Showing posts with label roger goodell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label roger goodell. Show all posts

Thursday, July 30, 2009

NFL Commissioner Press Conference on Michael Vick - full text



More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



The Michael Vick issue has drawn a variety of views and opinions like mine above, but only one person has the ability to determine his football future and that's NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. A press conference was held Monday in New York where Commissioner Goodell presented his decision regarding the former Atlanta Falcons quarterback, but we've only seen bits-and-pieces of text. Here's the full press conference transcript, courtesy of NFLMedia.com



NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL


Press Conference – Michael Vick Conditional Reinstatement

July 27, 2009


NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell: Good afternoon. As all of you are aware, I’ve made my decision regarding Michael Vick and I would be happy totake your questions. But before we do, I would just like to make a couple of points which I hope will be helpful inputting it into context.

First, and most importantly, we all want to recognize that the conduct that Michael engaged in was not only horrific, but it was cruel. And we all certainly recognize that and I believe after meeting with Michael that he recognizes that also. We engaged in a very thorough process. It was very carefully done and very thoroughly done. Multiple members of our staff were engaged as well as me. We went through his court records. We went through evaluations. We went through decisions. We know all the terms of his parole. We went through every detail, including about a four-and-a-half hour meeting with Michael last Wednesday here in the New York area. So we take this as a very serious matter. We’re dealing with a young man’s life. Our process was similarly reflective of the seriousness of that.

As you know, he can sign now with an NFL team. He can practice without delay with an NFL team. He may play in the final two preseason games of this preseason. And once the regular season starts, he can practice if the team so chooses. And I will decide within the first six weeks of the regular season when and whether he will be reinstated to play from there.

He has been very open and fully cooperative as well as his advisers and his counselors. I will say that one of the most important things that we talked about is that nobody gets through life alone. That you always have to have a mentor. That you always have to have somebody who will give you guidance and support at critical moments. Michael needs that right now and I have asked Tony Dungy to play a more formal role on my behalf but also on Michael’s behalf to serve as a mentor to Michael to help him and guide him through some very difficult decisions he’s going to have to make going forward. I do not expect he will be his only mentor,but Tony will be a big part in determining who else will serve as advisers to him. But I know Tony and Michael, who I spoke to earlier today on a conference call, both take it very seriously and are committed to making sure that they work closely together to make better decisions going forward.

I do believe that this transitional approach that we have outlined for Michael is the best thing for him, that it has the best opportunities to lead to success for a young man who has his life ahead of him. Whether he makes it on the field in the NFL is something that will be determined on the field. But he has some big decisions off the field to make in the way he conducts himself. I think he is at a point right now where he is prepared to make those decisions and hopefully conduct himself in a more positive way. I have said repeatedly,and many times before, that playing in the NFL is a privilege, we are held to a higher standard and it is not a right to be an NFL player. I think Michael clearly understands that is his responsibility and I think it is his opportunity now to earn that privilege back again. And that is up to Michael.

But one final point before I take your questions. As I’ve said many times before, I am very proud of NFL players. They do incredible things and exceed the standards that we set for them. And they do that both on and off the field. And I am proud of the things they do off the field. Obviously when you are dealing with 2,000 young men, you are going to have mistakes, bad judgments, and people are going to do things that you are not proud of. Obviously this is one case. But I hope something positive can come out of something that has been a very tragic circumstance and hopefully people will understand that the individual here has the right to earn that opportunity back again. He will be held accountable for that. He will be held accountable for his life management plan that he submitted to me, the things he says he is going to do, and I will make sure that he does that in responsible fashion, as will Tony.

Have any teams expressed an interest in signing him yet?

That’s not something that I would get involved with. I work for all 32 teams. As far as what team signs him, that’s an individual club decision and they’ll have to make that individually with him and negotiate.

On Michael lying:

He was not candid with me. In fact, prior to starting the hearing we spent a few minutes together and it was the first thing he raised with me. That he was disappointed in himself. That he was direct in the fact that he lied about his involvement in dog fighting. And I accept his apology. I understand. I don’t like being lied to like anybody else. But this is something that we have to move forward from. Michael understands that I am judging him on his activities going forward, on the words that he said to me, and on the conduct that hopefully will support the words he expressed to me personally.

What needs to happen in the next 12weeks for him to be reinstated?

A number of things. First he would have to sign a contract with a team. He will have to begin the process of getting re-acclimated into that community and that team. He’ll obviously want to relocate his family. He’s been very clear about that. He will have to get a support system around him. He will continue to go through the programs of his parole and also the programs that the NFL has designed for him. He will work very closely with Tony and me if necessary to make sure that we are providing the support necessary and the guidance. But he has a very difficult transition ahead and we want to support him in that and give him that opportunity. But he recognizes he has to earn that and his actions will have to support that.

Should Vick not sign with any team during the preseason, will the parameters of this reinstatement change? Have you looked into or discussed that possibility, if he doesn’t have the opportunity with a team during preseason?

Well that’s not something I can control. Of course individual clubs and Michael and his team will have to make that decision who he signs with ultimately. I don’t expect I would modify the terms of what I call the transition plan in any marginal way, but I’ll leave that option open if necessary – but I don’t see that as being something that I would engage in.

PETA has said that they had wanted you to have him undergo a psychiatric evaluation to show that he is truly remorseful and that if not they would consider protesting any team that would sign him. Did you have him undergo any evaluations?

Yes, in fact we worked with animal rights activist groups and we are clear: we worked with their medical professionals about the aspects of our evaluations. Michael fully cooperated with all of those tests. Those tests did not indicate there was any reason he couldn’t make a transition forward, but they also recognized that counseling and other aspects of support will be important for him going forward.


You mentioned there’d be an NFL component to his program as well, things he would have to adhere to. Could you elaborate on what that means beyond obviously the probationary things you have asked him to do legally?


Well the primary one is the role of (former Indianapolis Colts Head Coach) Tony Dungy. I believe that Tony is a very successful individual, he is somebody that I respect his judgment, I think he is wise and will give good counsel. I think he is committed to helping Michael asa young man – not as a football player. He’ll try to do what he can to help him reestablish his life and help him move forward. That’s the first thing that has to happen here. All of the conditions which we have outlined in the letter – which we will be happy to provide you with – we will hold Michael accountable for. He will be responsible for fulfilling those,and they will be part of my judgment about how long the period of time is before I’ll allow him to play in regular season games.

Did you feel a sense of urgency to make the decision quickly? Obviously it’s only been a week since he completed his federal term. How much of a relief – I don’t know if relief is the right word – but how much of a relief will it be for you tohave made this decision quickly?

