Re: WSGD W.hat S.hould G.oodell D.o?
posted at 7/23/2009 6:19 PM EDT
In Response to Re: WSGD W.hat S.hould G.oodell D.o?
You obviously are choosing to read what you wish and don't care to think about the complexity of the issues I presented. You may want to re-check your facts regarding the suspension of all the players mentioned. I'd previously posted a link detailing each.
What have I written that was incorrect. I have had to point out several errors in fact on your points. Please do the same.
Aside from that, there is no complexity. It is only "complex" because you are choosing to relate differing industries. My response to that is pretty simple - I don't agree with the analogy so I don't see a need to examine it.
Whenever the press (media) discusses the lives of celebrities and what their personal conduct has to do with their chosen craft, it ALWAYS turns to their lives a public figures regardless of the venue. The ALWAYS refer to them as a collective group as "ENTERTAINERS". The fans of these respective persons do the same when they try to quantify there opinion or disdain for said personal conduct. That is WHY I draw on those analagies.
But the analogies aren't valid. Actors and actresses do not have a code of conduct that is enforced by a commissioner, but you were saying earlier that Goodell should look at incidents with actors as precedents to developing his policy. Why? They are not relatable.
You refer to BR as having NO history of bad off the field behavior with your lone exception being stupidity. I refer to his off the field behavior as breaking the laws of the state where he resides. In the state of PA at the time of his accident, operating a motorcycle without a helmet is against the law, as is operation said vehicle without a proper license.
OK. But that doesn't say why you think he should be disciplined. Are you saying he should be disciplined under the personal conduct policy because he broke the law several years ago when he cracked his head open against a moving vehicle? How does this equate to a continued pattern of behavior?
Although the current policy about personal conduct was not in effect at the time of the "stomping incident", Haynesworth was suspended by Goodell for his "unprofessional conduct". The only reason that he wasn't criminally indicted was because the victim chose not to pursue that avenue of restitution. However, due to continued blurry vision, he has left open the possibility of a civil suit (do these circumstances sound familiar).
The personal conduct policy is still about OFF THE FIELD behavior. I am not sure what the above is meant for. You said earlier that he was disciplined under the personal conduct policy. Is that no longer true.
Finally, it is the way FANS perceive the entertainer which dictates his market value. FANS are selective (for whatever reasons) in who they choose to berate and rail against. I got three words that prove that point. Lance the PIG !
That isn't true. Fans do not dictate the a players salary. Performance does. Unless you want to say that fans dollars drive the economy of the league, but that is indirect. Fans do not dictate a players salary directly. But again, what is your point?
Again, why should BR be disciplined under the personal conduct policy. You are saying he should but you aren't even coming close to addressing why.