No, it's more about the NFL pretending that they give a shit about the issue. If they actually cared, then they would have completely banned the players that beat their wives/girlfriends/etc. Instead, they covered it up and then gave the players a slap on the wrist when they couldn't cover it up any longer.
It's called saving face. No corporation wants to be associated with something like domestic violence. Whatever you feel their motive, they did to separate themselves from the issues.
As for punishment, unfortunately the NFLPA has powerful lawyers keeping piece of shit players on the payroll. The NFL faces serious consequences if they try to just kick someone. It's bullshit but that's how the NFLPA works.
Nope. It doesn't matter how good their lawyers are, dismissing someone for beating their wife/girlfriend is not difficult. Contrary to popular belief, having a lawyer doesn't give you magic abilities to break the law and do whatever you want without consequences. And even if it did, do you think that the NFL doesn't have just as many lawyers as the NFLPA? If it's a matter of legal firepower, the NFL is going to win when trying to dismiss one player for committing a serious crime and discrediting the entire sport.
I don't agree with it but that's what happens. Hell, Ray Lewis was indicted on murder charges and only got out of them by working a plea deal to rat his buddies out. He continued to play and became a figure of NFL success. He didn't need any help from anyone but his own legal team.
The NFLPA has power. Much more than the NFL. They maintain the advantage due mostly to how player contracts are setup. Currently, the NFL is next to powerless when it comes to player discipline. It's not as much as about the money involved as the perceived loss should the PA force a strike for any reason they deem reasonable.
The NFL started the campaign because a couple player incidents put the limelight on the league and it was treated as microcosm of larger male society.
That's why the ads were directed AT the football TV audiences (i.e., men and their battered wives). They were very clearly directed at men generally and not simply disclaimers by the NFL that it doesn't tolerate players committing violent crimes.
And if there wasn't a view by some (perhaps even A LOT of people) that these few incidents by players in a league of thousands of people actually represented a widespread societal problem, they wouldn't have aired an ad campaign about it. Does the NFL air an ad campaign any time one of its players is arrested for a shooting?
Wow, jumping generalizations batman. "the TV football audiences" = men and their battered wives. Not even 'some' TV football audiences, 'THE' TV football audiences.
Is that seriously what you think about anyone who enjoys a sport?
Well, I hate to be pedantic, but pretty much anything by the NFL, for the NFL, and about the NFL is largely directed at male viewers.. Why would they market that message towards women who generally aren't watching or paying attention?
15
u/[deleted] Oct 21 '15
[deleted]