Pacman Suspended for the Entire 2007 Season

[DesertCat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...I always think of it this way

Should would I do outside of my job affect my employment status....I dont think so

...If I wanna get high, break the law, kill people etc...and it doesnt affect my job then who cares

[/ QUOTE ]

Employers. And everybody else.

This is a really awful post. You don't really believe this, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]


Absolutetely...I can understand the viewpoint that it can effect viewership...but is there anyone you know of that didnt watch the super bowl because of Tank? Neither did I.....


[/ QUOTE ]

The NFL cares if bad behavior hurts attendance at other games, not just the super bowl.

[ QUOTE ]

...I understand the image the league wants to portray but when you give individuals millions of dollars, when there whole life they have had to struggle to get a dime, dumb things will occur...


[/ QUOTE ]

And the NFL should care about Pacman's personal problems, why? They are trying to make a buck selling pro football games, if one player leaves, another enters to take his place. Sucks for the Titans, but another team will have a better season due to their poor judgement in employing Pacman and tying up their resources in him. Another cornerback instantly becomes "the best in the league" instead of PacMan. The NFL makes as much or more money.

[ QUOTE ]

...and from what I recall Pacman hasnt even been convicted or arrested yet in regards to his actions...so the NFL is suspending him with an innocent until proven guilty approach which is against most everything the legal system stands for?

...it may be a [censored] opinion to some, but it is just one mans opinion?


[/ QUOTE ]

It's been pointed out that this isn't the legal system. It's an employer hiring an employee to do a job. And employers have to use reasonably likely as a judgement.

[ QUOTE ]

...hypothetically imagine word gets to your employer that you may or not have banged a hooker and been drunk and high...and they fire you or suspend you without you being convicted of either? How pissed will you be?

[/ QUOTE ]

The CEO of Starwood, a multibillion dollar hotel chain, was just forced to resign and forfeit his $30M severence package allegedly because he sent inappropriate text messages to female subordinates, among other allegations of inappropriate conduct that he entirely denied. He was by all accounts, extremely valuable and doing a great job. But the board evidently felt he was a liar and a ticking time bomb that would blow up in their face, and that they could find another guy to do the job as well or better.

What you don't understand is the concept of brand management. The NFL wants people to have positive responses when the NFL is presented to them, they don't want any negative associations. They do thousands of things (marketing, charitable works, community outreach, player events with fans) to build goodwill and the value of their brand.

When a player willfully creates events that make the NFL and it's players look bad, the NFL probably can't quantify how many fans it will cost them. But neither do they need an exact count. The NFL is looking out for the good of all the teams, and anyone damaging the league's image, either in a small or big way, isn't needed, no matter how valuable he is to one franchise.

The players union understands the value of the NFL brand and how it's created their enormous salaries. What no one here has yet talked about is that the head of the players union, Gene Upshaw was directly involved in deciding PacMan's punishment, he signed off on it before it was announced with full support of the players.

Pacman got a little lucky. He can fix his life, come back and play and make tons of money. But the commissioner is setting him up for a lifetime ban if he screws up one more time. After all, why should he care about one of the few players who's screwing it up for everyone else?

[mmbt0ne]

[ QUOTE ]
or getting like 5 DUIs

[/ QUOTE ]

Bob Huggins, Eddie Sutton, and Billy Gillispie all hope you don't let your kids watch college basketball.

[GambleGamble]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...I always think of it this way

Should would I do outside of my job affect my employment status....I dont think so

...If I wanna get high, break the law, kill people etc...and it doesnt affect my job then who cares

[/ QUOTE ]

Employers. And everybody else.

This is a really awful post. You don't really believe this, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]


Absolutetely...I can understand the viewpoint that it can effect viewership...but is there anyone you know of that didnt watch the super bowl because of Tank? Neither did I.....


[/ QUOTE ]

The NFL cares if bad behavior hurts attendance at other games, not just the super bowl.
I was using the Super Bowl as a broad generalization, but would you not watch a game because a certain player was involved?
[ QUOTE ]

...I understand the image the league wants to portray but when you give individuals millions of dollars, when there whole life they have had to struggle to get a dime, dumb things will occur...


