Ahem. Some awesomely prescient dude wrote this:
Additionally, why the hell did the NFL put in the new six game suspension policy if they aren’t going to follow it? This was Rice’s first incident and Goodell gave him two games sitting before the new policy came out. How do you re-punish? And even then, if you are going to just wing this and you are going to go about and re-punish him, shouldn’t it be either four more games or a lifetime ban? It just makes no sense to me. What is Goodell doing or thinking? Is he just going to wait until the furor dies down and then decide to reinstate him- will that be four, five, ten games? Is he going to string him along for a year and then ban him permanently? Again, Goodell is just making shit up as he goes along, and I have no idea how anyone can think he or the NFL is sincere.
If you take a crime seriously, and domestic abuse is one that really should be taken seriously, you need to address it seriously. You need to set out a clear guideline for what is and what is not acceptable and what the punishment will be. In this case, Goodell has failed in almost every aspect discussed here, and some that were not. The initial punishment was too lenient, the second punishment is not clearly defined, and he still has never addressed the odious tweets that came from the Ravens organization (now deleted):
Janay Rice says she deeply regrets the role that she played the night of the incident.
— Baltimore Ravens (@Ravens) May 23, 2014
Like I said, he’s just making shit up as he goes along, and that’s no way to run a small store let alone a multi-billion high profile business. Not to mention, the Players Union should and probably will have a legal field day with this illogical behavior, which will then be portrayed as the Players Union supporting domestic violence when what they are really doing is defending their union members from arbitrary justice. That will give the NFL another pr disaster and counts, in my book, as “conduct detrimental to the league,” and if you think for one second the owners won’t use that in the long run to further weaken the union, you’re on glue.
ESPN:
The NFL players’ union appealed Ray Rice’s indefinite suspension Tuesday night.
Rice was originally handed a two-game suspension in July under the NFL’s personal conduct policy after he was charged with assault following a Feb. 15 altercation with his then-fiancee in a casino elevator.
The Baltimore running back had already served the first game of that suspension when, on Sept. 8, a video surfaced showing Rice punching Janay Palmer, now his wife, in that elevator.
Within hours, the Ravens released Rice and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell extended the suspension to indefinite based on the “new evidence.”
Goodell and the Ravens say they never saw the video before Sept. 8.
“This action taken by our union is to protect the due process rights of all NFL players,” the NFL Players Association said in a statement. “The NFLPA appeal is based on supporting facts that reveal a lack of a fair and impartial process, including the role of the office of the commissioner of the NFL. We have asked that a neutral and jointly selected arbitrator hear this case as the commissioner and his staff will be essential witnesses in the proceeding and thus cannot serve as impartial arbitrators.”
The NFLPA said that the collective bargaining agreement requires a hearing date be set within 10 days of the appeal notice. It also said the hearing will require a neutral arbitrator to determine what information was available to the NFL and when it was available.
Both the NFL and players’ association agree that Rice will remain suspended indefinitely while the appeal is resolved, league and union sources told ESPN’s Ed Werder.
The union, which had until 11:59 p.m. Tuesday to file the appeal, added that under governing labor law, an employee can’t be punished twice for the same action when all of the relevant facts were available to the employer at the time of the first punishment.
That last line that states “at the time of the first punishment” is just someone at the NFLPA having a jolly good time sticking the shiv in Roger, basically calling him a liar because he states, defying plausibility, that he never saw the elevator video until last week. Again, I have no idea how Goodell is keeping his job. He needs to be fired and sent somewhere where that kind of idiocy is rewarded. Maybe a gig at Fox News or he could run for the House as a Republican.
Eric U.
the congressman idea is pretty good for Goodell failing up. With Mark Sanford sitting in the House for as long as he want, you could never be the worst idiot in the group
drkrick
The league told Rice and the union that the indefinite suspension was because Rice had lied to Goodell, which was what made the second video “new information.” Several people in the meeting between Goodelll and Rice have told ESPN that what they saw matched Rice’s version completely. The Ravens also say that what they saw was what Rice told them. So count that as another unforced error from the Sheriff.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@Eric U.: Gohmert and Steve King. Just saying.
