So the NFL decides, ok, because this is your first issue, we're going to be a little more lenient and only suspend you for two games, but they put Rice on an extremely short leash and tell him that if he has any other incident, he'll get hammered.

Anytime someone throws the ol, he's extremely apologetic, he admits he screwed up badly, because this is your first issue, your excusing (maybe not his behavior) but the punishment which is exactly what I was referencing.

I also find it amazing that you challenge me to find specific info in the CBA implying that it isn't in there (and of course it's in there because they couldn't suspend him if it wasn't) while implying you know the exact process the NFL used for punishment as if you were in the room; So the NFL decides,.

I would also argue that a two game suspension was also arbitrary and ridiculously inappropriate. I would encourage you to read your own post that I was responding to in the first place and see if there could be anyway that someone could read that as being lenient on a thug who knocked out the women he loves, whether in the NFL system of justice or other.

 

[anotheridiot]

The league should not have needed to suspend Ray Rice. He should be under house arrest.

 

[Broncos6482]

Mind finding that particular bit for me?

Hmmm how did they suspend him at all then if there isn't a general PC rule in the CBA?

It's called the personal conduct policy, which always the commissioner to arbitrarily suspend someone for however long he chooses. The gray area is the length of the suspension. It's not spelled out specifically in the CBA.

He comes in to plead his case, he's extremely apologetic, he admits he screwed up badly and throws himself on the mercy of the court. And the woman he knocked out is there too, speaking on his behalf, pleading for him. So the NFL decides, ok, because this is your first issue, we're going to be a little more lenient and only suspend you for two games, but they put Rice on an extremely short leash and tell him that if he has any other incident, he'll get hammered.

Anytime someone throws the ol, he's extremely apologetic, he admits he screwed up badly, because this is your first issue, your excusing (maybe not his behavior) but the punishment which is exactly what I was referencing.

I'm trying to demonstrate to you how the NFL might have come to their conclusion. Remember how I've repeated many times that I didn't think the suspension was enough? Here, let me say it again: Ray Rice's suspension was much too short.

I also find it amazing that you challenge me to find specific info in the CBA implying that it isn't in there (and of course it's in there because they couldn't suspend him if it wasn't) while implying you know the exact process the NFL used for punishment as if you were in the room; So the NFL decides,.

I don't know the exact process the NFL uses for punishments, HOWEVER, I do know that the personal conduct policy (which is what was used to suspend Ray Rice) allows various lengths of suspensions, and is entirely up to the commissioner.

I would also argue that a two game suspension was also arbitrary and ridiculously inappropriate. I would encourage you to read your own post that I was responding to in the first place and see if there could be anyway that someone could read that as being lenient on a thug who knocked out the women he loves whether in the NFL system of justice or other.

I would encourage you to reread many of my posts that you've responded to, specifically the parts where I say that the suspension was too short (hence inappropriate) and a gray area (hence arbitrary). I think you'll find if you actually read what I'm saying, that we're not as far apart as you think we are.

I like you as a poster because I consider you a smart guy. I know you're smarter than this.

 

[Broncos6482]

Of course, the only reason he "recognizes" his mistake is due to all the public backlash. I really wonder if he realizes the TRUE mistake he made (and makes rather often).

I don't understand the second part of your post. I thought his mistake was going too easy on Rice. Are you implying that wasn't his "true" mistake?

 

[WalkerBoh]

I don't understand the second part of your post. I thought his mistake was going too easy on Rice. Are you implying that wasn't his "true" mistake?

Yes. His true mistake is in the incredible inconsistency in how he applies the personal conduct policy. The mistake he made with Ray Rice wasn't merely that he underpenalized him, but rather that he made his decision without any regard to how he enforced the conduct policy in the past. Roethlisberger is suspended 6 games (reduced to 4) with less evidence against him than Ray Rice had. That's just one example. Goodell has applied his rule in a haphazard way since its inception. Any psycologist will tell you that when a policy is enforced so inconsistently, it becomes ineffective at best, and useless at worst. So Goodell's response in this case is to create a specific "domestic abuse" policy. But the underlying problem remains. The personal conduct policy is still haphazard, and his latest action just makes it worse.

Now if and when Goodell recognizes his actual mistakes, then maybe he can develop a coherent, systematic, and consistent policy that's effective. Until then, he's just going to keep bumbling his way from one mistake to the next.

 

[BroncoInCALI]

Brandon Marshall is lucky this policy was not in place 6 or 7 years ago.....