Relief is not a word I would use here. I believe that it was my responsibility to make a thoughtful, clear decision, and to do it on a very timely basis. I am not here to punish anybody; we’re here to extend player’s careers rather than limit player’s careers. That is important for us to do as long as they recognize the standards by which we are going to hold them accountable and everybody in the NFL. I believe Michael understands that. I believe he deserves the opportunity to earn his way back onto the field – but he will have to earn it. It is up to him now, and we will support him the way we have outlined in my decision. I believe that I had the responsibility to make a decision as quickly as possible, one that was fair, and I hope this one is seen as fair – although I fully recognize that some people won’t agree with it.

About how many people played a role? Obviously this is your decision and your name is attached to it, but I know NFL security, probably owners and coaches, players past and present probably played some role in you formulating your final policy.

Well I believe very much in getting a variety of opinions to get a broad perspective. I reached out to a variety of leaders of our country, our society. I’ve talked to a number of current and former players, I’ve talked to a number of current and former coaches, I’ve talked to former and current executives – but I am very cautious about competitive issues here. I would not involve someone that would be involved potentially in Michael’s interest as a football player. I was interested in Michael as an individual and what we could do to help reestablish his life and get him involved in a positive way regardless of if he played football. I do believe very much in getting perspectives, and I believe that has served me very well in making decisions. As you pointed out, ultimately, at the end of the day, I had to go into a room and make a decision. I reached out to a number of people, including DeMaurice Smith (head of the NFL Players Union), former players, and coaches and I believe I had all the perspectives I needed to make this decision.

Did you talk with any of the sponsors of the NFL, any companies and what their reaction would be? Was there anything you would bounce off of them?

I didn’t – I can’t specifically recall contacting people in that context. From time to time I may have spoken to a CEO about how to make decisions like this and what are the important factors even though the circumstances, I presume, would be wildly different. But I never thought about it in the context of the commercial success of the NFL. That’s never been a factor for me from day one. The intent here was to do the right thing with a young man’s life and for the game of football and the NFL, and that’s what I tried to do.

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

NFL Reports Plan Of Layoffs At All NFL Business Units

NFL Reports Plan Of Layoffs At All NFL Business Units

NFL Reports Plan Of Layoffs At All NFL Business Units

This massive economic collapse has taken many companies and people into lower positions of wealth and caused many to lose their jobs at historic rates.  Well, after years of incredible growth, it was thought that the sports industry was immune to these developments surrounding the credit crunch.  


Not so. 


I received this email from the NFL's director of communications Greg Aiello:



  As part of an overall cost-cutting plan in response to the slumping economy, the NFL today confirmed plans to reduce its staff by approximately 150 employees during the next 60 days.
       There are 1,100 employees in three NFL locations around the country: league headquarters in New York; NFL Films production facilities in Mt Laurel, New Jersey; and NFL Network and NFL.com production facilities in Los Angeles.
       A voluntary separation program will be offered to personnel this week as a first step in the staff reduction.
       "These are difficult and painful steps," Commissioner Roger Goodell said Tuesday in a memo to his staff, "but they are necessary in the current economic environment. I would like to be able to report that we are immune to the troubles around us, but we are not. Properly managed, I am confident the NFL will emerge stronger, more efficient and poised to pursue long-term growth opportunities."

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell On President-Elect Barack Obama

On NFL Chat , I asked NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to share his thoughts on the election of Senator Barack Obama as President of The United States.  This is what he said:

"National elections are always exciting for me. I am glad we have elected a new president. It's time for us all to come together. President-elect Obama is inspirational and I look forward to supporting him as he begins his new term."  

Friday, October 17, 2008

NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL FALL MEETING ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA – OCTOBER 15, 2008 - NFL Media.com

NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL FALL MEETING ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA – OCTOBER 15, 2008

RE: Lengthening the regular season to 17 or 18 games.

…to support our relationship with our fans, because of the length of the season. That included weather conditions, with the potential for the season to go into late February. It involved, obviously, our relationship with the players, our relationships with media companies and the quality of the preseason. We’ve discussed this also in the context of the offseason. Again, that goes to the part about football readiness and how there’s greater interest from our fans of having a longer and deeper relationship with the NFL all year round.

I’m not suggesting playing games all year, but there was a suggestion about idea of a spring game of some type. A preseason-type game.

Q: You don’t want to give us an offseason, do you?

RG: We know you don’t want one.

Q: Any suggestion that two preseason games would hurt the evaluation process for teams as they make their final roster cuts?

RG: I think that’s what we mean about football readiness. I think that has to be evaluated. From a football perspective, there are two purposes. One, you want to get your team ready. Two, you make your evaluations of who will make your team. Those are the two primary objectives. We want to make sure teams have the ability to do that.

The likelihood is that teams will adjust to this, work in more scrimmages or other ways to evaluate players. The second point is, and I think I mentioned this yesterday, a developmental league of some type. That’s another question that a lot of clubs raised: how do we continue to develop our players?

Q: Before there is a vote on this, will the proposal include a definitive number (17 or 18 games), or will there be more discussion as the CBA negotiations move along?

RG: First, we have a lot more work to do on the analysis. This is something we will continue to pursue and will continue to evaluate. Eventually, we’ll have to decide strategically which proposal would be most beneficial to our players, our media partners, and other parties involved.

Q: Do you have a timetable for when you’ll decide on a proposal and then make it?

RG: We’re working on a proposal now. The major focus is analyzing the labor agreement and assessing the impact that this could bring to the table. We’re talking about cost recognition, the overall economics of the labor agreement, including stadium construction, retired players, and potential of expanding to more regular season games within the 20-game format. All of those things are factors that we’re considering.


Q: Is it clear whether or not the proposal will be 17 or 18 games yet?

RG: There are different viewpoints on that. I would say the prevailing thought that I sensed in the room was that it would be 18 games rather than 17 right now. People were still debating that.

RE: Are you exploring expanding the number of teams in the playoffs?

RG: There was some discussion of that. That came up. Some folks thought that was important to consider and include. Others had a different view on that also.

Q: What is your personal preference?

RG: We have to evaluate it a little bit more. I think it should be very special to get to post-season. I think to set a bar where to make it into post-season you have to achieve success, and make that special, is something we should continue.

RE: Super Bowl ticket prices

RG: The core prices have been set. We’re still evaluating some things.

RE: NFLN and whether there is any chance that negotiations with Comcast will be restarted before there’s a ruling by the judge

RG: We would hope so. We still believe that this should be settled at the negotiating table. Ultimately, that’s what’s in the best interest of all parties, most particularly the consumers. We would like to engage in a dialogue. We think the FCC ruling is significant from the standpoint that it is very clear that there is discrimination. We would like to get that done either at the negotiating table, or if we’re forced, to go through the process with the judge.