LanceThruster
First world problem.
jl
I think Rice deserves a very severe penalty. But, I have the IANAL problem, and have not thought about implications of the NFL having all the video evidence when they handed down the first penalty.
What a mess. Goodell wasn’t planning to have to make shit up as he goes along, he figured to sweep under the rug, give out a small penalty and keep the $ rolling in.
Saw a headline today about corporate sponsors getting antsy. Hey, maybe that will get these greedy moneybags’ attention? I’ll look for it.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@LanceThruster: So?
jl
Major Sponsors Turn Up Heat on NFL Over Handling of Abuse Scandal
By Ben Popken
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/nfl-controversy/major-sponsors-turn-heat-nfl-over-handling-abuse-scandal-n204736
burnspbesq
If I gave a shit about the NFL, I might be tempted to engage you on some of the sloppy reasoning that has characterized your writing about this incident. But I don’t, so knock yourself out.
Howard Beale IV
This is 100% bullshit. Either they let LE deal with this or the NFL is nothing more than La Costa Nostra.
Than again Local LE is questionable,,,,,
Alex
This was kind of expected ever since the NFL announced the indefinite suspension without explaining why Rice was suspended.
I guess they were hoping the NFLPA wouldn’t protest.
jl
I will check back to see if the BJ legal flying wedge can write a few sentences to help us non-lawyers out.
But following is not totally off-topic, since post is about dangerous clowns.
CNN: Joan Rivers’s Doctor Took Selfie, Performed Unauthorized Biopsy
https://celebrity.yahoo.com/blogs/celeb-news/report–joan-rivers-s-personal-doctor-began-biopsy–took-selfie-010531813.html
Roger Moore
I don’t think the part about “at the time of the first punishment” is sticking in the shiv. It’s the crux of the argument. If Goodell knew the full facts at the time of his first judgment, he can’t change his mind just because he got some bad press. If he did get new information, he’s legally allowed to change the punishment to whatever is appropriate given the newly appreciated nature of the offense.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@burnspbesq: Then why even bother to comment on it?
Roger Moore
@Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name):
Arrogant prick is arrogant. Also, too, prick.
Penus
@Eric U.: He might not be the worst idiot, but “biggest asshole” is up for grabs with Eric Cantor out.
Mike J
Why did the NCAA give Penn St four years out of bowl games if they were going to get out of jail early?
boatboy_srq
@Roger Moore: IOW, Goodell was either greedy or just incompetent, yes? There’s an “all of the above” that’s just screaming out to be applied there.
max
If the punishment is to be six games for the first offense and then a lifetime suspension for the second, then Rice should be suspended for six, minus the two games served. Rice didn’t do it twice (that we know of). If the punishment is lifetime suspension for the first offense, then that’s the only reason Rice should be suspended ‘indefinitely’ when it should be announced as a lifetime suspension.
Which seems a bit steep, considering this is the only avenue for employment in his field and given that his lifetime is probably going to be shortened by his previous play in the NFL.
If the police want to press charges, they should feel free. (I don’t think they have, have they?)
max
[‘The white guy will keep his job with no fuss, the black guy is screwed.’]
Dog On Porch
Drugs have turned the players of my youth into today’s player-beasts. Think Lance Armstrong. It’s little wonder with all the $billions$ at stake how things got to this point within the NFL.
The game itself is beautiful, it’s just people that mess it up.
Davebo
That’s more scratch than Fox would cough up and even the most corrupt congressman couldn’t slide those numbers under the rug.
The man is perhaps the highest paid total idiot in the country.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@Mike J: Not defending the NCAA’s decision or any of Goodell’s, but there is a difference between time off for good behavior and randomly jacking up a punishment because of poor PR.
