I'm as big a Panther homer as any, and I have no problem with the punishment. I don't think the fact that he's their best playmaker should have anything to do with the punishment. Heck, if he's a backup WR, chances are good he's waived.
Anything less than the 2 game suspension would have completely ripped this team apart.
I'd agree with that too. If I'm a Panther fan, I hate losing Smith but realize this was probably best for the long term.J
I don't understand why individual teams suspend players at the Pro level for non-legal issues. It's not rational and it doesn't make sense from a business perspective. Huge fines make sense but suspensions seem counter-productive. I'm not a Panthers fan or a Steve Smith owner. I just think it's silly. Suspensions are an appropriate punishment in high school and even college, but not at the pro level. These guys are highly paid, irreplaceable resources. A suspension hurts the Panthers as much if not more than Steve Smith.
It absolutely hurts the Panthers to not have Smith on the field 100% of the time. But that doesn't mean they just accept his behavior because they have to take the bad with the good. What he did was unacceptable and they let him know it while making a statement to the rest of the team that Steve Smith is not bigger than the unit as a whole, which is what they'd be saying if they let him play while fining him. It's a move that could actually cost Fox his job, but I personally think it's the right decision. Understandably you want to win and it's easy to say win at all costs. When the cost is your own reputation or the respect of the guys who are sweating and bleeding for you I can't imagine it's so black and white.
There are lots of ways to punish people. There are five main
reasons to punish someone: rehabilitation, incapacitation, deterrence, restoration and retribution. To me, Smith's actions deserve punishment based on a rehabilitation theory (i.e., Smith needs to get his head fixed), a restoration theory (Smith did something wrong to Lucas, and Lucas is worse off for it) and a retribution theory (Smith is the star of the team, and did something bad, and should be punished for that). Smith's actions
don't deserve punishment based on an incapacity theory (otherwise, Smith wouldn't be allowed to return after two games), or, IMO, a deterrence theory (a two-game suspension isn't going to deter Smith from doing whatever when he gets in a crazy rage; plus, it seems pretty unlikely that something like this would come up again with another member of the team). Only when deterrence (or incapacitation, but that's obvious) is the main goal does a suspension make sense; you want to prevent other players from doing the same bad thing, so you must deter them. But how often do players beat up their teammates? Less than once a year, league-wide. It's just not something that needs a significant deterrent, and if a player is so angry as to fight a teammate (which almost never happens), it's doubtful a two-game suspension will stop them when they're in that Smith/Romanowski state of mind.Obviously if we want to rehabilitate Smith, a suspension doesn't do that. If we want to restore what went wrong in the world, we'd want Smith to give Lucas a ton of money -- but once again, a suspension doesn't help Lucas at all. Finally, retribution theory doesn't justify a suspension, either; you're hurting everyone else just as much as Smith.
Now I think using retribution theory is a bit dicey -- Fox could tell Smith pay Lucas $100K or you're suspended for two games. I'm not sure that's a road a coach should go down, although I suppose it could work in theory. The Panthers will obviously try to rehabilitate Smith, but that still leaves retribution. The Panthers should punish Smith as an individual, either through a fine, or by making him run a gazillion laps, or making him do community service, or making him do something he really doesn't want to do. But the goal of retribution is to make everyone else feel better, and suspending Smith isn't going to do that. Surely there are ways to punish Smith as an individual while not punishing the team that are more effective than a suspension. (A suspension
would be a good punishment if a player was late to practices, or gave bad effort in camp or something. Those things need deterrence.)
I am an owner, though just in a "friendly" league, but honestly do think this is a situation where the team can punish the player and at the same time reduce the suspension for good behavior.
