Missing The Point: Redux

by Colin R. on Jun.30, 2009, under NFL

Ok, I don’t want to beat this to death, but I was watching ESPN’s ‘Around The Horn’ this afternoon, and heard some very well respected columnists make some horribly incorrect points regarding why its ok for Roger Goodell to hit Michael Vick with a heavy suspension.

Photo Courtesy of Flickr.com/littlerottenrobin (Creative Commons Licensed)

Photo Courtesy of Flickr.com/littlerottenrobin (Creative Commons Licensed)

 

The first point (and I’m paraphrasing, not quoting) came courtesy of Jay Mariotti, a Fanhouse.com writer and former Chicago Sun-Times writer. His thoughts?

“Roger Goodell is going to punish these people as he sees fit, he’s saying ‘This is my league.’”

Interesting insight, Jay…horribly incorrect, but interesting. This is NOT Roger Goodell’s league, as it is so often incorrectly called. The National Football League belongs primarily to its FANS, and somewhat to the owners of the 32 teams (Don’t believe me? Take away the fans and the teams and see whats left, or just take away the fans…either way the NFL stops existing). Roger Goodell is essentially holding this league in trust for the fans and the owners, he is there to manage the league, keep things running smoothly, and be a figurehead for an organization that often needs to present a single ‘face’ to seem more accessible. This isn’t some outlet for Roger Goodell to get drunk on power and scold grown men like he’s their mother. It isn’t a place for him to go and undermine the justice system by pretending he knows better. If a punishment doesn’t better the league, the it isn’t Goodell’s place to issue that punishment. He is merely a steward, and people need to stop calling this his league.

The second point comes from Los Angeles Times writer Bill Plaschke. Again, bear in mind this is only paraphrasing. So, whatcha got, Bill?

“The NFL is a business, and this is a business decision. Would you want to be the sponsor who’s commercial comes on first after Michael Vick has been playing?”

First off, hell yes I want to be that sponsor. This is the UNITED STATES, we have an enormous obsession with train wrecks. Remember all that coverage of Britney Spears when she was at rock bottom, Jennifer Aniston’s divorce, or the OctoMom? That’s what I thought. America’s obsession with these out-of-the-ordinary things is going to cause people who weren’t even football fans to tune in for the first few games, just to see the stadium’s reaction, or hear what trivia they can learn from the announcers. As for the normal NFL fans, the people who tune in every Sunday and Monday night for a game or two, they won’t stop watching even IF they think Vick shouldn’t be back (that’s really a big if, a lot of people think he’s done his time). You could put Vick, Bernie Madoff, and Satan on the field – if the game is good people are going to watch.

The second part of this is the idea that its a business decision by the NFL. Michael Vick’s name is tied to the NFL regardless, letting him back in or banning him won’t change that. The real ‘business decision’ part of this belongs to the owner who decides to to sign Vick. That owner has to deal with selling tickets and merchandise, that owner will be the one who brought Vick back (people WILL remember it that way, trust me), that owner will be the one has to explain it to the fans, and that owner will be the one who has to explain to the rest of his team why a swarm of reporters is hanging over the locker room every second of every day. The NFL doesn’t have much ‘business’ involved in this decision any more, the owner that signs Vick does.

Now, these columnists are more well-known than me, more respected, and more knowledgeable about sports. However, that doesn’t change the fact that they’re completely incorrect about Roger Goodell, Michael Vick, and the NFL…even if its just this one time.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Print

2 Comments for this entry

  • sean

    thanks for saying what everyone else is thinking. this man deserves a chance to go back to work.

  • Colin R.

    Absolutely. I don’t see what anyone gains by just punishing him forever. But everyone loses, including the charity he can no longer afford to fund. People seem to judge him based off of one thing he did that was wrong, but he used all that money for some very good things as well.

    Thanks for reading and commenting!

Leave a Reply

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!

Archives

All entries, chronologically...