James E Powell
which will then be portrayed as the Players Union supporting domestic violence when what they are really doing is defending their union members from arbitrary justice.
Most Americans don’t mind arbitrary justice when it’s visited upon people they despise. Some even prefer it.
drkrick
@jl:
It’s the only thing that will get their attention. It’s certainly what forced the NBA to take on Sterling, litigious SOB or not.
Steeplejack
If, after Goodell saw the first video, his immediate reaction was not to scream at his lackeys “There must be more tape! Get me all the surveillance tape!” then he is not worth $44 million a year. Maybe $20 million, tops.
Steeplejack
@Davebo:
Wow. That is mind-blowing.
Suzanne
Once again, y’all could express your discontent by boycotting NFL football. I’m sure someone will soon give me yet another disingenuous “explanation” why that would never work.
SixStringFanatic
Not to pick a nit here but yeah, I’m gonna…
There was no “Lifetime Ban” in Goodell’s announcement of new punishments. There was a 6-game ban for a first offense, with mitigating circumstances considered, and for a second offense there was an indefinite suspension with the offending player allowed to apply for reinstatement after one year. The Lifetime Ban is something that our media talking heads came up with on their own because “indefinite suspension with the offending player allowed to apply for reinstatement after one year” is too long to fit in a headline, chyron, bumper sticker or the head of any one of our media critters.
Davebo
@Suzanne:
Just ask social conservatives how well that has worked against Disney.
You express your discontent effectively by getting 32 owners to can the commissioner. You don’t do that by burning jerseys or giving up season tickets.
Good teams or bad teams in the right area will never miss you in the stands. Bad teams like Jacksonville will just tarp over more seats.
sublime33
I think it is plausible that Goodell never personally saw the video. But back in my former corporate days, I know of more than one occasion where someone was asked by a top officer to look at someone’s files or in their desk or computer or phone records or credit report and let me know if there is anything I should know about. They seem to think they are immune if they don’t personally get their hands dirty.
CTVoter
Just gonna be painted as UNIONS are sh#t.
Ever and always.
Management is never that.
Eric U.
@Dog On Porch: Lance Armstrong comes to mind for some people. If he made 50 million off of his doping I’d be surprised. How about A-Rod, who made $270 million off of his doping on a single contract? And nobody says boo about him. Same for the entirety of the NFL player’s union, nobody cares about them doping at all. The rules for drug testing of NFL players are totally ridiculous.
Suzanne
@Davebo: If enough people express their discontent by not buying season tickets or jerseys, the message would be loud and clear. That’ skins of how boycotts work—en masse, not individually.
Of course, this is a blog where people will refuse to shop at Walmart or Hobby Lobby, and won’t go to Chick-Fil-A or Burger King, because they don’t want to support unethical behavior. But I am assured that a boycott of the NFL won’t work. No reasoning has been provided as to why boycotting retail establishments is good, but boycotting the NFL is fantasy. I think people just don’t want to feel guilty about what they enjoy. I just would appreciate the honesty. “I don’t like the NFL and how they treat players and their despicable actions on behalf of women and children, but damn I like my football more than I hate that stuff.”
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@Suzanne: You will notice that public pressure is causing the NFL to address some of these issues. Goodell flailed and upped Rice’s suspension because of public pressure. Boycott vs engagement is a legitimate argument. It does mean that not everyone who chooses not to boycott is tacitly supporting the abuses.
SixStringFanatic
@Suzanne: There are nearly 154 million pro football fans in the US (Associated Press poll from January found 49% of Americans are pro football fans; US population is just under 314 million). Good luck getting 154 million people to agree on anything much less agree to give up their football watching or attendance. And even if they did, what good would it do, exactly?
Should we all agree to stop watching the games on TV? The NFL already collected their money from the TV networks for this year. In addition, they’ve already signed new, billion dollar, multi-year contracts with the TV networks that kick in next year. Those contracts don’t have any give-backsies if ratings slide.
