NFL Fires a Player qua Domestic Violence; morally right??

Make no mistakes, the NFL is completely beholden to corporate America,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Make no mistakes, the NFL is completely beholden to corporate America,

The NFL is corporate America. They aren't reluctant followers, they are leading the parade.

engineer wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:

Make no mistakes, the NFL is completely beholden to corporate America,

The NFL is corporate America. They aren't reluctant followers, they are leading the parade.

I think increasingly you are correct, the NFL is a collection of owners, and increasingly these owners are people who made their money being corporate class elite. I also took note of mention that corporate America spends more money promoting the NFL than the NFL does, they do it by buying tickets, skyboxes, and by running promotions over media aimed at the masses.

When corporate America says jump, the NFL asks how high.

When the NFL says jump, corporate America asks how high.

The NFL declined to release financial data, but an estimate of its revenue can be pieced together through various sources by economists and market researchers. That $10 billion pie is roughly sliced four ways, according to Navigate Research, a Chicago-based firm that specializes in the evaluation of sports and entertainment marketing investments.

About $5 billion from media and television rights to broadcast games. Paid for by corporate ads and charges to cable companies
About $1-2 billion in sponsorships, such as its long-running deal with PepsiCo, worth about $90 million to $100 million per year. All corporate money
About $2 billion related to attendance and ticket sales. Corporations buy a lot of these tickets
About $1 billion in merchandise and licensing. All corporate money

farmerman wrote:

I like the way you try to "extend" a point by making it enter the realm of the ridiculous. I, for one, don't think Rice should rot in hell , he should just not be reqrded for his Neanderthal and felonious actions to another human who just happens to be his wife.

Spousal laws protect these kinds of interactions nd assults and often wives defend their abusers for several reason byond the scope of this discussion. Rice shoul (qs he has) been given a directive from the NFL that he has no "license" to commit felonies against another person while off the field. I see no difference between a highly trained and skilled and pumped NFL "warrior" and a professional ranked boxer. The laws of conduct govern boxers out of the ring and these guys can be sentenced for using their ring skills to beat up people on the street.

The question should really be, IMHO, whether a "lifetime fooball ban " as a cruel and unusual punishment may be too excessive, especially since Rice is coming up on the end of his NFL career life. Mike Vick came back and has kept his nose clean but has just faded into obscurity (mostly based on his age I believe)

Neither do I, FM.

My point was made to Link...who in my opinion had gone too far in his reactions.

We all make mistakes.

Rice may never ever have done anything like this before...and may do nothing like it again.

A bit of perspective might be in order.

I've done some very stupid things in my day...and wouldn't want to be judged quite as harshly as Rice is being judged right now for those dumb things.

What he did was reprehensible. I just wanted to give a more balanced reaction.

if a wimpy little guy comes over and starts hitting Mike Tyon and then Mike turns and decks the guy, Mike is a felon. (look it up)
I see no difference.
You seem to be using the same doofus logic as "Womens seeking to get raped"

Sporting organisations are very reticent to use the courts against a professional body. Had certain injuries occurred off the pitch they would no doubt have ended up in court, but there is an understanding that when you go on to a sports pitch you suspend certain rights.

When you join a club you accept the rules of the club.

izzythepush wrote:

Sporting organisations are very reticent to use the courts against a professional body. Had certain injuries occurred off the pitch they would no doubt have ended up in court, but there is an understanding that when you go on to a sports pitch you suspend certain rights.

When you join a club you accept the rules of the club.

I did not mean that the NFL shud have sued Rice.
I mean that the NFL shud have confined its attention to athletic competition
and let the criminal justice system take care of itself.

Frank Apisa wrote:

farmerman wrote:

I like the way you try to "extend" a point by making it enter the realm of the ridiculous. I, for one, don't think Rice should rot in hell , he should just not be reqrded for his Neanderthal and felonious actions to another human who just happens to be his wife.

Spousal laws protect these kinds of interactions nd assults and often wives defend their abusers for several reason byond the scope of this discussion. Rice shoul (qs he has) been given a directive from the NFL that he has no "license" to commit felonies against another person while off the field. I see no difference between a highly trained and skilled and pumped NFL "warrior" and a professional ranked boxer. The laws of conduct govern boxers out of the ring and these guys can be sentenced for using their ring skills to beat up people on the street.

The question should really be, IMHO, whether a "lifetime fooball ban " as a cruel and unusual punishment may be too excessive, especially since Rice is coming up on the end of his NFL career life. Mike Vick came back and has kept his nose clean but has just faded into obscurity (mostly based on his age I believe)

Neither do I, FM.

My point was made to Link...who in my opinion had gone too far in his reactions.

We all make mistakes.

Rice may never ever have done anything like this before...and may do nothing like it again.

A bit of perspective might be in order.

I've done some very stupid things in my day...and wouldn't want to be judged quite as harshly as Rice is being judged right now for those dumb things.

What he did was reprehensible. I just wanted to give a more balanced reaction.

And again you make no sense - I was responding to the fact that you said that you understood why this man would act the way he would -- basically because he grew up in such conditions where these actions are normal.

I pointed out the fact that no he did not - he did not grow up in the "hood" or in circumstances where girls slap guys and he such. Also you pointed out that I probably had a much better environment than him - and I pointed out no not really.

I never said that he should rot in hell, but he is should be punished appropriately. I never said that I should be sitting next to God in heaven - I simply pointed out where I grew up. I never said I was did anything great.

You simply keep making excuses for someone that acted violently - again after I pointed out facts -- you twist things and then again you start giving him other excuses about football being violent so you understand him being violent. There are many football players and they do not all end up acting violently to their girlfriends or spouses.

He acted violently and did something that is against the law and should be punished for it. That is all I said and I stand by it. He takes his punishment like a man and then after redeems himself then he should be able to be forgiven.

Also, I have not acted violently as an adult and thus I should not be punished for it -- all I said.

Rules of the club tend to cover such things as bringing the game into disrepute.

Rules of the club tend to cover such things
as bringing the game into disrepute.