[/ QUOTE ]

And the NFL should care about Pacman's personal problems, why? They are trying to make a buck selling pro football games, if one player leaves, another enters to take his place. Sucks for the Titans, but another team will have a better season due to their poor judgement in employing Pacman and tying up their resources in him. Another cornerback instantly becomes "the best in the league" instead of PacMan. The NFL makes as much or more money.

Doesnt the NFL want to put the best product out there?, so losing one of its "best" corners hurt its product

[ QUOTE ]

...and from what I recall Pacman hasnt even been convicted or arrested yet in regards to his actions...so the NFL is suspending him with an innocent until proven guilty approach which is against most everything the legal system stands for?

...it may be a [censored] opinion to some, but it is just one mans opinion?


[/ QUOTE ]

It's been pointed out that this isn't the legal system. It's an employer hiring an employee to do a job. And employers have to use reasonably likely as a judgement.

I do understand the seperation between the two, and that the players most likely agree to a policy against negative spotlights etc on the league, but what proof does the league have that he caused the issue when the authorities still havent pressed charges against him?

[ QUOTE ]

...hypothetically imagine word gets to your employer that you may or not have banged a hooker and been drunk and high...and they fire you or suspend you without you being convicted of either? How pissed will you be?

[/ QUOTE ]

The CEO of Starwood, a multibillion dollar hotel chain, was just forced to resign and forfeit his $30M severence package allegedly because he sent inappropriate text messages to female subordinates, among other allegations of inappropriate conduct that he entirely denied. He was by all accounts, extremely valuable and doing a great job. But the board evidently felt he was a liar and a ticking time bomb that would blow up in their face, and that they could find another guy to do the job as well or better.

He was harrasing employees so it directly affected work

What you don't understand is the concept of brand management. The NFL wants people to have positive responses when the NFL is presented to them, they don't want any negative associations. They do thousands of things (marketing, charitable works, community outreach, player events with fans) to build goodwill and the value of their brand.

When a player willfully creates events that make the NFL and it's players look bad, the NFL probably can't quantify how many fans it will cost them. But neither do they need an exact count. The NFL is looking out for the good of all the teams, and anyone damaging the league's image, either in a small or big way, isn't needed, no matter how valuable he is to one franchise.

The players union understands the value of the NFL brand and how it's created their enormous salaries. What no one here has yet talked about is that the head of the players union, Gene Upshaw was directly involved in deciding PacMan's punishment, he signed off on it before it was announced with full support of the players.

Pacman got a little lucky. He can fix his life, come back and play and make tons of money. But the commissioner is setting him up for a lifetime ban if he screws up one more time. After all, why should he care about one of the few players who's screwing it up for everyone else?

[/ QUOTE ]

I also understand brand marketing, and the recent troubles between a bunch of athletes has brought it negative publicity, but he is getting as there are people who killed others (Leaonard Little) who were never suspended for the length of time he is....I expect an appeal will shorten this

[AngusThermopyle]

Little was suspended for eight games in '98.
He beat the later DUI charge.

[DesertCat]

[ QUOTE ]

I was using the Super Bowl as a broad generalization, but would you not watch a game because a certain player was involved?


[/ QUOTE ]

I might, I've actually cut back my NFL watching by about 80% the last 5 years, and dissatisfaction with the NFL's discipline polices is a factor, though probably a small one.

[ QUOTE ]


Doesnt the NFL want to put the best product out there?, so losing one of its "best" corners hurt its product


[/ QUOTE ]

You argue that Pacman's behavior won't cost the NFL fans, and then argue that people are going to stop watching because Pacman isn't playing? Well his family might, but I doubt many others will, because Pacman isn't the NFL's product, the NFL's product is competitive football games. If all the wide receivers & DB's in the league ran the 40 a tenth of a second slower, no-one would notice or care.

Now that Pacman is gone, he just made 16 quarterbacks who have to play against the Titans next year look better. The "product" is the same.

[ QUOTE ]


I do understand the seperation between the two, and that the players most likely agree to a policy against negative spotlights etc on the league, but what proof does the league have that he caused the issue when the authorities still havent pressed charges against him?