RE: When the last negotiations took place with Comcast?

RG: I’ll have to get back to you on that.

RE: Issue of players being fined after the game on plays that did not draw a penalty

RG: It’s always been an issue. That’s not new or recent. We’ve had that over the years, and it happens. When you see something that’s an illegal technique or something that we think that’s not proper and it wasn’t called, we’ll take whatever actions are appropriate to make sure the player and the coach understands that’s not permissible.

Q: You don’t feel it weakens the officials’ calls?

RG: I don’t think so. I think they do a great job.

RE: The role the economy will play in the upcoming season for the league and the clubs

That’s a pretty broad question, but the reality is it’s going to impact us. The economy is impacting us directly, and our business partners and our fans. So we’re sensitive to that, and we’re looking at everything we do, whether it’s our facilities, our stadium financing, or our pricing at the club level. We’re looking at all of those issues to determine how to best work our way through this.

RE: Do you get a sense from the union that they are more sensitive to the risks the owners are taking on?

RG: I really believe the players recognize what’s going on out there. Our business isn’t immune. This is a very significant time with what’s happening with the economy. And I don’t believe our players would be insensitive to that either.

Q: Is that based on conversations with union executives or individual players?

RG: I have had discussions with union executives and with players.

RE: Is there a change? Previously, they ignored your complaints.  Has there been a change in emphasis?

RG: I wouldn’t agree that they ignored it. Obviously, the developments over the last couple weeks… We’ve seen this coming for quite some time. We’ve discussed this publicly and privately. There are risks in the marketplace. These risks are shifted to the owners and that’s a significant risk that usually results in difficult economic consequences. That’s what we’re seeing in the market. I think the players recognize that, certainly in the economy we’re in right now. 

RE: Priority on security for the Super Bowl

RG: People derive comfort from knowing that we’re taking significant steps to ensure their safety. People come to our stadiums and want to know they’re safe. This Sunday here in Tampa you saw a good example of that. We had the pat downs and want to be able to accomplish that. People seemed to be generally accepting of it. People recognize it’s part of an everyday reality. We have a significant initiative to improve the experience at the stadium, not only security but making sure people feel comfortable.

Q: What’s the priority for you in terms of ensuring that fan behavior is within these standards?

RG: The big issue to me is making sure that everyone who comes to our stadium enjoys the event and that nobody stays away from our stadiums because of others’ behavior. There was a point made in our presentation this morning that one individual’s actions can affect up to 20 people’s view of the experience at the stadium.  Most of the people who come to our stadiums come and enjoy them and have a great time. Unfortunately, somebody can behave in such a manner that can ruin it for a lot of other people. If they do, we are going to deal with it properly. First action is taken in the stadium, and the second is to revoke their ticket privileges.

Q: Is adding two more teams to the playoffs two total or two per conference?

RG: We haven’t gotten into the specifics of it. There have been proposals over the last 10 years or so of extending the playoffs.


RE: Those haven’t gotten much support. Do you sense more support?

RG: There was support last time. I think there was quite a bit of discussion when we realigned the league. It’s been a few years.

Q: Do you think there would be more support if it comes in conjunction with a longer season?

RG: I’m not certain whether there is a strong correlation between the two. They are two distinct decisions. I think in some people’s minds those might impact on their ultimate vote. But I think they are ultimately two distinct decisions at this point in time. As we evaluate it, we might draw that this is something that should be done as part of that, if we get to the conclusion that we should expand or restructure the season.

RE: Adding a potential regular season game to the back end of the season as opposed to the starting the season earlier

RG: That is how we discussed it this morning and that is how we’re analyzing it. On the other hand, there are people who want to discuss how fans perceive that if they are going to regular season games in January. That is something we have got to be sensitive to. We’re going to evaluate that and doing some studies on that to see what we can determine.

Q: So you’re still open to starting the season a little earlier?

RG: Yeah, I wouldn’t rule anything out.

Q: Are you looking at reintroducing the idea of reducing debt cap?

RG: Yes. In this kind of market every company is evaluating their debt levels and we’re not different from that. We have an obligation to do that on an annual basis. We’re all concerned about debt in this kind of environment. You can see what it can do. Companies that are over-leveraged – that is what this is – this is a massive de-leveraging on a global basis. It can have significant consequences for a business and that is what we want to avoid.

Q: Is it a concern that the Union will once again file a complaint if the NFL wants to lower its debt?

RG: They very well might, but we’re running our business. We have to be able to run our business just like everyone else and managing your debt is a big part of that, just as it is for everybody.

Q: You mentioned a spring preseason game. Is there an appetite for that?

RG: It is interesting. That was raised by a few clubs. It is more in the context of what colleges do with their spring game. It can be in the form of a scrimmage. It was an interesting concept that has been raised before and was discussed this morning by a number of people.

Q: Is it one team playing another?

RG: It could be. It was an interesting idea, which we’ll look at. It was raised by more than one club.

Q: Do you plan to look into the assault charge against Larry Johnson?

RG: Yes.

RE: Are stadium costs the fastest rising costs you have?

RG: I’d have to look at it statistically. Either player costs or stadium costs, yes. Our costs continue to rise and revenues are under pressure right now.

RE: Backlash regarding the NFL going overboard on cracking down on over the top touchdown celebrations.

RG: It is a fine line between an emotion and enthusiastic response that is natural versus something that is predetermined that is nothing more than to affect the other team or reflect poorly on the game. We always try to find that balance.

Q: So you are not trying to discourage it when it is spontaneous?

RG: No. It is a passionate part of our game, it is a big part of our game so we don’t discourage that, but it can cross the line where it becomes staged and inciting to the other team, and that is a problem.

