Suspensions vs Fines (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

It's an interesting discussion I think when people are bringing up suspension topic. I hear some saying the league should just fine the player but don't suspend him. That way, the player feels the punishment but the team / fans aren't punished.

Others feel the only way to get the team / fans involved enough to care about the behavior is if it starts affecting them too.

Thoughts?

J

 

[eaglezzz]

I think the team has to be held responsible as well as the player. Do you really want the NFL to end up like the NBA. Nahhhhhh

Teams have to be held accountable for the guys they sign.

 

[JbizzleMan]

Exactly. These fines aren't exactly hurting the players any anyways.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Exactly. These fines aren't exactly hurting the players any anyways.

Hi J,I'd differ I think there. "Hurt" probably isn't the right word but a fine stings. For a guy making a million a year, a fine of $100,000 is a hit. Most of these guys didn't grow up super wealthy. They feel the sting of being fined that amount. J

 

[redBourne]

Exactly. These fines aren't exactly hurting the players any anyways.

Hi J,I'd differ I think there. "Hurt" probably isn't the right word but a fine stings. For a guy making a million a year, a fine of $100,000 is a hit. Most of these guys didn't grow up super wealthy. They feel the sting of being fined that amount. J

I feel like I read an article in an ESPN mag a while back (maybe last year) where the 'Anonymous Player X' was commenting on Albert Haynesworth's big deal with the skins. The player listed quite a lot of credits to the players publicized contract, such as agent commission, family's pulling on you to buy them things (ala mom, dad, sisters, 3rd cousins, etc), fitness experts, food specialists to make sure you eat right, an accountant to manage all this money, etc. Then there is all this pressure from the media and your surrounding players to live an outlandish lifestyle, sometimes beyond your means. The money gets consumed pretty quickly and I would like to venture that most of the players feel 'sting' when getting fined.

 

[Happy Ragnarok]

I think different punishments are appropriate for different infractions.

The NFL is, first and foremost, a PR industry. They are in the business of recruiting fans to fall in love with their local teams, to root for their local stars as heroes, and to spend as though associating themselves with both franchise and player is a laudable thing to do.

When a player does something to risk damage in the public's eye, then, that's a lot different then when he does something that's merely a violation of league rules or some such. An ultra-violent hit on a QB, while unnecessary, and important to discourage, does NOTHING to harm the public image or marketability of the league. Indeed, it'll probably go on a highlight reel.

For something that fans clearly dislike, and/or would want to distance themselves from (personally AND financially), it makes sense to keep the player at arm's length until the news cycle can complete itself. Till the outrage passes, amends can be made, and public image restored. Or at the very least, until the outrage has a chance to dull over time.

Big Ben, for example, had to be suspended. He wasn't found guilty of ANYTHING. He wasn't even CHARGED. But in the media's eye...and therefore the public's...it was his second accusation of sexual impropriety in too short a time. In the public mind and voice, he was very clearly found guilty in one way or another. And neither the NFL nor the Pittsburgh Steelers want their public image associated with a convicted rapist, even if that conviction is only in the court of public appeal. By distancing themselves, not only do they get to let the story play out while Ben's away from their product, but they get to be seen as having taken a stand against the thing the public hates.

Fine him? The public says, "So what? He's rich! So he can just pay his way out of forcing himself onto women?" Suspend him, and the public sees the effort of creating distance.

Maybe there are counterexamples. But in general, you fine for behavior. You suspend for image.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think different punishments are appropriate for different infractions.The NFL is, first and foremost, a PR industry. They are in the business of recruiting fans to fall in love with their local teams, to root for their local stars as heroes, and to spend as though associating themselves with both franchise and player is a laudable thing to do.When a player does something to risk damage in the public's eye, then, that's a lot different then when he does something that's merely a violation of league rules or some such. An ultra-violent hit on a QB, while unnecessary, and important to discourage, does NOTHING to harm the public image or marketability of the league. Indeed, it'll probably go on a highlight reel.For something that fans clearly dislike, and/or would want to distance themselves from (personally AND financially), it makes sense to keep the player at arm's length until the news cycle can complete itself. Till the outrage passes, amends can be made, and public image restored. Or at the very least, until the outrage has a chance to dull over time.Big Ben, for example, had to be suspended. He wasn't found guilty of ANYTHING. He wasn't even CHARGED. But in the media's eye...and therefore the public's...it was his second accusation of sexual impropriety in too short a time. In the public mind and voice, he was very clearly found guilty in one way or another. And neither the NFL nor the Pittsburgh Steelers want their public image associated with a convicted rapist, even if that conviction is only in the court of public appeal. By distancing themselves, not only do they get to let the story play out while Ben's away from their product, but they get to be seen as having taken a stand against the thing the public hates.Fine him? The public says, "So what? He's rich! So he can just pay his way out of forcing himself onto women?" Suspend him, and the public sees the effort of creating distance.Maybe there are counterexamples. But in general, you fine for behavior. You suspend for image.

