The NFL is a business first

There’s a lot going on in the news in reference to the NFL. Especially, how the NFL is handling everything with their latest slew of PR nightmares. There are questions that are left open and opposing views on how the matter is being handled. Should Ray Rice’s employment be terminated? Should Adrian Peterson be banned from all team activities? Their infractions were things done in their personal lives. The question then is, should one suffer professionally for things done privately? If so, how much is too much? What’s the proper action to take when handling these types of issues?

The NFL: An Objective Business Perspective

Now, I’m not going to sit here and tell you that I’m a hardcore football fan, but the business of the game I understand very well. The system in simpler terms is much like any other corporate structure. You have team owners (employers); and their employees: their administrative staff, including the coaching staffs, and the player’s themselves. The target market of the business is the fans that watch games (on field and off). The product being produced is a winning season and possibly a championship win. If you’re with me so far, we have the employers, the employees, the market, and the product of the business called the NFL.

Next, what needs to be examined, is what is the agreement that is being made by employee and employer. In most businesses, when the employee is hired on, there is a background check and a drug screen conducted to evaluate the productivity and overall conduct of the employee that is signing on. The key point to recognize is that character evaluations are administered by employers, but that happens prior to employment and grants the employer the ability to predict the utility of a prospective employee before their assignment begins.

For example, a company wants to employ a new accountant, but on further investigation of his background found that they have had multiple counts of fraud on their record. On gaining this new information regarding the new employee, still being under a probationary period, the company decides to let the employee go and hire another prospect. This allows the company to avoid any backlash from employee if, indeed, “old habits die hard”, and protects the company’s bottom line (because this type of information can determine an employee’s performance for the company; and we all know if it doesn’t help, it most likely hinders).

The NFL does this as well. The draft day process is the same process. Athletes compete for positions in the NFL on various teams, the teams themselves do the necessary research on the player to see if his record fits with their plan. At this stage, teams generally review the player’s history and look for anything that could present problems down the line as far as team conduct, PR nightmares, etc. If you haven’t seen it, Draft Day is an amazing movie that takes a look at that business side of the game and takes an interesting look into all of this.

Devil’s Advocate

To keep things interesting, lets argue the point that firing players because of personal drama is a bad call. Rice should not have been terminated, and Peterson should not have to be excluded from team events.

On and off the field

The NFL’s job (the NFL commissioner in particular) is to make sure that players conduct themselves respectably on the field. Where it gets interesting is an employee’s conduct off of the field. For football players their income comes from two avenues. Work done for the League, and the endorsements they sign with. This is where codes of conduct apply on and off of the field. When a company employs an athlete or celebrity they are utilizing their personality and character to sell the company’s product. When consumers look at a particular item and see their favorite celebrity attached to it the thought is, “hey, they are good people, they represent goals and principles that I have. I admire that, so I think I’ll by this product, because this is for me.” More or less, we think like this [ -__-].

This means, when a celebrity behaves negatively it negatively impacts the product that they endorse. The brand is tarnished by the celebrity’s association with it. What company’s do in these cases is cut ties with the employees as to say, “we as a company abhor this type of behavior.” This method stabilizes the brand and rallies the consumers in agreement. This strengthens the bond between the company and its consumers/shareholders. So, from this viewpoint, on the field conduct is the responsibility of the league; and off field the responsibility of product endorsement contracts.

Employment for Joe Schmoe

Think about it like this, if an employee works for a company and has some negative personal issues that affect their family or personal life does that translate to the office? There are employees, that lead the darkest of lives outside of the office, but, when they come in to the office, contribute to the company’s efficiency with ease. The company hired them on to do a job and do so with no issues. If they are successfully meeting the job requirements, when their personal lives lead them to a ditch in the road, as long as their fulfilling their job requirements, is it right for their office to terminate their employment based on those private issues?

So, for a player and their personal issues, does that translate to termination? Many would say that the action taken should be consistent across the board. So, in their defense, if the players still perform their duties to their full potential, what they do in their personal lives should be of no concern to their workplace, because their work performance is still above reproach. They have value for the company.

Realistically…

The NFL is a business after all, and the reality of the situation is that athletes are NOT like everyday employees. Not only are athletes and other celebrities responsible for their work and conduct in their chosen fields, but they are responsible for their conduct in their personal lives. These codes of conduct have been added to their player contracts as well as the contracts they sign for endorsements. Not only that, but they are public figures. The difference between public figures and private citizens is what is suggested in the titles themselves. Public figures don’t have the luxury of truly having a private life. All of the things done in their private lives are up for grabs if the media can get a hold of it. The downside is that there is little if anything information that they can keep to themselves. The upside is that for this risk to their personal lives they make insane amounts of money.

That being said, the NFL chose what was beneficial for business and their choice is now being scrutinized by the public. Quite frankly, it’s none of our business. The NFL made the necessary decisions that it had to so that they could turn the best profit and service their market by producing the best product. When the product began to deteriorate, they had to cut the necessary employees so that they could correct their product and restore faith in it from their market. Consider the timeline, The Ravens didn’t cut Rice until it became a media catastrophe. Up until that point, his personal life was questionable, but it hadn’t gotten to the point where the team was affected and, in turn, the product.

Ray Rice, purely from a business viewpoint, conducted himself in a way that put he, his fiancée, his family, and his company at risk. His actions impacted the morale of his teammates in the fact that the media would now be breaching their privacy to find out more information on him. This impacts the product of a winning team and the NFL took the steps necessary to eliminate that disruption of production. Ray Rice was fired, end of story. The life of a public figure. They know the risks.

Personally…

As man… As a human being, this happenstance is disappointing. Should Janay Palmer have hit her, then, fiancée? No not at all. There’s nothing so extreme that it requires you to hit another human being to get your point across. It’s a double standard that is grossly abused in today’s world. Women, under the assumption that a man can never lay a hand on them, feel comfortable (justified even) laying hands on a man without fear of the repercussions that come with hitting another human being. Should Ray Rice have laid out Janay? Absolutely not. No matter what she’s doing you have a responsibility as the lead of that relationship to handle situations with a calm head, no matter how stressful the exchange is. He hit her as if she was his physical equal. She charged after him like she was his physical equal. They are not, in any way, equal, physically. No human being should feel as if they have a right to inflict physical harm on any other.

The point here is that, in these situations, it really is a matter between the people involved. However, we live in a culture where we are encouraged to get so deeply involved in the lives of celebrities. Reality TV shows fool viewers into thinking that we really know what’s happening in someone’s life. The actual reality is that TV is grossly misleading (I shouldn’t have to say that). Most of these shows only give you a product that they know will keep you watching (after all TV is a business too). We think we know someone and their situation simply because we see them on TV or in the public eye. The fact is, we are only objective viewers of a situation we know nothing about. These are moments where we really need to remind ourselves to mind our own business and let things play out the way they will.

These are just my thoughts on the matter. Take them how you will. Comment below and lets start the discussion.