Since allegations surfaced on Oct. 7 that Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre sent inappropriate text messages and photos to a female game hostess and sideline reporter during his stint with the New York Jets in 2008, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has steadfastly refused to be held to a timetable in his investigation of the matter. That refusal now appears to have been a foot-dragging measure to avoid having to discipline Favre while he was still playing.
In an interview last night, Goodell reiterated his refusal to be held to a timetable. Yet in the same breath he finally announced when he hopes to conclude his investigation: within two weeks.
Addressing the question of when he would reach a decision on what action the NFL would take in the Favre case, Goodell’s choice of words was interesting: "I'm not going to put a timetable on it, other than I did say I hope it'll be by the end of the regular season.”
By stating specifically that he wasn’t “going to put a timetable on it,” Goodell appeared to be aiming to show that his response was consistent with his previous responses to the question.
On Oct. 12, Goodell said he was "not prepared to provide a timetable for making a decision about whether to discipline" Favre. He echoed that sentiment on Nov. 11: "I'm never pushed much by timelines. I think what you have to do is be fair, you have to try to get all the facts, and make a smart decision. I think what we need to do here is make sure we have all those facts from as many different sources as we can.”
Last night, with the Vikings out of the playoff picture and Favre having made it clear that he has no intention to return next season, Goodell was able to safely refer to a timeframe that would have no meaningful impact on Favre. And by reiterating his “no timetable” position despite declaring the timing in the same sentence, he was able to make it appear that nothing had changed in his approach to the case.
Goodell’s foot-dragging in the Favre case is especially glaring when it’s compared to the case of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. In that case, allegations surfaced on March 5 that Roethlisberger had sexually assaulted a 20-year-old woman at a nightclub in Georgia. Goodell meted out a six-game suspension 47 days later, on April 21. That case was especially complex, given that the allegations resulted in a criminal investigation, though no criminal charges were filed against Roethlisberger.
The Favre case appears to be much less complicated, since there was never a hint of criminal wrongdoing. Yet it’s been more than 80 days since the allegations against Favre surfaced, and Goodell has still managed to delay a finding in the case until a point when the difficult decision of whether to suspend a player of Favre’s stature no longer has to be made.
While we have as much admiration and respect for Favre’s contribution to the game as anyone, we would argue that all players should be treated equally by the NFL in any investigation. That didn’t appear to happen in the Favre case.
No comments:
Post a Comment