Guys, read the entire article; you are misinterpreting Kraft's comments. He's inferring that Goodell is a business-minded commissioner and the NFL now needs a legal-minded commissioner to bring about a "clearly defined" role in increasingly complicated legal issues regarding disciplinary matters.
He's saying that when Goodell first took over, the biggest issue in the NFL was business related; so they hired a business-minded commissioner to focus on new media deals, stadiums, making their product visible to fans, etc. And in that sense? Goodell has been a success (and by all accounts, this is genuinely true).
But, when Kraft points out that these legal issues are "extremely important" and getting more and more complicated; he's really not supporting Goodell. Rather, he says that the NFL needs a clearly defined role for the commish (i.e. they don't currently have one; which is a veiled criticism of Goodell) and because Goodell keeps handling legal issues - without such a clearly defined process - he keeps finding himself on the firing line (i.e. it's been a disaster; which, again, is a veiled criticism of Goodell). So how does the NFL fix this current problem?
Well, he then points to the NFL's past issues and how the Commissioner was hired specifically to handle it. So, when the NFL's biggest issue was marketing? They brought in Pete Rozelle because that was his specialty. When the league's biggest issue turned to anti-trust litigation? They brought in Paul Tagliabue. When the NFL wanted to focus on media? They brought in Goodell....
"So, I think each of the three of them in succession played an important role and a timely role for what the need was at the time.”
But this? It tells me that Goodell's very need, and his role, is a thing of the past....