Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL OKs New Conduct Policy

SgtJoo

By SgtJoo,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

SgtJoo Proficient

SgtJoo

Posted
Posted

Among the key points in the memo to team owners, who gathered in Irving, Texas, for their final scheduled meeting before the end of the season:

 

The NFL has decided it can "no longer defer entirely to the decisions of the criminal justice system, which is governed by processes and considerations that are not appropriate to a workplace, especially a workplace as visible and influential as ours."
 
• The new policy will "embrace the use of independent investigations." To that end, the NFL will explore hiring a special counsel for investigations and conduct.
 
• The policy will implement an element of leave with pay during investigations of persons charged with violent crimes.
 
• The new policy "essentially removes the commissioner from the initial disciplinary proceedings," though the commissioner will maintain his role in the appeals process, but establishes "a more rigorous and transparent process for those initial disciplinary decisions."

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12009596/memo-roger-goodell-nfl-owners-outlines-conduct-policy-changes

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Montsta Rising Star

Montsta

Posted
Posted

• The policy will implement an element of leave with pay during investigations of persons charged with violent crimes.

This is kinda scary IMO. Before this year I had never heard of the commissioner's exempt list. This gives the league the power to indefinitely suspend with pay any player accused of a "violent" crime, and then suspend them WITHOUT pay after the process concludes.

If you think this team was reluctant to sign players with a troubled history before, then just wait.

Teams will be VERY reluctant to give guys chances now I think. Being able to suspend a bad apple and get your money back is one thing. Them being paid to sit for potentially multiple seasons is another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SgtJoo Proficient

SgtJoo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This is kinda scary IMO. Before this year I had never heard of the commissioner's exempt list. This gives the league the power to indefinitely suspend with pay any player accused of a "violent" crime, and then suspend them WITHOUT pay after the process concludes.

If you think this team was reluctant to sign players with a troubled history before, then just wait.

Teams will be VERY reluctant to give guys chances now I think. Being able to suspend a bad apple and get your money back is one thing. Them being paid to sit for potentially multiple seasons is another.

 

Obviously this hasn't been OKd by the NFLPA.

 

Should have probably added that to the OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SgtJoo Proficient

SgtJoo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
NFL PLAYERS ASSOCIATION STATEMENT
 
Our union has not been offered the professional courtesy of seeing the NFL's new personal conduct policy before it hit the presses. Their unilateral decision and conduct today is the only thing that has been consistent over the past few months.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Ooh, get em.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricky Spanish Grand Master

Ricky Spanish

Posted
Posted

I don't see how that makes it as practice. Get any one vindictive GF, or even Crazed fan, to go out to a club/ area where the other team's players will be and fake an act of violence or make a claim of it and then there's a media shitstorm. 

 

If this ends up passing then if I were a player, I'd walk around with a go pro everywhere I went. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pox 08 Newbie

Pox 08

Posted
Posted

That is..............  so wrong. 

 

 

People say that the players (AP and Hardy) had a choice in the matter,  to sign-up to go on the commish list...but,  what other real choice was there?  Panthers would have kept deactivating Hardy.. Basically it's a "Sign this,  don't sign this,  either way,  you're not going to play"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Inimicus Mentor

Inimicus

Posted
Posted

Keep in mind that it will take more than a random accusation.  A player wouldn't be put on leave unless there were at least enough evidence of a crime to indict/charge the player.

 

 

The idea that someone can claim rape the week before the Super Bowl to have a QB suspended wouldn't ever happen unless she had some reasonable level of proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • jfra78
      Are all veterinarians this greedy ?

      By jfra78 · Posted

      Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...