![](https://jlpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/e852d43808504a1e6dd55f6bded5c89b-football-stadiums-games-of-football-pdf.jpg)
Foul: The Inadequate NFL Response to Player Violence
November 5, 2022Feature . Uncategorized Article(Source)
The NFL has a player violence problem.
On June 7th, 2022, the New York Times published a bombshell report, detailing NFL quarterback Deshaun Watson’s extensive sexual misconduct. Over a 17-month period, Watson met, at a minimum, 66 women for massages. Over 30 women have since accused Watson of sexual misconduct in massage appointments. The public reaction to the accusations was near-universal disgust and outrage, however, Watson himself has faced little in the way of consequences. While Watson was suspended for 11 games and fined, his time in the NFL is far from over. In fact, even after the news of Watson’s misconduct broke, the Cleveland Browns offered Watson a fully-guaranteed, $230 million contract, the largest fully-guaranteed contract in the NFL.
Deshaun Watson is not the first NFL star to be accused of serious off-the-field misconduct. Punter Matt Ariza was recently cut from the Buffalo Bills due to his alleged involvement in a gang rape. Pittsburg Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger was famously, credibly accused of rape multiple times. Tyreek Hill, current Miami Dolphins wide receiver, was recently granted a $120 million dollar contract extension despite being recorded admitting breaking his three-year-old’s arm and threatening his girlfriend.
Reports of violent behavior by active NFL players run in limitless supply, yet consequences for such behavior are few and far between. A recent study analyzed the effect of violence against women on NFL players’ careers. Based on a matched-pairs analysis of NFL player arrests from 2000 to 2019, researchers found that the effect of an arrest for violence against women was negligible in terms of career outcomes. Further, even that small difference in career outcomes completely disappears if the arrested players in question fall within the top 75% of the league. In short, even average and slightly-below-average football talent extinguishes career consequences for documented violence against women. As league coaches openly admit, in deciding penalties for serious misconduct, “each case must be measured on its own merits…a player’s production is one of the factors.”
Current league procedures are insufficient.
The rampant unanswered violence against women in the NFL begs an obvious question: what is the league doing wrong? The NFL follows a specific procedure following a player’s arrest. At the outset, the NFL often makes a public statement. In 2006, after 35 player arrests that year, NFL president of public relations Greg Aiello issued a statement declaring “[m]ost NFL players are good citizens, and some are outstanding citizens,” crediting the misconduct to a “small percentage” of the league, and asserting that “[t]he goal is to eliminate all such negative conduct.” But despite promises such as these, procedural steps beyond a public statement are limited.
While a Disciplinary Officer conducts the initial investigation of a player’s misconduct, the league Commissioner is the arbiter of internal misconduct investigations. The Commissioner has the power to overturn, reduce, or increase the discipline issued by the Disciplinary Officer. With such absolute power localized to one decision-maker, under the current system, outcomes are at the behest of a single, potentially-biased decision maker. It is not in the best interest of the Commissioner to take the league’s stars out of the game. This reality is on full display upon review of the league’s consistent laxed response to player violence, particularly against women.
Private institutions’ punishment structures affect the public.
While league punishment is viewed as private punishment–as opposed to the public form of punishment implicated in criminal proceedings–even private punishment processes have material consequences for the public penal system. Further, many features of league punishment more closely resemble public punishment than private. League punishment is highly publicized. Each instance of player violence and the league’s reaction to that violence sparks massive public discourse. Such discourse has the potential to, and certainly does, influence the larger public. For example, the highly publicized trial of former running back O.J. Simpson has been described as fundamentally changing pop culture. Public interest in player misconduct is undeniable.
The NFL also proudly touts its relationship and responsibility to the community. This perhaps explains the league’s engagement in public acts of punishment when dealing with episodes of misconduct, further concentrating the exposure of any given incident. Such a public response is likely derivative of a sense of accountability to the public, shared by both the league and the public. Further, beyond simple accountability to fans, the NFL also espouses independent moral authority to punish. The league and its affiliates often refer to players as “role models.” Moral rhetoric is consistently exercised by the NFL, particularly when issuing public statements regarding player misconduct. Such moral authority, pedaled and perpetuated by the NFL itself, further bolsters the NFL’s position as operating in direct connection to the public.
Given the public implications of league adjudication, the NFL must do more to correct current trends of violence in the league. Scholars Janine Young Kim and Matthew J. Parlow identified different forms of private punishment: cooperative, exclusive, and private policing. Under the cooperative model, public criminal law depends on the active participation of private individuals and groups to function. The exclusive model involves opting-out of the public criminal law in favor of better procedures for achieving justice. Contrarily, the private policing model involves private groups working towards goals other than achieving justice. Rather, private policing prioritizes “efficiency and goal-achievement” over community good.
Currently, the NFL adjudicative system most closely resembles the private policing, self-interested model. The NFL should turn away from this model in favor of either a cooperative or exclusive model of punishment. Meaning, the NFL should not only be as effective at policing violence of its players as the criminal system, but more effective. Domestic violence cases involving athletes have a 36% conviction rate, as opposed to the general public rate of conviction of 75%. The NFL should rise to the challenge it set out for itself by taking on the responsibility of moral beacon in the community and take tangible steps to stop violence by its players.
The first step to curbing the unrelenting violence in the NFL is instituting real consequences and making those consequences visible. While the NFL could not ban all players who committed crimes without violating anti-discrimination laws designed to protect those with criminal records, the league could take immediate, individualized action for each new instance of violence or serious misconduct. Deterrence is entirely absent from the equation when time and time again, league superstars like Deshaun Watson and Ben Roethlisberger commit repeated heinous acts and escape any and all long-term reprieve. Second, punishments for misconduct should be talent- and player-value-blind. Allowing players to evade punishment if they are sufficiently talented undercuts any posturing of moral fortitude by the NFL. Most importantly, given the legitimate social repercussions of all punishment actions taken by the NFL, the NFL needs to demonstrate an actual interest in stopping player violence through immovable rules, procedures for handling violations, and consistent punishments. Words are not enough.
![](https://live-journal-of-law-and-public-policy.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/thumbnail_image-1.png)
Marie is an NYU alumnus and current 2L at Cornell Law School. She has experience working in psychiatric mental health and incarceral settings and is interested in the criminal justice system. She loves the Buffalo Bills, her dog Khaleesi, and Chipotle.
Suggested citation: Marie Nercessian, Foul: The Inadequate NFL Response to Player Violence, Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, The Issue Spotter (Nov. 5, 2022), https://live-journal-of-law-and-public-policy.pantheonsite.io/foul-the-inadequate-nfl-response-to-player-violence/.
You may also like
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- October 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- April 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- August 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- June 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010