# # #

Thursday, September 04, 2008

NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL WITH WALL STREET JOURNAL

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell
With Matt Futterman, Wall Street Journal
August 14, 2008
Q: Do you go into a season with the mindset of what story you want to tell? What is the big picture for 2008?
Commissioner Goodell: No, I think that’s the great thing about football. I’ve said it repeatedly before. We’re the ultimate in reality television. We don’t know what the story is. Stories will unfold. We never would have been able to anticipate the Brett Favre story 45 days ago. Stories develop as the season goes on. Young players come through and perform, whether through injuries by somebody in front of them, or whether they just come in and perform at extremely high levels. I think that’s one of the things that makes the game so great – the unexpected always happens in the NFL.
Does last season’s success translate into an improved bottom line? Is there a direct correlation if there’s a huge amount of attention on the field with great stories, or is your reputation pretty well locked in place?
It’s not a direct or immediate benefit like that. What it really does to us is it just continues to grow the popularity of our game. When you can have the size of the audience that watched the Super Bowl last year be able to be so entertained and so excited by that game, it carries over into the next year and it develops new fans and it gives people another way to get involved with our game. And that’s what we’re in the business of doing – growing our game.
On the current situation with the owners opting out of the CBA and taking the position that the players have been given too much revenue:
I don’t look at it like that. I look at it as the labor agreement, when you negotiate a labor agreement, has to work for all parties, in this case, the owners on one level and the players on the other level. And it wasn’t working for the owners. And that’s why they took the step to say, let’s trigger out, which was an option they had, and let’s make sure that we start addressing the issues to make sure it works for all parties. And that’s simply what they did, and so that starts the clock and gives us the ability to start negotiating so that we can address the issues of what wasn’t working for the owners. Of course, if the players have issues that aren’t working for them, we’ll look at that also. But the reality of it is, the labor agreement has got to be flexible enough to address all of these issues and make sure that the game stays strong.
In the past would you say the owners have been satisfied with the status quo and generally pleased before this labor agreement?
I don’t know if I’d say that. I think there’s always been a give and take in the previous negotiations. It’s a structure where there are different forces at play during a period of time in any agreement, and the forces now are becoming pretty extraordinary. We have significant economic conditions that are changing the environment for owners and for every other business, by the way. Consumers are feeling it directly. We’re all feeling it. So there are factors that we’d have to consider there. There are risks in the marketplace as a result of that that changed the economics for the owners. There are aspects of the arrangement that just aren’t working for the owners that need to be addressed as soon as possible, and that’s why we terminated now.
Is big-market/small-market discrepancy at the root of some of this owner dissatisfaction?
No, those are two different issues. That was something that got mistakenly mixed together in the last negotiations. Those are two separate issues. The NFL has the greatest amount of revenue sharing of any professional sports league, and it’s one of the fundamental aspects of our league, of why we continue to be successful and why we continue to be the leader in professional sports; because we have done revenue sharing in an intelligent and responsible fashion for all clubs, and it allows all our clubs the ability to be able to get the revenue to compete. The labor issue is, simply, are the labor costs too high? So you’re getting dispute about the labor costs being too high for high-revenue or low-revenue clubs. It’s not working for the majority of clubs, which is why we had a 32-0 vote. So I don’t mix those two issues. We will always look at revenue sharing. We have looked at revenue sharing. We share all of our national revenue equally. We share our gate on a 1/3-2/3 basis, and even some of that is pooled equally in terms of visiting team shares. So I think there are a lot of things that we do very intelligently in our revenue sharing. We have continued to make modifications to that, and we will. But this is about the labor costs.
Does the revenue sharing have to be fixed as much as the labor costs do?
No. You always modify the revenue sharing based on where we are as a league. Where are the revenues coming from? Are they coming from local or are they national? You obviously have to keep your eye on that and make modifications as you go. We did that when we realigned the league several years ago. What we did is we essentially pooled the VTS, so there were no financial ramifications by realignment. That was an intelligent thing to do and allowed us to make the best possible decision for our fans on how the league is aligned. That’s the kind of intelligent decisions we make on a regular basis so that revenue sharing continues to be one of the fundamental aspects of our success.
How important was it to you to get Brett Favre back on the field once he said he wanted to play?
I think you have two things here. One is if he decides he wants to play, he has certain rights as a player wanting to play. At the same time, the Green Bay Packers have rights. They held his rights as a player. So they had competing interests there. They had equal rights which needed to be resolved. I was interjected at one level because of a tampering rule, but I was also interjected from the standpoint of he had to be reinstated by the commissioner. I wanted to make sure both rights were respected and that they reached some kind of a compromise that they both felt comfortable with. I don’t make a decision about who signs him or who doesn’t sign him; once he went back to the Packers, they resolved that matter between the two parties, which is the way it should be.
Does it feel good knowing Favre is still part of the equation, in terms of being on the field after his great season last year, and the fact that he’s been a face of the NFL for a decade or so?
Sure. Having Brett Favre on the field playing in the National Football League is great for us. I’m very direct about that. If he wants to play, it’s a great thing for the NFL, so we welcome him back. But as far as the rights between the team and the player, those are issues that have to be dealt with on the club level. That’s not something the commissioner directly gets involved with, other than to make sure that our policies and procedures are properly respected.
Is your biggest frustration these days the NFL Network?
I wouldn’t say it’s the biggest. I would say that it’s frustrating for us because we think we have very compelling product and we know there’s demand from our fans. We hear it repeatedly, and we’re looking for broad distribution of the network. We think it’s important to us strategically over the next several years, but more importantly, it’s about delivering more football to more fans. We would like to get that broad distribution and we’re working hard trying to figure out the best way of doing it.
You’ve been making the same argument for the NFLN that a lot of independent channels have been making for a long time. Is there a sense two to three years into it that this argument for broad distribution of the network isn’t going to get anywhere?
No, I wouldn’t say that. I think, if you look back at the history, and I’m not an expert as it relates to distribution of cable channels, but it’s not unusual that you have these types of disputes among cable operators and programmers about how they get distribution. So I don’t find that terribly unusual in this industry, from what I’ve observed. We just find it unfortunate the consumer, our fans, are losing at this point in time because they’re not getting this high-quality entertainment, and that’s what we want to try to resolve. We’re going to look at various ways of being able to do that, whether it’s improving the content and the product; how we can make the NFL Network better so we can get the distribution that we believe it deserves.
Has it been a money-losing proposition for the NFL so far?
No, that’s not the issue. We’re making money on it. Our issue is getting broad distribution so our fans get to see our games. That’s another fundamental aspect of our media policies – to make sure that our games are available to the broadest possible audience. That’s what we’ve done successfully with broadcast television. We’re one of the few sports leagues to be able to continue to place product on broadcast television. We want all of our games, when they appear, not to be in 40 or 45 million homes. We want them in 80 or 85 million homes. It’s proven that our content has that kind of demand. Its ratings and its audience levels are very consistent with the most popular programming, if it’s not the highest programming, in all of entertainment. That’s why we believe there’s demand for our product.
If you want to get the broadest distribution, why not just make a deal with ESPN?
RG: It depends on what deal you’re talking about with ESPN. What we’re looking for is to get the broadest audience with the best-quality product. We’re looking at what we can do to make this the most attractive programming and most attractive content out there. It has to be done in an intelligent fashion because this is an important strategic asset for us. We want to have something that talks about football 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. We’re not talking about something that’s promoting other sports or other entities. We’re talking about something where people can go to find football 365 days a year.
Is it something you think can be solved in the near future?
I don’t know. I sure hope so. We’re working towards it, but again, this is a long-term strategy. We’re going to continue to negotiate and try to find creative ways to make sure we get this distribution, and we’ll do it as fast as we possibly can because we know the consumers want it. But we’re only one side of the party here.
Is it difficult to keep your eye on that long-term strategy in the face of the short-term headaches?
No. I think the most important thing for us to do is always keep the eye on the long-term. The National Football League was not built in a short period of time, and its success is really reliant on us making sure we continue to keep the long-term focus on our challenges and our opportunities going forward.
In terms of going forward and how people are going to consume the NFL, and new media, including internet strategies, do you see games being digitally delivered down the road, or would that take too much away from the valuable broadcast packages?
The premise is to continue to be successful on broadcast television. What we’re finding with various experiments going on with digital media, whether it be the recent experience with the Olympics, or what we hope to be able to determine through our experiment with NBC this season, are that these digital media opportunities are supplementing and adding to the audience for broadcast television. It appears in the short-term that may be a very positive development. So that would be a reason why we would continue to do these experiments – to learn more about it and learn how we can use these technologies to be able to broaden our television audience.
So you’re trying to prove to the broadcast networks that digital media wouldn’t detract from the broadcast audience, but potentially add to it?
Again, the fear always is that these are going to detract from the broadcast audience. It doesn’t appear to be the case. In fact, what it does is create greater interest in the broadcast. So what we’re looking toward is what it is we can do with our digital media assets to broaden that audience, to create more excitement, to create more interest, so that we broaden our broadcast audience and become more successful on broadcast television.
The broadcast outlets are always going to want more. Are you in a position where you’re going to be able to give it to them? There’s been talk of shortening the preseason and extending the regular season. Do you think you’re heading down that road?
That’s a little different. What we’re trying to do is make sure that all of our content is high quality, and it meets the standard of what we think the excellence of the NFL content is. So what we’re looking at is whether the preseason is really that high quality that we expect from NFL programming, and I don’t think it is. So what we’re looking to do is say, can we convert some of that programming into high-quality regular-season programming? We play a 20-game season right now – 4 preseason and 16 regular season. We’re evaluating whether we’re better off with a 17-3 ratio or an 18-2 ratio, again, to improve the quality of that content even further. And it does provide more content in that fashion.
Do you have a preference for which way it would go – would you start before Labor Day or go longer?
Interestingly enough, we do have the option to move the Super Bowl later. The current analysis would indicate that we would go after Labor Day, a week later in the season or two weeks later in the season.
So you’d stick with starting it when you do now?
Yes. That’s when football season is. We celebrate the start of football season with Kickoff when we come back from Labor Day and everyone’s done with summer vacation. It’s football season.
Do you have to end the season by the Daytona 500?
No. Our view is, when we’re getting into that late season, we really own that calendar, and that’s an opportunity for us to continue to build our game.
Do you see a team in London or Paris by 2025?
Very possibly. Our experience in London in the short-term has been extremely positive. We played our first regular season game there last year. The mayor told me we could have sold the game out ten times over, and that’s in a 90,000-plus seat stadium. We came back again this year with another game and we sold out the tickets in, I think, an hour and a half. We have a tremendous interest and a tremendous fan base over there. We have great media interest over there. So I think that’s a marketplace that clearly could support an NFL franchise, and that’s one of the things that we’re looking at. How do we continue to play more regular-season games over there and develop that interest so that it could handle a franchise at some point in the future.
Would an overseas franchise go to London first?
I wouldn’t foreclose it. It could go someplace else, but the UK is a very developed media market and a very developed NFL market. We have a strong fan base there. So I would think that’s probably the leader in the clubhouse.
In the shorter term, could there be an NFL team in Canada?
I don’t know. Right now we’re doing what we can to try to broaden the fan base for our Buffalo Bills. Several years ago we worked to regionalize that team in western New York. It’s been very successful, but as that market continues to have challenges, we’re looking to see how we can broaden it even further. So they’re playing a game in Toronto, as a matter of fact, this evening, and there will be a regular-season game later this year there. That has really helped the Buffalo Bills be stronger in Buffalo, and that’s what we’re hoping to do. But it’s also reached out to another set of fans that we know we have in Canada that are able to come and attend a game in Toronto.
Being from the Buffalo area, is it a high priority for you that there always be an NFL team in Buffalo?
I think it’s a high priority for us to make sure all of our teams are successful, and we look to see what we can do to make them successful.  
###

NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL WITH BOOMER ESIASON AND CRAIG CARTON


From NFL Media.com

NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL

WITH BOOMER ESIASON AND CRAIG CARTON

WFAN Radio – September 3, 2008


Q: Welcome back to the show, Roger. How are you doing?


Commissioner Goodell: Great, Craig. It’s good to be with you.

On thoughts about Gene Upshaw’s death:

It was a sad day. We had a memorial service for him in Washington yesterday and it was a terrific service for a terrific man. I’ve said many times that I don’t know if there are many people who have contributed more to football as an individual, both as a player and as the NFLPA executive director. He’s done great things for football and it was a sad day for all of us.

On how Upshaw’s death will affect labor peace and negotiations with the NFLPA:

I haven’t spent a lot of time thinking about it because we’ve been so focused on losing a great man, but he clearly is going to leave a void because of the great leadership Gene had provided. On the other hand, he’s created a tremendous organization in the NFLPA. They represent the players extremely well; they’re going through the process to select a successor to Gene. I’m sure they will find someone who is very capable and we’ll sit down at the table and discuss it. As you mentioned, we have some time here. This is not a focus for fans in the short term, I’m confident we’ll be able to sit down at the table and get these issues resolved.

On what types of activities are going on before the game as part of the spectacle that is Kickoff Weekend:

Boomer, you know we don’t do anything small in the NFL and tomorrow is no exception to that. We’re having a big event in Columbus Circle; there will be free football and a music event. We’ll have Usher, Keith Urban, Natasha Bedingfield and a lot of great Hall of Famers, a lot of great Jets and Giants on hand to celebrate the return of football and the kickoff to the 2008 season.

Do you get giddy like a fan on the eve of the opening game or is it too business-like for you?

Absolutely, I’m still a fan at heart. I’ve been thinking about this for the last several months. The buildup to the season is always great for us; we have great stories coming into the season and I have no doubt it is going to be an even better season than last year, and that is a hard mark to beat. I have as much enthusiasm and excitement as every other fan.

