Goodell says there’s momentum for expanding the playoffs

[SB39]

If the sole purpose of Goodell and his office is to make as much money as possible, then what is there to prevent arbitrary changes to the league rules and format in any manner that would increase popularity?

Goodell is commissioner, he is not God. He cannot unilaterally makes any rules changes he wants. In fact, he officially doesn't even get a vote as it takes 24/32 owners.

Some 25 million viewers watch american idol. The NFL could stand to benefit in popularity by pulling in some of that crowd. What is so ridiculous about it? If you have a counter-argument, make it instead of arbitrarily dismissing it.

The only thing more moronic that your suggestion that the NFL should transform itself into American Idol is your "what is so ridiculous about that" routine?

If you want to discuss this issue intelligently, I would be happy to continue. If your argument is going to be American Idol is popular therefore the NFL should transform into "live auditions for the players and a viewer voting contest to determine which among the losers to save for the playoffs" then I have little time for that level of idiocy.

 

[SB39]

So I'm sitting here wracking my brain trying to figure out just what it is that the great Roger Goodell has done that has resulted in the NFL's great popularity.

Still thinking ...

He is the commissioner of the greatest, most successful league in North American sports. To refuse to give him any credit for that is silly.

 

[Zeus]

He is the commissioner of the greatest, most successful league in North American sports. To refuse to give him any credit for that is silly.

It was the greatest, most suceessful league in North American sports under Tagliabue as well. My question stands - what did Roger do to bring this about?

 

[ausbacker]

Really? That's how we're measuring the commissioner? By how many players complain when they get fined??

Oh, there's a surprise. Players don't like getting fined. Gee, thanks for the insight.

I understand it's a difficult concept for you to grasp, that the commissioner, CEO or leader of any organization is responsible for the culture, direction and performance of said organization. You're being naive enough to hang your hat on revenue and popularity whilst not bothering to even scratch the surface as to all the factors affecting the totality that is the NFL.

SB39, really, you have no idea what you're talking about here and you're simply arguing for the sake of arguments. The trend toward spurious decision making in NFL legislature has been a failure of monumental proportions. That alone, has happened under Goodell's watch. If you don't think so, perhaps you should raise it with the players, coaches and media scribes who have trouble understanding why the officials officiate the way they do.

Also, quit with your smug attitude. Several posters have put forward many intelligent propositions to you, all of which you have not sufficiently answered.

 

[SB39]

I understand it's a difficult concept for you to grasp,

Sure thing, Mr. "Quit with the smug attitude"

that the commissioner, CEO or leader of any organization is responsible for the culture, direction and performance of said organization.

What is it about the NFL that makes you think the culture is suffering? It is far and away the best run sport in America.

I realize this is a difficult concept for you to grasp, but an athlete complaining about being fined does not mean there is a poor culture leaguewide.

You're being naive enough to hang your hat on revenue and popularity whilst not bothering to even scratch the surface as to all the factors affecting the totality that is the NFL.

If you don't think those 2 things are the things owners are primarily, overwhelmingly interested in, then you're the one being naïve. All other factors are nowhere near as important.

You think Jerry Jones and Bob Kraft and Dan Snyder give a rat's ass about the latest athlete to complain about his fine? Think again. But those guys sure do care about the seasonal ratings book which came out this week, and they're laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[SB39]

It was the greatest, most suceessful league in North American sports under Tagliabue as well.

It was in complete disarray under Tagliabue. Franchises moving all over the country on a whim for starters.

My question stands - what did Roger do to bring this about?

I guess you don't follow football, so apparently I have to spell it out. As I have mentioned in many other posts, he is not God. He cannot unilaterally do anything. But here are some changes that have taken place in the Goodell regime:

The 1st round of the draft moving to prime time
Thursday night game weekly
Increased emphasis on player safety
Successful resolution of a lawsuit which could have completely destroyed the league as we know it
Increased emphasis on punishing player misconduct off the field
New CBA without a single regular season game missed
Increased international exposure
New record breaking contracts with the networks

So now that I've answered your question, please answer one of mine: Why do you believe Goodell deserves absolutely zero credit for running the greatest, most popular sport in the country?

 

[mgteich]

IMHO, this is really an impressive list of accomplishments over seven years.