[/ QUOTE ]

The NFL is using his obligation to inform them of arrests as cause. He got arrested several times last year without telling them. But an employer could use any lie or evasion of truth as evidence against an employee.

[ QUOTE ]


The CEO of Starwood, a multibillion dollar hotel chain, was just forced to resign and forfeit his $30M severence package allegedly because he sent inappropriate text messages to female subordinates, among other allegations of inappropriate conduct that he entirely denied. He was by all accounts, extremely valuable and doing a great job. But the board evidently felt he was a liar and a ticking time bomb that would blow up in their face, and that they could find another guy to do the job as well or better.

He was harrasing employees so it directly affected work

[/ QUOTE ]

There has been no harassment suit filed against the ex-CEO, and if there were, this man is worth tens of millions per year to Starwood, they could afford to pay a few mil in settlements to keep him. It appears they were worried about damage to their public reputation, and that would cost much, much more to repair and recover from.

Public relations is a job responsibility of every NFL player and coach. The NFL cares if a player is rude to fans in the supermarket, at public events, or even in a public restroom.

[ QUOTE ]

I also understand brand marketing, and the recent troubles between a bunch of athletes has brought it negative publicity, but he is getting as there are people who killed others (Leaonard Little) who were never suspended for the length of time he is....I expect an appeal will shorten this

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Pacman is the first to bear the brunt of changes to a policy that had been far too lenient. I agree about Little and others (Ray Lewis, Bill Romanowski) who were given slaps on the wrist. Tagliboob really blew his job responsibilities and now the new guy is making up for lost time.

And you are right there will probably be an appeal, I'd bet NFL players have some arbitration rights over discipline issues. My point is that he's not going to get much support from his union, who mostly wants to see him go away and serve his time.

[DesertCat]

[ QUOTE ]
Little was suspended for eight games in '98.
He beat the later DUI charge.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

In an audiotape, Little first tells Stork he had two beers, and later he says
he doesn't remember. Little refused a breathalyzer test at the Ladue Police
Station that would have shown his blood alcohol content.


[/ QUOTE ]

If I was Tagliboob, that would have been all I needed to give him a permanent suspension. A guy who killed a woman drunk driving should not be refusing to cooperate with police under my employee. I'd tell "Leonard, congratulations, you exercised your constitutional rights and avoided a prison term, but you are not the type of person we want working for our organization."

[DesertCat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
or getting like 5 DUIs

[/ QUOTE ]

Bob Huggins, Eddie Sutton, and Billy Gillispie all hope you don't let your kids watch college basketball.

[/ QUOTE ]

The NCAA is a hugely profitable private business that funnels most of it's profits into the pockets of coaches and administrators, leaving a token remainder for the colleges. It's very backwards, very insular, and it's not surprising it does a lousy job of brand management in this area.

[SuperUberBob]

He's scum. Should be permanently banned.

[Sluss]

[ QUOTE ]
The NFL has a teflon image. NBA is the league of thugs and MLB is the league of steroids despite the NFL probably having both more thugs and more cheaters.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true right now, but how much more of this will the NFL be able to take. Sooner or later this could come back to haunt them. I can understand how the league is tyring to prevent this change by cracking down on a few players and making it seem like they are tough (see steroids policy).

Although to a certain extent I agree with CaseClosed and Gamble. If we get to the point where the league is cracking down before we find out if a player is even guilty of an infraction we are walking down a slippery slope.

[jalapenoguy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The NFL has a teflon image. NBA is the league of thugs and MLB is the league of steroids despite the NFL probably having both more thugs and more cheaters.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true right now, but how much more of this will the NFL be able to take. Sooner or later this could come back to haunt them. I can understand how the league is tyring to prevent this change by cracking down on a few players and making it seem like they are tough (see steroids policy).

Although to a certain extent I agree with CaseClosed and Gamble. If we get to the point where the league is cracking down before we find out if a player is even guilty of an infraction we are walking down a slippery slope.

[/ QUOTE ]

luckily we are in the internet media and youtube age and we really don't have to worry about that.

every month we go one step closer to everything that happens being able to be seen online.