Tools of The NFL: Issue 2 - The NFL Itself

The Commissioner and de facto face of the NFL, Roger Goodell, is routinely jeered by the very fans that provide life to his business. It is ironic that the most viewed sports draft (in terms of the “big three” American professional sports: MLB, NBA, and NFL) initiates with a rousing rebuke as fans drown out Goodell’s sheepishly, whimpering voice during the opening of the NFL draft. It is also ironic that the NFL season ends with the same nasty rebuke as fans jeer Goodell when he hands the Super Bowl victors with the Lombardy Trophy. Why is the man, the face of the most popular form of live entertainment, hated by the very people who prop up his lucrative enterprise? It is due to a lack of governance.

The Commissioner receives his power from Article VIII, Section 8.1 of the NFL’s Constitution and Bylaws. Section 8.1 states:

“The League shall select and employ a person of unquestionable integrity to serve as Commissioner of the League and shall determine the period and fix the compensation of his employment. All voting requirements and procedures for the selection of or successor to the office of Commissioner shall be determined by the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds or 18, whichever is greater, of the members of the League.”

In short, the Commissioner receives his power from the franchise owners. Furthermore, these owners also determine whether his term will be renewed or not. Assuming the Commissioner has the same self-serving, greedy instincts as his bosses (the franchise owners) then Goodell will make sure he does all in his power to please at least 22 owners (two-thirds), thus extending his term as commissioner.

This form of power and authority has a democratic semblance because a “vote” occurs. Unlike in a political democracy, in which the people elect a political figure to govern over them with limited authority, “corporate democracy” (which goes along with “jumbo shrimp” and “business ethics” as examples of oxymorons) has an oligarchy choose the leader who does not need to answer to the governed.  For the most part this is because a corporate CEO must be responsive to the shareholders, who elect the directors who then elect the CEO. This corporate governance, though, poses an issue when the shareholders are absent from the equation – like in the NFL.

The NFL is a private entity in which its power is derived from 32 billionaires who each own a distinct franchise within the league. As stated earlier, two-thirds of these billionaires must elect a “person with unquestionable integrity” (whatever that means) to be Commissioner of the league. The Commissioner is then provided with vast jurisdiction to resolve disputes between any combination of players, officials, team employees, owners, and coaches of the NFL. Furthermore, under Article VIII Section 8.3:

“The Commissioner shall have full, complete and final jurisdiction and authority to arbitrate: any dispute involving a member or members in the League or any players or employees . . .of the League . . . that in the opinion of the Commissioner constitutes conduct detrimental to the best interest of the League or professional football.”

So essentially the Commissioner has complete judicial authority over the league, yet also has a vested interest to remain in good favor with the owners, or in laymen terms, his bosses. More importantly, if there was a dispute between a player and an owner, Goodell is in charge of remedying the situation. That hardly seems like a fair form of mediation, considering Goodell receives his paycheck from the owners. There is a real-life example of this very situation happening – Ray Rice.

Most people have a good understanding of the Ray Rice situation in which he knocked out his then fiancé in an Atlantic City hotel elevator and was caught on video committing said act. The NFL, Goodell at first, issued Rice a two-game suspension. This punishment quickly shifted after the public received video of the actual punch. The NFL claimed they had not seen the video prior to it being released to the public. This fact is disputed and, according to an ESPN article written by Don Van Natta Jr. and Van Valkenburg, “When evidence of it [the elevator video] surfaced anyway, the NFL and the Ravens quickly shifted gears and simultaneously attempted to pin the blame on Rice and his alleged lack of truthfulness with Goodell about what had happened in the elevator.” The NFL, in an attempt to look as though they never saw the elevator video prior, which seems laughable considering the NFL is a multi-billion dollar enterprise and also the very fact that TMZ (who was the entity who released the elevator video) was able to obtain a copy of the video by, according to one of its journalist, “in one phone call.” Furthermore, as referenced in the ESPN article, there is ample evidence that the NFL had news of the video’s existence from the day after the event occurred.  It stated the Raven’s Director of Security reported such a video to a team executive in Baltimore. More importantly, the Ravens’ President, Dick Cass, was told by Rice’s defense attorney, Michael J. Diamondstein, how horrible the video was. “Cass did not request a copy of the video from Diamondstein but instead began urging Rice’s legal team to get Rice accepted into a pretrial intervention program after being told some of the program’s benefits . . . Among them: It would keep the inside-the elevator footage from becoming public.”

