PDA

View Full Version : Tom Cable and the League Double Standard


Vinny
10-06-2009, 01:54 PM
In the "things I can't comprehend" section from Michael Silver of Yahoo Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-morningrush100509&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell’s assertion, to Fox’s Jay Glazer on Saturday, that the alleged incident in which Raiders coach Tom Cable assaulted defensive assistant Randy Hanson “is not getting pushed under the rug.” Um, really? Look, I’m a big Goodell fan, and I have no reason to believe the commissioner is being disingenuous. But in this case, he isn’t doing a very convincing job of making people believe that the league’s code of conduct is enforced as aggressively when it comes to coaches as it is with players. Think about it: If Brandon Marshall or Pacman Jones or Chris Henry or Steve Smith had been accused of striking a teammate and sending him to the hospital, do you really believe we’d have gone this long without some sort of highly publicized investigation on the league’s part (if the team in question didn’t take action first)? In this case, the Napa, Calif., police reportedly have taken statements from Hanson and three other witnesses; has the NFL interviewed any of these people? Considering the apparent (and pathetic) lack of engagement from Cable’s bosses – specifically owner Al Davis – shouldn’t Goodell be taking it upon himself to get to the bottom of the incident in a suitably conspicuous way? He should be less encumbered than when he deals with players, in fact, because there is no collective bargaining agreement or union limiting his ability to investigate. If I were Goodell, I’d have sent someone to the Raiders’ facility immediately after news broke of Hanson’s hospitalization and demanded answers from all parties concerned. Anyone who refused to cooperate would have been subject to my discipline, including Davis. But Goodell either hasn’t done a thing, or he has done things behind the scenes to which the public isn’t privy. Either way, it gives the appearance that this isn’t a priority for him – that he’s, you know, sweeping it under the rug. I’ll take his word for it that he isn’t, but it would be great if we started getting some answers.

infantrycak
10-06-2009, 02:23 PM
Yup - same standards should be applied to coaches. Now this is a first offense and the players he mentions are repeat offenders, but nonetheless coaches should not be exempt in any fashion.

Double Barrel
10-06-2009, 03:45 PM
It is going to be interesting to see how Goodell treats this incident. He risks losing credibility with the players if he goes light on the coach.

Thorn
10-06-2009, 05:16 PM
if anything, coachs should be held to a higher standard, most certainly not lower.

Dan B.
10-06-2009, 05:18 PM
Odd that they will hold coaches to equal drug standards and ban them for a failed drug test, but won't act on this.

Mr. White
10-08-2009, 12:05 PM
http://sfist.com/attachments/SFist_Brock/Raiders%20Coaches%20Fight_chun.jpg

El Tejano
10-08-2009, 12:18 PM
I wonder how quickly it would've been handled if it were a coach like Mike Tomlin, or Raheem Morris.

Texecutioner
10-08-2009, 12:40 PM
I wonder how quickly it would've been handled if it were a coach like Mike Tomlin, or Raheem Morris.

What the hell are you trying to say?

El Tejano
10-08-2009, 12:48 PM
Well if you are going to throw it out there about the players...... You telling me the media wouldn't blow that up more?

Texecutioner
10-08-2009, 01:21 PM
Well if you are going to throw it out there about the players...... You telling me the media wouldn't blow that up more?

The league didn't even suspend Steve Smith last season when he busted a CB's nose. His team did, but Goodell didn't get involved.

This is a different issue with coaches, and it's not the norm so I can see why it's being reviewed possibly a little more.

But what I don't get is what difference would it make if it were Tomlin who did this? Why would he be any different than Cable?


And another thing is that Goodell hasn't been consistent with any of his suspensions. He's been all over the place and anything but consistent with his fines and suspensions.

HOU-TEX
10-08-2009, 01:50 PM
I guess I'm not understanding the "double standard" mumbo jumbo. Doesn't Goodell usually allow justice to run it's course before handing out punishment? I haven't been following this story as close as some (cuz I don't care), but I don't think the law is finished with this case.

Why should Goodell do anything until Cable's proven guilty?

infantrycak
10-08-2009, 02:10 PM
I guess I'm not understanding the "double standard" mumbo jumbo. Doesn't Goodell usually allow justice to run it's course before handing out punishment? I haven't been following this story as close as some (cuz I don't care), but I don't think the law is finished with this case.

Why should Goodell do anything until Cable's proven guilty?


Goodell acted on Pacman before the law was done. Now that was his 17th offense so draw your own distinction.

Texans_Chick
10-08-2009, 02:11 PM
Here's a pdf of the most recent personal conduct policy (http://www.nflplayers.com/images/fck/NFL%20Personal%20Conduct%20Policy%202008.pdf).


While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct, and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful.

Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime.

Notably, it doesn't talk about "criminal case" but rather "criminal activity." It also subjects the person to an evaluation and counseling even if they are not charged if it is appears as though they violated the policy, which it certainly appears that Cable did.