It is amazing to me that a League with names like O.J. Simpson and Rae Caruth checkering it's past took so long to institute a policy like this.

 

[HOF-ELWAY-7]

I'm trying to demonstrate to you how the NFL might have come to their conclusion.

Then you should have started with; What the NFL may have been thinking; instead of;

So now you've got to make a judgment call. In the case of Rice, you've got a guy who has never been in any trouble before (that I know of, correct me if I'm wrong please). He comes in to plead his case, he's extremely apologetic, he admits he screwed up badly and throws himself on the mercy of the court. And the woman he knocked out is there too, speaking on his behalf, pleading for him. So the NFL decides, ok, because this is your first issue, we're going to be a little more lenient and only suspend you for two games, but they put Rice on an extremely short leash and tell him that if he has any other incident, he'll get hammered.

That came across as fact. I'm not telling you how to write, however; when speaking about something as egregious as DV people should be very clear and leave no gray area or room for doubt about how they feel. If I missed that, I missed that but that's how I read it. Especially when people reading these posts that may have been terribly affected by DV. Just saying.

 

[Mondio]

This was a violation of the NFL's alcohol policy. So that right there tells us the exact substance they're referring to here is alcohol. If it were something different it would constitute a violation of a seperate policy.....

ahh, Ok. I didn't see that specification. Which shouldn't surprise me, I just glanced and made a great assumption

Makes more sense now.

 

[HOF-ELWAY-7]

In direct response to widespread public criticism over Ray Rice's recent two-game suspension, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell accepted blame in a memorandum to all 32 of the league's owners, introducing a new policy with severe penalties for future domestic abuse and sexual assault violations.
While Goodell did not mention the Baltimore Ravens running back by name, his memo was a clear reaction to the controversy surrounding the rather lenient disciplinary action taken after Rice allegedly knocked his then-fiancée Janay Palmer unconscious in an Atlantic City casino elevator this past February.
In the memo obtained by Yahoo Sports, Goodell went so far as to admit, "I didn't get it right."


Sure as heck sounds like he could have done more within the CBA, and he's right he didn't come close to getting it right....

 

[Broncosr0k]

I am not real excited about Prater's replacement. We might just consider going for it on 4th down.

 

[Broncos6482]

I'm trying to demonstrate to you how the NFL might have come to their conclusion.

Then you should have started with; What the NFL may have been thinking; instead of;

So now you've got to make a judgment call. In the case of Rice, you've got a guy who has never been in any trouble before (that I know of, correct me if I'm wrong please). He comes in to plead his case, he's extremely apologetic, he admits he screwed up badly and throws himself on the mercy of the court. And the woman he knocked out is there too, speaking on his behalf, pleading for him. So the NFL decides, ok, because this is your first issue, we're going to be a little more lenient and only suspend you for two games, but they put Rice on an extremely short leash and tell him that if he has any other incident, he'll get hammered.

That came across as fact. I'm not telling you how to write, however; when speaking about something as egregious as DV people should be very clear and leave no gray area or room for doubt about how they feel. If I missed that, I missed that but that's how I read it. Especially when people reading these posts that may have been terribly affected by DV. Just saying.

I can see how that could have been confusing, especially if you didn't bother to read the first sentence of my very next paragraph.

I don't write all of that to say that I agree with the length of Rice's suspension (I don't, I think it should have been longer), but I write it to demonstrate how the NFL could have reached its decision.

Probably could have avoided a lot of this had I put that first, but I didn't. That's probably why I'm not getting paid for my writing.

 

[Broncos6482]

Yes. His true mistake is in the incredible inconsistency in how he applies the personal conduct policy. The mistake he made with Ray Rice wasn't merely that he underpenalized him, but rather that he made his decision without any regard to how he enforced the conduct policy in the past. Roethlisberger is suspended 6 games (reduced to 4) with less evidence against him than Ray Rice had. That's just one example. Goodell has applied his rule in a haphazard way since its inception. Any psycologist will tell you that when a policy is enforced so inconsistently, it becomes ineffective at best, and useless at worst. So Goodell's response in this case is to create a specific "domestic abuse" policy. But the underlying problem remains.

The personal conduct policy is still haphazard, and his latest action just makes it worse.​

Now if and when Goodell recognizes his actual mistakes, then maybe he can develop a coherent, systematic, and consistent policy that's effective. Until then, he's just going to keep bumbling his way from one mistake to the next.