Should we all stop attending NFL games? We’ve already paid for the tickets, so the NFL’s already got that money too.
Maybe we could stop buying NFL-themed T-shirts, jerseys, sweatshirts, jackets, blankets, car flags or some of the other hundreds of items available for purchase online at the click of a mouse? Again, 154 million fans and the incredible difficulty of organizing said mass of mostly fucked up humanity.
Instead, we might consider firing off angry letters, emails and phone calls to the companies that SPONSOR the NFL and it’s teams. Those companies that don’t have TV deals, or already-purchased tickets or a monopoly on their markets, which the NFL also has. We might consider buying products from rival companies which, again, the NFL does not have. THAT will get the attention of those companies and they might, in turn, start sending their own angry communications to the NFL and it’s team owners. THAT might in turn actually get the attention of the overpaid morons who run the NFL and own the NFL’s teams. And THAT is actually what’s happening as we speak.
Also, hearing someone who doesn’t like football in the first place say “why don’t you just boycott them” is a little like me telling country music fans “why don’t you just stop listening to that crap?”
ETA to add the simple phrase “multi-year” in the description of the NFL’s TV contracts. ‘Cause some people here are awfully fucking pedantic about edits.
billB
Back to the first cause, the man did a bad thing, BUT in the end the Lady married him. Assuming she was not coerced, [do we know that?] Then it seems that is evidence that he had a drunken event,
and he got better with the help of his [now] wife. She seems to love him, right?
So why are we ready to hang everyone?
drkrick
@Eric U.:
Did you consume even a single piece of sports media at any time in 2013?
SixStringFanatic
@billB: Is there anything you actually know about domestic violence and the relationship between the victims and the perpetrators of domestic violence? One of the few good things that’s come out of this whole mess is the incredible amount of really good, thoughtful articles written about domestic violence, why women stay with their abusers, why it’s such a difficult crime to prosecute and many, many other topics related to the subject. It’s too bad you couldn’t take the time to find or read any of them.
Ruckus
@billB:
So getting drunk is a get out of jail free card?
It’s OK he didn’t mean it?
He’ll never do it again?
Ever heard about spousal abuse?
Didn’t think so.
Suzanne
@SixStringFanatic: And yet again, lots of people—many on this very blog— boycott Walmart and Chick-Fil-A because they feel conscience-driven to not support those companies, not because they think they have enough other people on board to actually get those companies to change their business models. However, even a small minority, if it is vocal enough, can cause enough of a PR headache to get a company to change it’s behavior even slightly. This is what I find disingenuous. Even if the money is already spent this season—and there’s plenty of single-game tickets and jerseys left to sell this season, so that’s not a really persuasive argument—one could always stop watching next season. And even though the TV deals are done, the networks watch their ratings very, VERY closely. If they are low, it creates more bad PR.
I didn’t say anything about liking football or not, but you did. So I’m right. It’s easy to boycott retail stores that you weren’t going to shop at anyway, but boycotting football would be less fun, so it has to be dismissed out of hand. Lovely.
@Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name): Boycott vs engagement IS a legitimate argument. What I am finding disheartening is the absolute refusal to consider a boycott. It is repeatedly dismissed as ineffective, even though some of those people engage in retail boycotts (even though those aren’t really effective yet either). I think the refusal to even consider it is fairly tribal.
Ruckus
@SixStringFanatic:
There have been articles written before. Maybe this time some of the info will actually penetrate the gray matter of those who dismiss it as boys will be boys, he didn’t mean it, I love him, he was drunk, he’s never done this before, let’s ignore it-his career is on the line, etc, etc.
Boy do I crack myself up sometimes.
Suzanne
@billB: Have nice, tall, cold glass of shut the fuck up.
