Anyone think Jones' suspension conditions are a bit ridiculous

[REEGSKINS]

i think it's too harsh pac should have gotten 8 games and henry 4 games. that would have hurt them enough. athletes have been getting in trouble forever. this wasnt the answer. the guys needs help, not to be away from his teammates for a year. plus these instances happened before this new policy. if the commish is going to pass out these kind of penalties he should have outlined the future penalties. i hope pac man can turn his life around cause is one great cb.

[Veretax]

I agree with you..... except I think it is wrong to discipline someone based on what may only be hearsay. Its like if I was in walmart and a clerk got shot and my employer found out I was there, whether or not I did anything, suspending me.

[Bat~man]

these guys have been nothing but problems since their days at WVU and everyone knows it , it wont stop ... i dont even think they will stop after this just slow down a bit , dont gimmi the " havent been convicted" junk , get real ...

[Major Harris]

these guys have been nothing but problems since their days at WVU and everyone knows it , it wont stop ... i dont even think they will stop after this just slow down a bit , dont gimmi the " havent been convicted" junk , get real ...

can i just clarify one little thing....pac man wasn't trouble at wvu. one fight at a bar as a freshman, 3 years of nothing but hard work on and off the field after that.

carry on.

[turbodiesel#44]

I agree with you..... except I think it is wrong to discipline someone based on what may only be hearsay. Its like if I was in walmart and a clerk got shot and my employer found out I was there, whether or not I did anything, suspending me.

The thing is, you should be damn sure an athlete is guilty before a suspension. It is not like loosing a couple weeks at the office. A 6 or 7 year career in the NFL is an unusually long career, and even when you come back, you earning potential is severely reduced. If he has done those crimes, he should be barred for life. But I guess the commish knows justice better than our justice system.

[jamesbondman]

Pacman and many other lawbreakers can do as they please and skirt the law, brandish guns, get into fights and hurt people, and they get suspensions.

Don Imus lost his job because of words. Don Imus is unemployed because of words. He didn't rape anybody...didn't rob anybody....didn't kidnap anybody...didn't molest anybody...and didn't kill anybody or do drugs or sell drugs. Words!

If this society isn't full of hypocracy I don't know what is.

[dinzelwashington]

ok u own a company. . you are the boss. pacman works for you. hes in and out of court, missing games. abscent from work. no shows because he is in trouble with the law. how much chnaces did he get. and this las vegas incident being the biggest one, theres no more sympathy. you are a professional athlete. a role model. this is something left for pacman to sit home and think about his actions. how much does he love more, football or chilling with his gangster friends. if he doesnt change after this year, he doesnt belong in the nfl period.

[Veretax]

these guys have been nothing but problems since their days at WVU and everyone knows it , it wont stop ... i dont even think they will stop after this just slow down a bit , dont gimmi the " havent been convicted" junk , get real ...

If not for the constitution I would agree with you, but Pacman has not been given his day in court, its a bit premature to suspend him for a WHOLE season when that has happened. Now if they wanted to suspend him for say two or four games (pending an acquittal) for tarnishing the NFL's name, I'd have no problem with that, because if acquitted hed be able to come back as being exonerated. The media right now is really focusing a lot of limelight on this kind of thing so I am of the opinion it gets blown out of proportion. And the NFL players rarely get the best end of that deal.

can i just clarify one little thing....pac man wasn't trouble at wvu. one fight at a bar as a freshman, 3 years of nothing but hard work on and off the field after that.

carry on.

The only issues I had with Pacman, was a propensity to get personal fouls on late hits. But you are correct nothing else off the field happened.

The thing is, you should be damn sure an athlete is guilty before a suspension. It is not like loosing a couple weeks at the office. A 6 or 7 year career in the NFL is an unusually long career, and even when you come back, you earning potential is severely reduced. If he has done those crimes, he should be barred for life. But I guess the commish knows justice better than our justice system.

Which is exactly my point 16 weeks isn't even half a year, but when you only work part time essentially that's a lot of money to lose.

Pacman and many other lawbreakers can do as they please and skirt the law, brandish guns, get into fights and hurt people, and they get suspensions.

Don Imus lost his job because of words. Don Imus is unemployed because of words. He didn't rape anybody...didn't rob anybody....didn't kidnap anybody...didn't molest anybody...and didn't kill anybody or do drugs or sell drugs. Words!