I agree with most of what you said, I just disagree with the part that I bolded. To me, his latest action doesn't make it worse, but rather it's the first step in developing a coherent, systematic, and consistent policy. Spelling it out specifically leaves less room for judgment calls, and I think that's a good thing.

 

[WalkerBoh]

I agree with most of what you said, I just disagree with the part that I bolded. To me, his latest action doesn't make it worse, but rather it's the first step in developing a coherent, systematic, and consistent policy. Spelling it out specifically leaves less room for judgment calls, and I think that's a good thing.

Not really. Reason it makes things worse is because of the very narrow scope it covers. So, if Player "B" gets arrested for, say, illegal discharge of a firearm, Goodell is back to where he was with Ray Rice. Then, moving further, Player "C" is caught on film punching out someone else at a nightclub. Again, there's no clear direction on what should be done in those cases, because all Goodell did was outline a domestic abuse policy. So instead of having a coherent and systematic personal conduct policy, he's going to end up with a patchwork of dozens of little, specific policies that may or may not relate to one another. Instead of being proavtive, Goodell is still being reactive, and even then he's doing it wrong. Unless he actually sits down with NFLPA and designs a SINGLE policy that covers the broad spectrum of personal conduct, he's just inviting more problems.

 

[Broncos6482]

The new policy covers assault, battery, domestic violence, or sexual assault, so the scope isn't as narrow as you think it is. So in your example, player C would definitely fall under this policy. I think he's being more proactive than you're giving him credit for.

 

[WalkerBoh]

The new policy covers assault, battery, domestic violence, or sexual assault, so the scope isn't as narrow as you think it is. So in your example, player C would definitely fall under this policy. I think he's being more proactive than you're giving him credit for.

Admittedly, that's my bad there. I was initially going off what most of the press stories were printing. Reading the actuall letter clarifies it a LITTLE more, but Goodell still has a long way to go before he has a useful policy.

 

[cdumler7]

Yes. His true mistake is in the incredible inconsistency in how he applies the personal conduct policy. The mistake he made with Ray Rice wasn't merely that he underpenalized him, but rather that he made his decision without any regard to how he enforced the conduct policy in the past. Roethlisberger is suspended 6 games (reduced to 4) with less evidence against him than Ray Rice had. That's just one example. Goodell has applied his rule in a haphazard way since its inception. Any psycologist will tell you that when a policy is enforced so inconsistently, it becomes ineffective at best, and useless at worst. So Goodell's response in this case is to create a specific "domestic abuse" policy. But the underlying problem remains. The personal conduct policy is still haphazard, and his latest action just makes it worse.

Now if and when Goodell recognizes his actual mistakes, then maybe he can develop a coherent, systematic, and consistent policy that's effective. Until then, he's just going to keep bumbling his way from one mistake to the next.

The Roethlisberger situation is a bit different though than that of Rice. I agree with the new rules that have been established but this was not the first strike for Roethlisberger. So I can see why for Goodell he felt like Rice's punishment should be less. Now obviously with the video evidence and everything else present Goodell should have realized this was one of those needs to come down hard on a player to make sure other players know the NFL does not mess around on these things. I'm glad if nothing else the Ray Rice situation has finally caused the NFL to not turn a blind eye to this issue. Rice's situation is just so much more because of the video but he is far from the first player to act in such a way. Heck earlier this year there was just as big of a name player that did essentially the same thing and was actually found guilty of domestic violence yet is hardly talked about in Greg Hardy.

 

[Broncos6482]

The Roethlisberger situation is a bit different though than that of Rice. I agree with the new rules that have been established but this was not the first strike for Roethlisberger. So I can see why for Goodell he felt like Rice's punishment should be less. Now obviously with the video evidence and everything else present Goodell should have realized this was one of those needs to come down hard on a player to make sure other players know the NFL does not mess around on these things. I'm glad if nothing else the Ray Rice situation has finally caused the NFL to not turn a blind eye to this issue. Rice's situation is just so much more because of the video but he is far from the first player to act in such a way. Heck earlier this year there was just as big of a name player that did essentially the same thing and was actually found guilty of domestic violence yet is hardly talked about in Greg Hardy.

 

[WalkerBoh]

And Goodell's inept inconsistency continues:

Ray Rice cut by Ravens, indefinitely banned by NFL amid video fallout - CBSSports.com

 

[HOF-ELWAY-7]