Violet
@SixStringFanatic:
Contracts are made to be changed. If ratings suddenly went to zero for this season, I’m certain that at some point the advertisers and TV networks would start the re-negotiation process. Lots of lawyers would be involved for sure. And maybe the current contracts would stand. But the next time contract negotiation came up it would be very different for the NFL.
Davebo
@Suzanne:
The truth is that if, for instance, 50% of Dallas Cowboys and Houston Texans fans gave up their season tickets tomorrow they’d be bought up before this sunday’s games.
If 50% of Jacksonville or Tennesse fans gave up their tickets everyone would wonder why it took them so long.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@Suzanne: I
No, but for a fan it does have a cost. From your previous posts on this blog, you are not a football fan. As a result, you are in the same position I am with respect to Hobby Lobby. I don’t consume their product, so my decision to avoid them is meaningless. Again, things like the “Goodell must go” signs at games and the public pressure on advertisers are more likely, in my view, to have an effect than boycotts.
Also, when women show up at games after Rice’s actions have been made public wearing Rice jerseys….
Ruckus
@Suzanne:
I’ve not only considered it but have been actively boycotting for over 20 yrs. Maybe it’s because I don’t give a rats ass about football, hockey or baseball either for that matter.
But I think you are correct, a boycott rarely is real effective, unless it hurts someone’s bottom line, be that entertainment value or real money. And I think you are on the nose about people would rather watch than worry or even think about an issue like spousal abuse. But as was discussed the other night, boxing has dropped off in popularity rather dramatically. Enough people just don’t have any appreciation for seeing someone get the shit beat out of them. That’s my objection to football and hockey, the games are now about violence, not about skill in moving the ball or puck. I think it is part of the reason soccer is gaining in popularity. I watched the last game of the world cup at a friends house and it was exciting, great play and tactics, and the little bit of violence was penalized. And he was listening to the spanish broadcast, which I could follow about maybe 20% of the time. It was still good.
Ruckus
@Suzanne:
We, @SixStringFanatic: and I, should have gone for the short and sweet answer. It was better.
Mnemosyne
@SixStringFanatic:
Actually, that’s not quite true. What happens is that the networks sign contracts with the NFL, and then the networks turn around and sell advertising time to sponsors. If the ratings don’t live up to the NFL’s promises, the sponsors can demand give-backs from the networks in the form of free advertising time.
The other potential problem is that sponsors can start dropping the NFL, which means the networks have to start scrambling for new sponsors and offering them those timeslots, usually at a lower rate, and the new sponsors are usually less desirable — Motel 6 vs. Radisson, for example.
Depending on the ins and outs of the networks’ contracts with the NFL, they may be able to force the NFL to do givebacks to the network if ratings drop by enough. Or the network can try to cancel the contract if ratings go below X amount.
Suzanne
@Davebo: And if people stopped buying products sold by the NFL’s sponsors, and if they stopped buying merchandise, things would change quickly. But the real reason to boycott is because, even if it changes nothing, it offends your conscience to give some organizations your money. Scale is not the issue. Scale is not the reason that the left embraces some boycotts but not others. That is not the differentiating factor.
@Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name): Right. It has a cost, and the cost is too high for some. I just want honesty about it. I just don’t want smoke blown up my ass. Because right now, this looks like it is okay to support an organization that employs rapists and wife-beaters and child abusers, because giving up watching football would just SUCK.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@Suzanne: What kind of car do you drive; where was it made? Where are your clothes made? The computer you are using to type your comments, where was it made? How about the labor conditions there?
Suzanne
@Ruckus: Boxing dropped off in popularity because of the nature of the activity itself, not because people found the business distasteful.
I just want honesty. And the honest answer is that people love football, and that makes them look for an excuse to not stop watching. However, most of us would rightly criticize that behavior in any other scenario.
Suzanne
@Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name): What’s your point? I do my best to practice enlightened consumerism, insofar as I can. Of course, that has nothing to do with whether or not it’s ethical to support a company that covers up for child abusers and rapists and woman-beaters as long as they win games.