It was in complete disarray under Tagliabue. Franchises moving all over the country on a whim for starters.
I guess you don't follow football, so apparently I have to spell it out. As I have mentioned in many other posts, he is not God. He cannot unilaterally do anything. But here are some changes that have taken place in the Goodell regime:

The 1st round of the draft moving to prime time
Thursday night game weekly
Increased emphasis on player safety
Successful resolution of a lawsuit which could have completely destroyed the league as we know it
Increased emphasis on punishing player misconduct off the field
New CBA without a single regular season game missed
Increased international exposure
New record breaking contracts with the networks

So now that I've answered your question, please answer one of mine: Why do you believe Goodell deserves absolutely zero credit for running the greatest, most popular sport in the country?

 

[ausbacker]

Sure thing, Mr. "Quit with the smug attitude"
What is it about the NFL that makes you think the culture is suffering? It is far and away the best run sport in America.

I realize this is a difficult concept for you to grasp, but an athlete complaining about being fined does not mean there is a poor culture leaguewide.
If you don't think those 2 things are the things owners are primarily, overwhelmingly interested in, then you're the one being naïve. All other factors are nowhere near as important.

You think Jerry Jones and Bob Kraft and Dan Snyder give a rat's ass about the latest athlete to complain about his fine? Think again. But those guys sure do care about the seasonal ratings book which came out this week, and they're laughing all the way to the bank.

The biggest problem with your point of view is you seem to believe that the Commissioner of the NFL works expressly and in isolation for the owners. Once you accept that he does not work for just the owners, your judgement may be less clouded.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; Goodell is an excellent businessman and a tremendously poor commissioner.

 

[Observer]

Goodell is commissioner, he is not God. He cannot unilaterally makes any rules changes he wants. In fact, he officially doesn't even get a vote as it takes 24/32 owners.

And there lies the central issue. The owners have every incentive to maximize revenue no matter how the game of football is transformed. So who is going to push back if the commissioner himself is doing nothing more than maximizing revenue? His vote and position becomes completely redundant doesn't it?

 

[moosekill]

The biggest problem with your point of view is you seem to believe that the Commissioner of the NFL works expressly and in isolation for the owners. Once you accept that he does not work for just the owners, your judgement may be less clouded.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; Goodell is an excellent businessman and a tremendously poor commissioner.

He does work just for the owners. He works at their will and is hired and fired by them. You simply do not seem to understand this. If he makes them unhappy they fire him. So far, he seems to have made them very happy.

An excellent business man looks at the ratings from last weekend and says, holy crap, think of how much more money we could make for everyone if we had another game. So he brings it up to the owner and they vet it publicly to see what kind of response they get.

The NFL is a business, plain and simple.

 

[moosekill]

And there lies the central issue. The owners have every incentive to maximize revenue no matter how the game of football is transformed. So who is going to push back if the commissioner himself is doing nothing more than maximizing revenue? His vote and position becomes completely redundant doesn't it?

So you think adding two extra games is going to transform the league. LOL

 

[ausbacker]

He does work just for the owners. He works at their will and is hired and fired by them. You simply do not seem to understand this. If he makes them unhappy they fire him. So far, he seems to have made them very happy.

An excellent business man looks at the ratings from last weekend and says, holy crap, think of how much more money we could make for everyone if we had another game. So he brings it up to the owner and they vet it publicly to see what kind of response they get.

The NFL is a business, plain and simple.

I cannot begun to understand the abject ridiculousness of the notion that Goodell works for just the owners. That is absurd. I acknowledge he is a representative of the owners given his employment by the 32 owners but Goodell, the Commissioner of the NFL is responsible for more than just revenue and ratings. Those responsibilities extend beyond ownership.

If Goodell works for the owners and the owners explicity moosekill, why did he fine the Redskins and Cowboys for circumnavigating total player payments a few years ago? That seems counterproductive to their interests wouldn't you say?

 

[Observer]

So you think adding two extra games is going to transform the league. LOL

We are talking about Roger Goodell's role here. LOL

 

[moosekill]

You may be.

 

[moosekill]

I cannot begun to understand the abject ridiculousness of the notion that Goodell works for just the owners. That is absurd. I acknowledge he is a representative of the owners given his employment by the 32 owners but Goodell, the Commissioner of the NFL is responsible for more than just revenue and ratings. Those responsibilities extend beyond ownership.

If Goodell works for the owners and the owners explicity moosekill, why did he fine the Redskins and Cowboys for circumnavigating total player payments a few years ago? That seems counterproductive to their interests wouldn't you say?