J

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I think different punishments are appropriate for different infractions.The NFL is, first and foremost, a PR industry. They are in the business of recruiting fans to fall in love with their local teams, to root for their local stars as heroes, and to spend as though associating themselves with both franchise and player is a laudable thing to do.When a player does something to risk damage in the public's eye, then, that's a lot different then when he does something that's merely a violation of league rules or some such. An ultra-violent hit on a QB, while unnecessary, and important to discourage, does NOTHING to harm the public image or marketability of the league. Indeed, it'll probably go on a highlight reel.For something that fans clearly dislike, and/or would want to distance themselves from (personally AND financially), it makes sense to keep the player at arm's length until the news cycle can complete itself. Till the outrage passes, amends can be made, and public image restored. Or at the very least, until the outrage has a chance to dull over time.Big Ben, for example, had to be suspended. He wasn't found guilty of ANYTHING. He wasn't even CHARGED. But in the media's eye...and therefore the public's...it was his second accusation of sexual impropriety in too short a time. In the public mind and voice, he was very clearly found guilty in one way or another. And neither the NFL nor the Pittsburgh Steelers want their public image associated with a convicted rapist, even if that conviction is only in the court of public appeal. By distancing themselves, not only do they get to let the story play out while Ben's away from their product, but they get to be seen as having taken a stand against the thing the public hates.Fine him? The public says, "So what? He's rich! So he can just pay his way out of forcing himself onto women?" Suspend him, and the public sees the effort of creating distance.Maybe there are counterexamples. But in general, you fine for behavior. You suspend for image.

J

Good summary.If you don't suspend a player that is behaving in a manner that detriments the league's image, you are indirectly condoning that behavior. Goodell knows this and suspends players accordingly.This also has the added benefit of forcing teams to police their own teams to avoid such suspensions.

 

[SkyRattlers]

Exactly. These fines aren't exactly hurting the players any anyways.

Hi J,I'd differ I think there. "Hurt" probably isn't the right word but a fine stings. For a guy making a million a year, a fine of $100,000 is a hit. Most of these guys didn't grow up super wealthy. They feel the sting of being fined that amount. J

Fines very rarely ever reach that level though Joe. The three fines levied today by the NFL for various late hits were either $5000 or $7500.Chad Johnson has been fined $25000 for his twitter violations but that number is inflated because of his repetitive and flagrant attitude.Ray Lewis was fined $250,000 for the murder scandel. But outside that it's only owners or coaches that have paid the really huge fines.

 

[Das Boot]

I think the team has to be held responsible as well as the player. Do you really want the NFL to end up like the NBA. NahhhhhhTeams have to be held accountable for the guys they sign.

Exactly.Plus, silly as it sounds, most players still are athletes that want to play and compete. It's all they know and what they love. So taking that away from them hurts MUCH more than the money.And affecting the team and its fans by suspending problem players brings even more pressure on that player to change their behavior in the form of peer pressure and fan pressure.It also reduces the number of chances that player will realize he has to bounce from team to team after each repeated transgression - teams will be less likely to sign players who are a suspension risk that can hurt the team as opposed to the player just hurting himself in the wallet.It's also important for the credibility of the league... fans get royally pissed off at what some of the problem players do and get away with, and suspensions are a key part of the league's image of not tolerating such behavior.As can be seen in this thread, and which I agree with, fines to these players are essentially meaningless. There are many reasons suspensions should be a key part of punishment for serious violations.