Steeplejack
@Suzanne:
Well said.
Ruckus
@Suzanne:
Yes more and more people got to not liking boxing. But it did not used to be this way. I used to watch it, we used to talk about it at work. Not any more. Enough people, including me started to see the bad side of it. Football is no different. If enough people start to see the bad side, employing and overlooking and yes even encouraging the violence both on and off the field then football could be in the same place. It has to reach a tipping point. Boxing did, although I’d bet not many could tell when and how that tipping point was reached. I can’t and as I said I used to be if not a fan at least I had an appreciation for the sport, however wrong I think that was/is. I’ve already reached my tipping point with football and hockey. It is possible that others will also.
ETA I write too long sometimes but I thought it might be reasonable to assume that I agree with you. I may have not quite got that across.
scav
On has to admire the ardent feminism of old @billB: there, the superpower he is willing to admit lies in the solitary hands of a single woman. If Janay Palmer married the creep than everything everywhere is totally copacetic and legit — the entire creaking edifice of lies and enabling and winks and inert bodies pulled out of elevators and left lying, investigations that don’t investigate, evidence that is only observed when convenient like the Cheshire Cat, not an atom of it matters. She took the ring. So no other other single instance (and the numbers are ringing up like at McDonalds, (Over ###### Bruised!”) and nobody else’s opinion matter: All Is Absolved. Play Ball.
Violet
@Mnemosyne:
Yep. And that’s happening right now. I’m sure Radisson and the Vikings had some sort of contract. And lo and behold, Radisson decided the Vikings weren’t worth it–they were too damaging to their brand. Contracts mean nothing when a corporation wants to break them.
I wonder how many corporate sponsors of NFL teams have “morals clauses” in the contracts? If a player does X that would embarrass the sponsor they can get out of their contract. If they don’t have them now, they’ll sure as hell have them going forward.
Suzanne
@Ruckus: I hope so, because football is unquestionably harmful to the players, and the patriarchal culture means that the NFL does some really awful shit. But the only thing that actually had blog readers here turning off the games was the scab refs during the strike. No bad behavior on the part of the players or business was enough, and the growing evidence of horrible brain damage wasn’t enough. That….kind of sucks.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@Suzanne: The NFL seems to be making halting and so far ineffectual steps towards dealing with the issues you mention. They are fucking up how they do it, but they are working on it. The products you buy, how much effort are the companies that produce them putting in to resolve the labor issues?
Again, engagement vs boycott?
LanceThruster
@Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name):
My point exactly! And an opportunity for me to rail at the bloated sports industrial complex.
Suzanne
@Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name): Okay, if we’re making this about me and my personal consumption, I am not a big shopper and I try to buy used stuff. The one place that I do spend $$$ is Costco, because I like how much they compensate their employees. I don’t know about the labor practices in every factory that produces every product I buy, but I do typically try to avoid cheap stuff from Asia, where there are lots of labor and human rights violations. HOWEVER, my beef with Costco involves the clamshell packaging that many of the products there are sold in. I have written three letters at this point asking them to get rid of clamshells, or at least make the packages in separate materials so I can throw them into our commingled recyclables bin. So there is an example of trying to engage, because they conduct themselves ethically in many other ways.
I think engagement can be a really good strategy. I just think that, in this case, it may not be the,only,one. And yet, it is the only one on the table b/c God forbid someone doesn’t watch football.
Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name)
@Suzanne: But you wouldn’t watch football anyway, right?
Fans are protesting. The fact that all of this is in the public eye is because people do care. The league is actually trying to work this out because of public outcry.
Suzanne
Once again, this isn’t about me. I watch approximately two football (NFL and NCAA) games a year, on TV only.
We’ll see how much people care. I am skeptical, considering how much bad behavior football fans have historically been willing to forgive. But I would be thrilled to be mistaken.
Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN)
@Eric U.:
Absolutely fucking wrong. Given what we know about when Alex Rodriguez started using steroids, he had demonstrated long before that that he was one of the best players in the game. In this he is like Barry Bonds. Steroids make a difference, but they don’t make a $270 million difference. Ridriguez would have made a hell of a lot of money on that contract even without doping.
scav
@Suzanne: And we’re still in the first flush of the news cycle. The focus will likely quickly shift, that’s certainly what the corporate heads are counting on. We can only wait and see what, if anything, is maintained over time. Longterm, it might be more the head-damage and probable declining rates of middle-class participation that might ratchet the sport down to a size where it can be altered. Although I guess they could go totally spectator and just watch individuals from poorer backgrounds batter themselves (keeps them off the streets!) and not let jr. donate his neurons to the sacred cause. Like you, I’m not exactly sanguine.
Cops are certainly doing their bit to grab the media spotlight and take the heat off. Now there seems to be a deputy in Tulsa county OK indulging in a spot sexual assault and battery and indecent exposure under cover of traffic stops or dropped 9-11 calls. Can we image what things will escalate to if we do get a female president and the misogynists really come out to play? whee.
Nobodyspecial
@Ruckus: Your comments about hockey make me wonder if your exposure to it began and ended with Slap Shot. Well, no, honestly, I don’t wonder, really.
Wayne
Heard someone say this morning that Goodell being promoted to the head of the NFL is the Peter Principal in action.
Figs
For those talking about the decline of boxing because (presumably) of the inherent violence, how do you explain the concomitant rise in popularity of MMA?
JR in WV
@Mike J:
Obviously, the NCAA decided that they like pedophilia more than they expected to.
I’m just surprised that so many Penn State supporters decided that they like pedophilia too~!! Or may be not so surprising, after all the first DA to investigate Uncle Jerry went missing up there in the boonies of Happy Valley.
JR in WV
I’m not sure how I could go about boycotting the NFL. I don’t watch pay TV, over the air broadcasts only. (No Monday Nite NFL TV games for me ;-( )
I don’t have much NFL merchandise, one Greenbay Tee shirt I bought years ago because I needed another Tee. It has construction adhesive on the belly now, like most of my Tees.
There is room for about 1,280,000 people in the various stadiums of the NFL, assuming about 80K per and 16 games a week, both of those numbers are probably a little high as teams get bye weeks and I think 80K is also a little high. So that’s a small number of folks (dolts?) paying hundreds of dollars to watch a game in the rain or cold.
If I watch a game on a rainy afternoon or evening, on free broadcast TV, am I supporting the NFL? I don’t drink Bud (Sierra Nevada or Cleveland’s Burning River, mostly) ot stay at the Raddison. If I feel more conflicted when I watch, does that help?
I dunno…
This moral balancing act is hard. I wish we had a Costco to join, it’s like a 3 or 4 hour drive to the nearest one…. So we don’t do Walmart, just because I don’t like the stores and I don’t like their products much. KMart/Sears (which (Sears) was our go to for years) seems to be in the grasp of a minion of Ayn Rand, he’s set the different parts of the commercial enterprise at each other’s throats, where does this make any sense?
Does the NFL store sell butter and eggs? How about lumber? So I can’t boycott that, I buy that from a local store when I can…
ETA: I don’t mean to minimize domestic violence, I’ve never hit anyone ever, Well, ‘cept for my little brother a long time ago.
Suzanne
@JR in WV: I don’t think that everyone can fight every battle. Short of eschewing all worldly possessions and becoming a Jainist monk, there’s no way to live your life in this society without contributing to something shitty. But just be straight up about it. If giving up watching football is too hard for you, admit it to yourself. And I also think it’s worthwhile to ask the question of how much bad behavior you can stand before you just can’t bear to watch anymore.
But I think those questions are hard to ask and it’s easier to A) convince yourself that your actions would have no effect, or B) try to tear down the credibility of someone else.