This example is not to defend Ray Rice’s actions but to illustrate how arbitrarily Goodell is able to issue punishment without following any sort of equitable justice.   Despite how the NFL spun it, it does not appear that Rice lied to the NFL, but rather the Ravens desperately did not want their most marketable (and lucrative) player to be released. With Goodell’s help, the Ravens attempted to conceal the video, enabling Goodell to issue a two-game suspension without the worry of public backlash because the public would have trouble comprehending the gruesomeness of Rice’s actions. However, when that plan came to a crashing halt, Goodell had to choose – does he side with the player, who claims he told the complete truth of what happened or does he side with the owner who unethically tried to conceal the facts from reaching the media? For Goodell, the issue was easy – throw the player under the bus and side with the owner who holds power over Goodell’s wallet.

Therefore, to ensure equitable justice in the NFL it is necessary that the method in which the Commissioner is elected is amended. Rather than the owners having the sole power to elect the commissioner, they should be limited. This limitation should be done in such a way that affords the NFL’s assets – its players – a say in who the Commissioner should be. In turn, the NFL players (via through their union representatives) should have the right to nominate three candidates to be the NFL commissioner. From the three candidates nominated by the players, the Owners shall choose, by a two-third vote, one of these candidates to be the next commissioner. The commissioner shall have a five-year term.  At the end of the five-year term the nomination/election process should commence again. No commissioner may serve more than two five year terms.

This simple governance break up will (1) ensure that the players have a say in who governs their league (2) also gives the owners a say in who governs their league and (3) causes the Commissioner to appoint or create a separate department to hear and issue discipline. The third aspect is incredibly important because by altering the way in which the Commissioner is elected (both players and owners having a vote) it incentivizes the Commissioner to remain neutral between players or owners. For instance, by setting up a separate and independent disciplinary body that oversees hearings and issues sanctions, the Commissioner cannot be blamed for a team or player’s punishment. The Commissioner may propose, voted on by the Owners, certain policies that the disciplinary body is to follow over certain issues. For example, if a player is found to be using performance enhancing drugs, he should be suspended for a third of the season. Overall, this change in governance allows for fans to have better trust in the NFL and for there to be less conflict and ambiguity when a player may actually get suspended or punished.

The obvious target for this proposal is the notion that management, who presumably invested money, should have a greater say in how their business is run than the labor that is hired by the management. Furthermore, many would say that the NFL players’ union (NFLPA) is already a body that provides the players with a voice. To the latter statement the NFLPA helps provide the players with many resources, but the players are still required to have their hearing in front of “Czar” Goodell. The union provides them with a forum for defending themselves in front of the judge, jury, and executioner, but the player is hardly afforded a “fighting” chance.

The former notion about management is understandable if the NFL was, say, a manufacturing company that produced cars. Customers are directly paying for the car, not the laborer who put the wheels on the car (indirectly the customer is, yes, but the customer isn’t paying to watch the wheels get fastened onto the car). However, the NFL and all professional sports are unique in which the human capital (i.e. the players) are the very item that fans are paying for. The fans only turn to T.V. or buy a ticket for the NFL’s labor unit and nothing else. Further, the players should be provided a say in the commissioner for the simple reason in that they are in a highly limited employment field. Unlike an accountant, who can find a job at thousands of companies, an NFL running back may only be employed by a finite business – the NFL. In turn, the accountant who doesn’t like a company’s management may leave and find a new job, but an NFL player who doesn’t like management can quit, yes, but his alternatives are slim to none in finding another running back position.

The NFL is the greatest professional sports league, but it is the only league in which the fans boo at both the opener and season finale. That needs to change.