On Brett Favre in a New York Jets uniform:

It is great to see Brett back playing football. When he retired in February everybody knew they were going to miss a great player and when he decided to come back and play it was great for the NFL and the Jets were the beneficiary of that. This year they have the opportunity to have #4 playing in the Jets’ green and that is great for Jets fans and it is great for all football fans because it will be something wonderful for them to follow.

On role in Brett’s return to the Packers and NFL:

It wasn’t particularly difficult, Craig. My job as commissioner is to make sure that all of our rules are followed. Brett had rights as a player who wanted to continue his playing career and the Packers had right also and I just wanted to make sure those were respected. Eventually they got together and resolved that it was better for Brett to move on. They went and had discussions with a number of teams and the Jets ended up being the winner for Brett. I think that is great for all of our fans and I think it may end up being one of those circumstances that turns out to be great for Packers fans and for Jets fans.

From a commissioner’s standpoint, do you prefer the story of a player playing almost his entire career with one team and retiring with that team?

You’re right, there aren’t many players that have greater credibility and reputation as Brett Favre does both on and off the field. I would only argue this point: having Brett Favre on the field and having our fans have an opportunity to enjoy the way he plays the game, which as you know has genuine excitement and enthusiasm, I think that is great for a fan. I may disagree from the standpoint of seeing him retire. It’s great that he is still playing football and we’re glad to see him back on the field.

On the fan conduct policy:

First off, it was not a reaction to the Jets’ circumstances. This is something we have been looking at for the past couple of years. It is something we have heard from our fans about, and the core issue that we are trying to address here is to allow anyone to come to an NFL stadium and enjoy the experience and not have it ruined by somebody else. We want people to come and have a good time. We’re not trying to create an atmosphere that lacks in enthusiasm. We’re trying to create an atmosphere where everyone in the stadium is enjoying themselves and can bring anyone they want to the stadium knowing they are going to have a positive experience.

I’m comfortable that that is going to happen and each club is going to deal with it in their own way because it is different in each community.

On whether this policy is in response to what other fans have asked you to do based on their in-game experiences:

That is absolutely right, Boomer. It is something I’ve heard consistently from fans, that it is getting harder and harder for them to go to the stadium because of the behavior of some of the other fans. It is a very limited number of fans that behave in that fashion. We want to make sure we say to those individuals, “Listen, you have to come and enjoy the experience responsibly, and don’t ruin it for others.”

On tailgating:

Craig, nobody tried to say we’re getting rid of tailgating. Let’s try to keep this in perspective here. We’re not suggesting that you’re going to stop enjoying yourself going to the stadium and that you’re not going to stand up and show a lot of enthusiasm. That is an overstatement and it is just not fair.

On the Personal Conduct Policy and if it will lead to fewer off-field problems now:

I certainly hope so. We have 2,000 young men and almost every one of them are outstanding young men, as both you and Boomer know. You always have a few guys that just don’t understand their responsibility as NFL players and their roles as players in their communities. It’s something that we thought was important to do because most of our players – virtually all of them – are doing great things in the community, and the ones that aren’t reflect poorly on them as a group, and on the NFL. So I think it’s something that was important for us to do, and I do believe our players understand it and support it. They were part of developing the policy and I think it’ll have a positive impact, but this is something that will take some period of time to get through because it’s got to reach everybody – not only NFL players, but every college player and every high school player so they know if they want to play at this level, you’re going to have to represent the league and your team and your community in a positive way.

On the situation in New Orleans and the Saints playing their home opener Sunday in the Super Dome:

Yes, the Super Dome came through with very minor damage. They’re still working on getting electricity back, but we are going to be playing the game as scheduled – 12 pm local time, 1 pm east coast time. It should be an exciting start for them because it represents so much to that community and it represents so much the spirit of those people in that community and how they continue to come back from Hurricane Katrina, and certainly now with the latest incidents, they really have just done themselves proud. We’re happy to be part of that celebration to show that New Orleans is going to continue to be a great community.

On the use of PSLs with many new stadiums:

I’m not offended by them. In fact, I think more customers are starting to understand there’s value to the PSLs. This is something now that they own and they can sell that at some point in the future if they so desire and get value for that. The experience we’ve had in other communities is that the PSL was actually a benefit to the fans, and also, it’s a way to get new stadiums built and it’s been effective in other communities. This is a privately funded stadium. You know the price tag, and it’s an expensive project, and this is a way to try to close that gap.

On whether there is a concern that this will price out blue-collar fans:

Yes, absolutely. I think it concerns our teams, too. I think both the Jets and the Giants have been very sensitive to that. They’re taking different approaches to how they’re pricing PSLs, but they’re both very concerned with that and making sure that their fans can continue to come to the stadium and support both teams. I think that’s something you always have to be concerned with. You always have to recognize that it’s a heavy load for consumers, and it’s a great piece of entertainment, but you want to make sure everyone has that same access.

# # #

Monday, August 04, 2008

The Commish Speaks on rookie salaries

Goodell speaks out on rookie salaries By Ralph Garcia for Football Reporters Online 8/1/08

Several weeks back, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell made his feelings about the rookie pay scale known. He called it ridiculous and rightfully so. Well no kidding commish. I like that he mentions a system where the younger players can renegotiate their contracts after they have proven themselves.

He made another great point when he said that when the last CBA was approved no one took into consideration the hit the economy would take. The affect it had later has made us want for the old days. We need to get back to the days where a player would earn his money by his play. Now these days we are losing core players. Players that have taken these teams to playoffs and made their mark in the league are being lost to the salary given to unproven talent.

In the past you would have to work hard to earn your pay and now all you have to do is have a great college career and you are set for life. Forget the player that has settled his family in a city and then has to move on a couple of years later due to the cap. So a big applause to the commish and lets hope something can be worked out where the rookies get their money and those who have worked for theirs get paid right then and there. Where you earn your keep and not get paid for what you have not earned yet.

Monday, June 02, 2008

Pacman Returns-for now...

From NFLMedia.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

6/2/08



NFL STATEMENT ON LIMITED REINSTATEMENT OF ADAM JONES:



Commissioner Roger Goodell notified Adam Jones today that, effective immediately, he may participate in organized team activities with the Dallas Cowboys, including training camp and preseason games. In a letter to Jones, Commissioner Goodell wrote that a final determination on his reinstatement for the 2008 regular season will be made by September 1. Commissioner Goodell told Jones that his continued participation in the NFL depends on demonstrating that he can conduct himself in a lawful and reliable manner. Jones will be expected to continue the personal conduct program established for him by the NFL and the Cowboys and to avoid further adverse involvement with law enforcement.