If this society isn't full of hypocracy I don't know what is.

Don Imus is a bit of a different story, one I'm not sure why everyone makes a big deal out of what he says when you have rapists and other popular artists songs being played on the radio with the EXACT same words. However, CBS has a right to fire Don Imus because they believe in this case that his words and pattern of behavior in the past would likely recur. In his case he was caught on tape, has admitted wrong doing and was suspended. Ultimately CBS may be forced into doing this because Imus's sponsors may be pulling their support. WIthout advertising support NO show can be carried on the radio. I think that is what happened here.

The same is not true of the Titans Pac Man Jones. I severly doubt anyone who is a football fan is going to turn off the NFL or Titans games if Pacman weren't suspended. It doesn't really affect anyones income but pacmans.

ok u own a company. . you are the boss. pacman works for you. hes in and out of court, missing games. abscent from work. no shows because he is in trouble with the law. how much chnaces did he get. and this las vegas incident being the biggest one, theres no more sympathy. you are a professional athlete. a role model. this is something left for pacman to sit home and think about his actions. how much does he love more, football or chilling with his gangster friends. if he doesnt change after this year, he doesnt belong in the nfl period.

Tardiness would be cause for firing, not suspension, however if I was a good boss I'd have met with him several times before coming to that. It would depend on what happened in Vegas. If he punched a client then he'd be gone no questions there.

Okay get it out of your head, Pro players are not role models anymore. They haven't been for about ten years. They play a game where it is physical and people get smacked around that's hardly a civilized form for a role model. Now, if you want to dispute that with me you are more then welcome to disagree, but anyone that looks to Pro athletes for a role model is in trouble anyways.

Back wheN I was growing up there were only a hand ful of people i considered role models in the NFL, and lately they haven't been getting the press, its been the bad boys. So yeah as long as players keep getting in trouble I think it would be unwise to view them as a role model.

[Major Harris]

The only issues I had with Pacman, was a propensity to get personal fouls on late hits. But you are correct nothing else off the field happened.

true, but that was, and still is, a team problem.

[Taylor 36]

Okay get it out of your head, Pro players are not role models anymore. They haven't been for about ten years. They play a game where it is physical and people get smacked around that's hardly a civilized form for a role model. Now, if you want to dispute that with me you are more then welcome to disagree, but anyone that looks to Pro athletes for a role model is in trouble anyways.

Back wheN I was growing up there were only a hand ful of people i considered role models in the NFL, and lately they haven't been getting the press, its been the bad boys. So yeah as long as players keep getting in trouble I think it would be unwise to view them as a role model.

Just because you don't see them as being viable role models doesn't mean they aren't. They shouldn't be, I'll agree with you, but they are. Kids look up to Pro athletes, rappers, thugs, and the lot today whether they should or not. You can't be so naive to think that kids are smart enough and have good enough judgement on character to know better than to look up to fools like Pacman, can you?

[Popeman38]

If not for the constitution I would agree with you, but Pacman has not been given his day in court, its a bit premature to suspend him for a WHOLE season when that has happened. Now if they wanted to suspend him for say two or four games (pending an acquittal) for tarnishing the NFL's name, I'd have no problem with that, because if acquitted hed be able to come back as being exonerated. The media right now is really focusing a lot of limelight on this kind of thing so I am of the opinion it gets blown out of proportion. And the NFL players rarely get the best end of that deal.

The Constitution only comes into play IF Pacman was suspended for the crimes. Pacman was not suspended for the crimes, he was suspended for embarrassing the league. Even if he is acquitted of every charge ever made against him, he is in violation of the leagues conduct policy (the old one, which was used to suspend him). The right to due process does not apply to keeping your job.

Don Imus is a bit of a different story, one I'm not sure why everyone makes a big deal out of what he says when you have rapists and other popular artists songs being played on the radio with the EXACT same words. However, CBS has a right to fire Don Imus because they believe in this case that his words and pattern of behavior in the past would likely recur. In his case he was caught on tape, has admitted wrong doing and was suspended. Ultimately CBS may be forced into doing this because Imus's sponsors may be pulling their support. WIthout advertising support NO show can be carried on the radio. I think that is what happened here.

The same is not true of the Titans Pac Man Jones. I severly doubt anyone who is a football fan is going to turn off the NFL or Titans games if Pacman weren't suspended. It doesn't really affect anyones income but pacmans.

