NFLPA head DeMaurice Smith: League stance on player conduct arbitration ‘all about control’
The NFL and the NFL Players’ Association eventually came to agreements on several issues in recent years, from assigning a neutral arbitrator for on-field penalties to a new drug policy.
But what has brought the most attention to the league – much of it negative or flat-out ridicule – has been off-field matters. Since taking over as commissioner, Roger Goodell has become a czar of discipline, and the results of late have not been good.
Even with the victories the NFLPA has gained through arbitration and federal court, with Judge Richard Berman vacating Tom Brady’s four-game suspension, union executive director DeMaurice Smith knows such battles are not good for the game.
“I’m happy we won the cases, but I don’t think anybody on our side and especially on their side would think that the last five fights have been good for football,” Smith told Shutdown Corner on Tuesday night from Buffalo, where he met with Bills players.
Smith meets with players from every club annually, beginning in training camp and hitting a few a week. On Monday he was in New England; he was in Pittsburgh on Wednesday.
The meeting with Patriots players, who endured seven months of uncertainty before finding out they’d have their star quarterback for the season opener, was “a little different” than in years past, but mostly about union business. Smith acknowledged that there was celebrating at that opening game when the Patriots played the Steelers.
Pittsburgh owner Art Rooney II told the Washington Post on Tuesday night that the NFL and team owners have begun “informal discussions” with the union about changing the punishment system. Union president and Cincinnati Bengals offensive tackle Eric Winston disputed that claim on Twitter, saying there have been no informal or formal proposals made by the league.
The Players Association made a formal proposal for neutral arbitration in player conduct cases quite some time ago, and is still waiting for a response from the NFL.
“Frankly, if the league wants to agree to a neutral arbitrator, or an independent arbitrator, that’s well within their power and that deal [would be] done,” Smith said. “It’s just up to this point they have steadfastly resisted having an independent arbitrator … It comes down to their unwillingness to have an independent person review the discipline that’s handed down, and when they don’t have that, you end up in a world where they try to make it up as they go along.”
That has certainly seemed to be the case over the last year-plus, with Ray Rice initially getting a two-game suspension for domestic violence and Brady getting four games for possibly knowing something about funny business that may or may not have happened with footballs.
“I think it’s best for our business if we have clear rules, where they’re collectively bargained, where we know what the process is, where players know what things they can be punished for,” Smith said. “And then to have a system where there’s someone we jointly pick to review it, and that’s what we do with drug policy now, that’s what we do for on-field fines, and frankly, when it comes to those two areas, it’s worked pretty well. You don’t hear a lot of major cases now about on-field fines, and you certainly don’t’ hear a lot about players unhappy with the drug policy.
“We have an independent arbitrator for both instances now and I think that’s really good for our business. I just don’t think it’s been a highlight of the league where we were literally talking about the first half of an AFC championship game right before the ball was snapped to start a new season. I don’t think anybody thinks that’s good for business.”
Goodell intimated last week that he would be open to a change in his role in player discipline, in part saying it is becoming too time consuming. Throughout league history, the commissioner has had the power to punish players for off-field actions and serve as the appeals officer in those cases, but it is only under Goodell that there have been calls for a change to that process.
Smith doesn’t “have the luxury” as he put it of trying to figure out if Goodell is sincere or if there are enough owners fed up with the costly losses – not to mention the losses in terms of public opinion – though he quipped both sides could have saved a lot of money over the past seven months if there were a neutral arbitrator involved.
But as it was with getting an independent arbitrator for on-field discipline or the new drug policy or the new concussion protocol, the NFL’s reluctance comes down to one thing.
“It goes back to the long history of they want control,” Smith said. “At the end of the day, they may put dollar signs on why they oppose X, Y and Z, but I’ve been in this job for a little while now and I’m convinced of something that Gene (Upshaw) said long before I took the job, that the league’s big issue is control and they don’t like to give up control. And on the issue of an independent arbitrator, it’s exactly about control.”
Smith maintains, however, that resolution will come once the league responds to the NFLPA’s proposal or submits a counter-proposal and the two hammer out a compromise – aka they collectively bargain.
“It’s both simple and not simple. The simple side of it is the day that we will have an independent arbitrator is the day that they agree to it. It’s an over simplification, but that’s the fact,” Smith said.