My Take: That Means No more Topless Bars Pacman!! If you really want to Play in the NFL it's time to show you mean it and keep your Nose clean!

Monday, May 26, 2008

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell Q & A At NFL Spring Meeting



COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL AT SPRING MEETING
Atlanta, GA – May 20, 2008

News / Release - Source: NFLMedia.com

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell Q & A At NFL Spring Meeting



ROGER GOODELL: We had a four-hour meeting this morning and covered a lot of subjects, including labor. We talked a lot about other related issues with respect to our stadiums, what we’re doing to improve the experience for our fans in the stadium. We spent a great deal of time on financial matters and the labor matter. I know you want to speak about the labor matter so I’d be happy to take your questions. I will be back later this afternoon and I can take questions on other matters. But we’ve got sort of a short timetable before we start this afternoon. The Super Bowl voting is this afternoon at 1:00 PM.

What signal does opting out send in terms of league’s position?
RG: It’s a very clear signal that the ownership does not believe that this deal is working. And it’s important for us all to sit down at the table and to try to address the matters that aren’t working for the ownership. There’s a very strong opinion in the ownership and the vote reflects that.

What has changed in the past two years to make this deal not work when it was agreed upon in 2006?
RG: Anytime you make a deal you don’t know how it’s going to work until you experience it. We’ve had two years now of operating under the new deal. Clearly, the economics are not working for the owners. Clearly, we have been investing more in stadiums and the costs of generating that revenue is become more significant. And it’s no secret what we’re going through from an economic standpoint that creates more risk in the marketplace.

Does making this decision now as opposed to the November deadline buy more time to negotiate with the players?
RG: It’s a fair point. There’s no question. We don’t need further time to analyze whether this is working or not working. It’s not working. It was the ownership’s view. It’s not a failure of negotiations. It’s a failure of the deal. So let’s get to the negotiations. It is a fair comment to say that this does give us an opportunity to sit with the players and understand the issues and get them to understand the issues and try to come up with some greater solutions.

Do you think the issues between high revenue franchises and low revenue franchises still exist and that’s the reason they are opting out?
RG: I don’t. As you know we share more revenue than any other sports league. This is about the issue of labor costs not about revenue sharing.

It’s been suggested that if the league proves that it is in dire financial straights, the union will listen and will look differently at the situation. Is that a realistic solution?
RG: We are not in dire financial straights. We’ve never indicated that. We’ve never stated that. What we’re looking for is a fair deal for both sides -- the players and the management. We had a meeting with the union roughly a week ago. We offered to show them more financial data and they attached a number of conditions to that that we found were unreasonable. So we didn’t get to that point. We are willing to make our case of why the deal isn’t working for us but it has to be done properly.

The union says that it was the league that attached conditions to the disclosure of the financial situation. What were they?
RG: I don’t remember right now. We’ll get it for you.

Can you attach a metric of financial distress in terms of higher cost? We know how much the salary cap is, but can you state the average player salary, player payroll, or how much the teams’ profit margins are down?
RG: Clearly more money is going to the players, both in salary and in benefits. That adds additional stress with respect to the economics of running a league and it leaves you less margins to operate within. When you have bumps in the road, which none of us can forecast, that has a significant impact on what we hope will be the economics of running an NFL team.

What is the message to fans who don’t pay attention to all the financial details and who just want to know about their football?
RG: We have guaranteed three more years of NFL football. It is our responsibility to work out these matters and that is our job and that’s what we’re going to get focused on immediately. We recognize how important it is to have NFL football. We’ve had labor peace for several years and we hope to continue that.

When are the next scheduled meetings with the union?
RG: We don’t have anything scheduled at this point in time. I’m sure I will speak with Gene in the near future and we’ll decide how to proceed on that level.

Will this come down to the deadline? What are the hopes it will get done prior to the deadline?
RG: It’s like most issues. Deadlines always are helpful. I think anytime you have a deadline it forces people to understand the consequences of not reaching an agreement. That’s what we all have to understand and hopefully cooler heads will prevail here.

Has there been any talk that having a 17th regular-season game in place of the fourth preseason game will create a bigger revenue pot?
RG: We actually are looking at that as one alternative. We are going to report to ownership today on our preseason and what we can do to improve the quality of our preseason. We think that may impact on some of the things that we want to talk to players about.

What would a 17th game do in terms of creating more room to get a settlement with the players?
RG: It will create new revenue. The thought process was that we might reduce the preseason by a game in return for that. The players will still play the same number of games, but it may give us an opportunity to put higher quality football out there. We are not satisfied with the quality of the preseason right now. We’d like to improve on that and that’s what we’re looking at.

In the league’s statement you mention the issue of recouping signing bonuses. How has that escalated as an issue?
RG: It’s probably highlighted in a large part by the Michael Vick issue. There are other cases such as Ashley Lelie and others. In the Michael Vick case, he’s not able to play football and as such he got a significant signing bonus and we are not able to recover that. That’s money that could be going to players who are playing the game right now. So we think that there are some adjustments there that need to be made that are beneficial to the veteran players, frankly.

If there is a lockout in 2011, have you talked to the three owners bidding on the 2012 Super Bowl and how it might impact that Super Bowl?
RG: There’s been some initial discussion on that. But we’re not that far down the road. Our thought process is: how do we get an agreement that works? We recognize how it could impact people, groups or communities who want to host Super Bowls. But, I don’t think we’re at a point now to really be focused on that.

What happens to the rookie class coming in at the 2010 Draft?
RG: The Draft is negotiated through, I think, 2011. We would have the Draft through 2011.

But the 2010 rookie class would be uncapped as well?
RG: Yes.

What is it about the preseason that is lacking?
RG: That’s one of the things we’re analyzing. It used to be that we had six preseason games. In today’s NFL, it’s become more of a year-round business. Athletes come in and they probably are better prepared for the season, both physically and mentally. Is it necessary to have four preseason games to get the players prepared to play in the regular season? There’s an evaluation of talent. Who should make the team? Who shouldn’t make the team? Of course, the big significant issue for us is the quality of it and what our fans are seeing. Is it the best way to promote the upcoming season?

If there is an odd number of regular-season games, is there a way to balance out home games?
RG: You play it by conference and you flip-flop it each year. So, the AFC would play nine home games in your scenario and next year the NFC would play nine.

During the fourth preseason game, often starters don’t even play. Would you expand rosters to compensate for more competitive games?
RG: We would look at that. That’s a reasonable point to look at. It’s a long season for the players. We want to make sure that the quality of the product is unmatched. So we would look at that.

Is there any indication that coaches wouldn’t just do the same thing in the third preseason game that they now do in the fourth and not play their starters?
RG: Maybe we’ll look at two [games].