Your lack of comprehension is very difficult for me to understand. He works for the owners. They control his job. If he pisses off enough of them, for whatever reason, he will be fired. Yet the owners, in their wisdom, make it his job to enforce the rules and bylaws they themselves have created. They understand that there are what, 30 different owners, each with their own agenda. They need to give someone the power to make sure individuals don't abuse their power and break their own rules, rules that some of the individual owners may never have supported in the first place. He punished Kraft for spygate, he punished the Redskins and Cowboys for playing with the salary cap. That is his job.

The owners need to be protected from themselves by someone, they have to understand this, so that is what the commissioner does. Of course, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the owners themselves decide upon the punishments and simply give them to Roger to doll out, keeping the public perception that he is doing it while it is all being done internally, but I have no idea.

 

[moosekill]

This is the closest analogy I can come up with, and maybe it will help. I run a company that belongs to a buying group. We along with 200 other companies pay money and form a company that hires people. Those people pool all of our stores buying power together to buy products at a much lower price. That company has a CEO. Now that CEO can remove members from the group if they don't pay their bills, or if they have bad business practices. Now if enough members weren't happy with that CEO we could have him removed, he works for us. However, we give him the power to make day to day decisions, to remove members to penalize us if we misbehave. It is a fine line for him to walk, but in the end as long as he runs a successful company he will probably be retained. That is all we really want.

 

[ausbacker]

Your lack of comprehension is very difficult for me to understand. He works for the owners. They control his job. If he pisses off enough of them, for whatever reason, he will be fired. Yet the owners, in their wisdom, make it his job to enforce the rules and bylaws they themselves have created. They understand that there are what, 30 different owners, each with their own agenda. They need to give someone the power to make sure individuals don't abuse their power and break their own rules, rules that some of the individual owners may never have supported in the first place. He punished Kraft for spygate, he punished the Redskins and Cowboys for playing with the salary cap. That is his job.

The owners need to be protected from themselves by someone, they have to understand this, so that is what the commissioner does. Of course, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the owners themselves decide upon the punishments and simply give them to Roger to doll out, keeping the public perception that he is doing it while it is all being done internally, but I have no idea.

It really is mind boggling to me that you actually believe this. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's going to be as silly the 100th time as it was the first time reading it.

Goodell is employed by the owners and has responsibilities far beyond the interests of the owners so much so that he represents the interests of not just the owners, but the NFL and its industry. Are his primary interests the owners? Sure. Does he oversee and engage in other interests? He sure does.

Goodell is the face of the NFL. The sooner you accept that the better. We're now done. I won't be responding to you further in this thread.

 

[moosekill]

You don't really understand how things in the real world work, do you.

 

[moosekill]

He may be the face of the NFL, but he is the face the owners decided to put there, and the second they grow tired of him he will be gone.

 

[mgteich]

Goodell is hired and fired by the owners.

He has many responsibilities. He may even serve on the Salvation Army Board of Directors for all I know.

None of his responsibilities make him answerable to anyone but the owners.
=====

When I worked, I had very specific responsibilities to our customers and to the community.
I had many responsibilities to other workers. I had responsibilities regarding safety and non-descrimination in the workplace.

But none of these responsibilities changed the fact that I worked for the top management, the bosses (the owners in Goodell's case).

Ultimately, everyone who works in a business is responsible to act to produce more revenue. In Goodell's case it is part of his direct responsibilities.
=====

The BOTTOM LINE is that Goodell acts to please those who pay his salary. Believing anything different is simply naive. The fact that he has lots of responsibilities to lots of separate groups is irrelevant to the fact that the judges of his success are those who pay his salary. Goodell is not in a union. He is part of management. He serves at the whim and will of higher management. That simply is the way the world works.

If Goodell should act in a way that is displeasing to the majority of owners, he would be subject to discipline and eventually fired. But Goodell is much smarter than that.
======

As an aside, I think that is extremely unlikely that any significant action taken by Goodell wouldn't be pre-approved by the owners. It is extremely unlikely that Kraft wouldn't have pre-approved almost every action. Kraft is rarely in the minority on policy issues.

It really is mind boggling to me that you actually believe this. No matter how many times you repeat it, it's going to be as silly the 100th time as it was the first time reading it.

Goodell is employed by the owners and has responsibilities far beyond the interests of the owners so much so that he represents the interests of not just the owners, but the NFL and its industry. Goodell is the face of the NFL.