Don Imus and Pacman are the exact same circumstance. Don Imus made an ass of himself. He was fired for screwing up. Pacman has made an ass of himself. He was suspended for a year. Now, which one got the harsher punishment? Didn't CBS and MSNBC take away Imus' livlihood without your "due process"? Why are you outraged by Pacmans suspension but cool with Imus' firing?

*****I am in no way defending Don Imus. I think his firing is just. I also feel that Pacman should have been fired and not just suspended.

[Taylor 36]

No I am not dense. I am merely saying, that no major corporation would be able to suspend or fire a person without first having a full investigation by parties within the company (interviewing witnesses for example) and giving the accused the opportunity to defend his actions. Now We don't know what Pacman said to Goodell maybe he admitted to it, if he did then these might be justified, however, I still say that no legal agreement can seed your rights protected under the constitution to any other authority.

Are you crazy? People are suspended and fired in all walks of life for using bad judgemnet, even if they were proven to not have played a direct part of the crime later on. Ask any teacher, cop, lawyer, accountant, fire fighter, etc. about their chances of being suspended or let go after certain accusations have been made, before their day in court. It happens all the time, and these people don't make six figures PER paychack. So, don't gripe about Pacman not being able to support his family because of HIS decisions and HIS actions.

I agree with you..... except I think it is wrong to discipline someone based on what may only be hearsay. Its like if I was in walmart and a clerk got shot and my employer found out I was there, whether or not I did anything, suspending me.

There is a LOT more than hearsay here, and that much HAS been proven. And , please, your Walmart comparison is pretty lame. Even Pacman would not get in trouble with the league if he was in the back of Walmart buying diapers for his kids while someone HE WASN"T THERE WITH was robbing the store up front, unless he was being accused of participating in the crime.

[Veretax]

I feel parents should steer kids away from folks, i mean playes don't deserve that kind of admiration any more their careers are far far too short anymore

[Taylor 36]

I feel parents should steer kids away from folks, i mean playes don't deserve that kind of admiration any more their careers are far far too short anymore

I agree completely, but we both know that that is not how things work today. It is unfortunate, but many of these players, especially the bad character ones (because ESPN focus on them more than the good ones) are looked at as role models to today's youth. It is scary.

[Langford78]

Why don't you go out and get into 10 "situations" with the cops, getting arrested on several of them. See if your employers wait untill you're actually convicted of something before they give you the boot.

[Veretax]

The Constitution only comes into play IF Pacman was suspended for the crimes. Pacman was not suspended for the crimes, he was suspended for embarrassing the league. Even if he is acquitted of every charge ever made against him, he is in violation of the leagues conduct policy (the old one, which was used to suspend him). The right to due process does not apply to keeping your job.

Don Imus and Pacman are the exact same circumstance. Don Imus made an ass of himself. He was fired for screwing up. Pacman has made an ass of himself. He was suspended for a year. Now, which one got the harsher punishment? Didn't CBS and MSNBC take away Imus' livlihood without your "due process"? Why are you outraged by Pacmans suspension but cool with Imus' firing?

*****I am in no way defending Don Imus. I think his firing is just. I also feel that Pacman should have been fired and not just suspended.

I don't think the Imus situation compares, and I understand the conduct policy, but it seems to me that suspension is a poor, poor way to discipline these guys. I'd rather see them dock the guys pay for the year i mean like if they make 500k a game slash it in half. Simply suspending isn't going to stop these guys I don't think.

And Langford, I find your post completely insulting and will give it no more attention.

[Popeman38]

I don't think the Imus situation compares, and I understand the conduct policy, but it seems to me that suspension is a poor, poor way to discipline these guys. I'd rather see them dock the guys pay for the year i mean like if they make 500k a game slash it in half. Simply suspending isn't going to stop these guys I don't think.

He was suspended w/out pay, costing him his $1.3M in compensation. So he misses getting to play, and pulling down 7 figures. Best of both worlds.

[Neophyte]

I don't think the Imus situation compares, and I understand the conduct policy, but it seems to me that suspension is a poor, poor way to discipline these guys. I'd rather see them dock the guys pay for the year i mean like if they make 500k a game slash it in half. Simply suspending isn't going to stop these guys I don't think.

These guys care about two things...playing and money. And in that order. If you want to get their attention you have take away the things they care about most, just like you would with a child. Suspending without pay is not only not a poor way to do it, it is the very best way to do it.