If the case involves "significant bodily harm," they can make a decision even before a criminal case has concluded even on a first offense. Hanson had his jaw broken and cracked two teeth.

Clubs are required to report these incidents under the policy. At the time this happened, the Raiders publicly denied anything happened.

Cable is in a boatload of trouble. Read this Nancy Gay (long time Raider writer) article (http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/10/07/tom-cable-randy-hanson-in-limbo-as-da-mulls-textbook-felony-as/) about the details.

In part:

In the early evening of Aug. 5 at the Marriott-Napa Valley, Cable called a closed-door meeting and asked Hanson -- who is still listed on the Raiders' Web site as a defensive assistant -- to attend, along with defensive coordinator John Marshall, defensive backs coach Lionel Washington and defensive backs assistant/squad development coach Willie Brown.

Hanson told detectives that Cable sat at the head of a small rectangular table, with Marshall at the opposite end. Washington sat at Cable's immediate left, and Hanson was seated next to Washington. Brown sat across from Washington and Hanson, to Cable's right.

Cable called the meeting to address Hanson's dealings with the defensive backs. "The players are confused by you, Randy," Cable allegedly told Hanson. He also reportedly told Hanson that he was being relegated to film work and would no longer be allowed to work directly with the defensive backs. "John Marshall says he has talked to you about this," Cable told Hanson.

According to the Hanson's statement, he turned to Marshall and said, 'That's a lie, John!" and Hanson insisted that Marshall had not previously mentioned anything about a communication problem with the defensive backs.

At that point, Hanson told police he was blindly body slammed by Cable into the wall behind Marshall with such force that he was thrown out of his chair and into a small table next to the wall. The table had a small lamp on it and both were overturned and broken in the scuffle.

According to Hanson's account, the other coaches in the room began yelling, "Tom, what are you doing?" as Cable put his right hand against Hanson's face and shoved his left cheek against the wall. Hanson told police he could feel his upper jaw being crushed into the wall.

The other coaches pulled Cable from Hanson, but an enraged Cable broke their grasp and attacked Hanson a second time, allegedly screaming, "I'm going to kill you!" over and over as he kept a hand around Hanson's throat.



That is nuts. Crazy nuts.

Cage match: Cable versus Rex Ryan? Who would you take?

Texan_Bill
10-08-2009, 02:12 PM
I guess I'm not understanding the "double standard" mumbo jumbo. Doesn't Goodell usually allow justice to run it's course before handing out punishment? I haven't been following this story as close as some (cuz I don't care), but I don't think the law is finished with this case.

Why should Goodell do anything until Cable's proven guilty?

Exactly my thoughts since this thread was started. I believe the case was just handed over to the DA's office the other day.

Texecutioner
10-08-2009, 02:21 PM
Goodell acted on Pacman before the law was done. Now that was his 17th offense so draw your own distinction.

Pac Man had already been on a zero tolerance policy before that had happened and was almost not even let back into the league that year. He was told that if even the slightest incident occured with him he would be gone again.

Actually that Pac Man case was one of the most bullshit rulings from the commish, because the commish only suspended him for four freaking games, when he was supposed to be out for a year or two when that happened. he assaulted his own paid security in a public hotel. He completely broke the zero tolerance policy imposed from Goodell but got a soft punishment. Throughout all of the suspensions, they have all been for longer periods of time and for more games once you screwed up again and again. Pac Man had already been suspended for a full year and was then put on a zero tolerance policy and attacked a man in a public hotel, so he should have gotten at least a year for that incident but he only got 4 games since it was Jerry Jones's little toy.

HOU-TEX
10-08-2009, 02:26 PM
Goodell acted on Pacman before the law was done. Now that was his 17th offense so draw your own distinction.

Ha. I think he was waaay too generous with Pacman. He should've never let him back in the league after the 16th. Eh, thankfully we don't have to deal with that asshat. At least for now.

Exactly my thoughts since this thread was started. I believe the case was just handed over to the DA's office the other day.

Yeah, I haven't cared a whole lot about the situation to even post, but the bickering about Goodell kinda nicked a nerve. I actually love how Goodell has handled player discipline throughout the league. I thought he gave pacman too many chances, but meh.

Texan_Bill
10-08-2009, 02:29 PM
Ha. I think he was waaay too generous with Pacman. He should've never let him back in the league after the 16th. Eh, thankfully we don't have to deal with that asshat. At least for now.



Yeah, I haven't cared a whole lot about the situation to even post, but the bickering about Goodell kinda nicked a nerve. I actually love how Goodell has handled player discipline throughout the league. I thought he gave pacman too many chances, but meh.

Right there with you bro!! I think some people forget how outta control some of the discipline problems had gotten under Tagliabue. And yes, he was a little soft on Pacman.

HOU-TEX
10-08-2009, 02:31 PM
Right there with you bro!! I think some people forget how outta control some of the discipline problems had gotten under Tagliabue. And yes, he was a little soft on Pacman.

Totally agree! The NFL needed badly.