The union argues that a lot of money comes out of the players’ share to help fund stadiums. How valid is that as an argument?
RG: It’s valid that they’ve given us a cap credit. But all of the risk falls on the NFL owners. They have to take the risk that if the project comes in they can finance it and sell against it. The players are just agreeing that they will give a credit on the basis of a certain amount of revenue going forward. It’s helpful. I don’t think it addresses sufficiently enough the concerns that we have as you’re building $2 billion stadiums.

What’s your biggest concern as you get to 2010?
RG: Getting an agreement. From our standpoint, we are just looking for an agreement. We will reach an agreement at some point. We would like to reach an agreement with the least amount of pain and turmoil. We hope we can do it at the negotiating table and in an appropriate fashion within the right timetable. We are not concerned about an uncapped year. With the kind of dollars we’re paying right now that doesn’t necessarily concern us. What we would like to do is keep a system that works for us and both parties.

If you get to an uncapped year, how difficult will it be to reestablish a system with a cap?
RG: In 1993 we did not have a cap system and we got one. I’m sure there will be a lot of rhetoric about no cap system if there isn’t one at that point in time. But we were able to make that transition before and I’m sure we can do it again if necessary.

Is it fair to say the agreement that started in 2006 was not a wise agreement?
RG: I don’t really look back at it that way. We all were making an effort to try to keep labor peace. We reached an agreement that we knew was going to be pushing the envelope. After two years of living within that system, we recognized it does not work long-term for us. That’s the way it goes.

With today’s vote to opt out, how will that affect any LA initiative with this degree of uncertainty?
RG: Uncertainty is never a great thing. So you have that and it could affect the potential for us to get a team in Los Angeles. It could affect the potential for additional revenue streams through television. It can have that impact. I hope it won’t. I hope that we’ll be able to reach that agreement. But there is that potential.

With the credits given by the union, what are some of the ways they would bear risk?
RG: They don’t bear the risk.

What would be some of the ways?
RG: I’m not going to negotiate with them publicly. The cost of generating revenue is becoming more and more expensive. They share in revenue. They don’t share in cost.

Will the discussion of having a 17th regular-season game be included in the labor discussions or is it possible that it can be moved faster through separate discussions?
RG: I guess it’s possible but I don’t know. We haven’t had extensive discussions with the union. Most of our analysis has been internal. Does it work? Is it something we want to pursue? Before we propose something we would want to think through all the issues that some of the people have raised here. How would you work 17 weeks by conference? We need to do more analysis. We would talk to the union at the appropriate time and see what their reaction is.

What is the status on the Marvin Harrison situation?
RG: We are just keeping very close to all of the investigators and making sure we understand the facts as soon as they become available to us. That’s all we can do until we have more facts.

Are you concerned?
RG: I’m always concerned when our players are involved with things. It’s premature for us to say anything because we really do not know enough of the facts.

Did you consider making a proposal to the union before opting out?
RG: We had a meeting with them. We felt that this deal was not working. That was the most clear message to send them. It’s really to get to the table and to start negotiating. Whether we make a proposal or they make a proposal first, the reality is we just have to get to an agreement. We didn’t feel the deal was working. We needed to make that clear so that we could start the negotiation.

How much has the increased costs of stadium financing exacerbated the issue of rising player costs?
RG: When you’re building $2 billion facilities, you can understand the stress that brings on a system. Generating the kind of revenue to pay down that $2 billion is significant. And you have the obligations to pay the players as part of that. So, that’s been a big issue. That’s one of the things that none of us could have foreseen. But, when you see what’s happened in the marketplace with respect to financing particularly the auction rate securities. That’s a big impact that the owners have to bear, not the players. That’s what I mean by about risk in the marketplace.


Welcome Zenophon!
Home Teams Releases Game Day Resources My Page
My Profile
Help
Log Out



NFL Media > Releases > News Story




News / Release

Commissioner Goodell -- Spring Meeting In Atlanta (Part 2 of 2)
05/21/2008
COMMISSIONER GOODELL PRESS CONFERENCE
NFL SPRING MEETING
Atlanta, GA – May 20, 2008, 5:00 PM

Commissioner Goodell: Regarding the Competition Committee agenda, we picked up many of the matters that we had tabled from the March meetings.

One of them was the coach-to-defense implementation of the communication system.

The second was the integrity of the game. The rules and the policy that we adopted in March, we went through the details of how that will work – specifically the certification, the duty to report, the spot checks and some of the technology we’ll be using.

Third point, the Competition Committee discussed what has been called ‘the hair rule.’ We have tabled that on the basis – it was my view – that there was further work to be done. As you know, in March I tabled it because I felt it was out of respect to the players – Alex (Marvez) is over here shaking his head, the Alex rule (laughter) – I thought it was important for us to hear directly from the players. We had a Player Advisory Committee meeting in April. There are some additional items that need to be followed up on, so I felt out of respect for the players that we should continue to work with them and address this to see if there is a reasonable compromise, which of course doesn’t include cutting their hair. That has been tabled.

One other issue is that we have expanded our international practice squad to 16 teams for the season.

Preseason. We had a pretty lengthy presentation at the end of today on how we would approach the preseason. It was innovative. It was discussing more of how we look at our offseason and the start of our offseason from Senior Bowl to Combine to The Draft to training camps and minicamps. How a player goes through the process of making a team is a very compelling story, and we call it “the journey”. It is something we’re going to do more work on as it relates to how we can create greater content for the NFL and present our players and the game at a time when there is more desire for NFL content.

We spent a quite a bit of time today on fan conduct. We look at the issue of our in-stadium experience as something that is critically important. We think that the experience can be improved. We are going to be working with our clubs to improve that. We want everyone to be able to come to our stadiums and behave properly. So we’ll be focusing on that, including the implementation of an NFL fan conduct policy which we will have out prior to the season. It was generally agreed among all of our clubs that we should be able to do better here and make sure all fans can come in and enjoy the experience.

Personal conduct was raised and discussed again at length. This is an ongoing issue as I told you one year ago. We are adding some additional aspects to our policy. The most specific one and the one of greatest interest will be implementing club fines. Clubs that have incidents, players, coaches, anybody involved with an incident, there will be a league fine attached to that, and it will escalate with the more incidents that you might have.

We spent a little bit of time also talking about our public service promotional platform. The discussion there was what the NFL should stand for and where we can make the greatest difference. I think our focus is on youth health and fitness and it’s something that we are going to be more focused on as we go into this season and clearly beyond that.

Then we spent a little bit of time on two significant anniversaries. This year, as you know, is the 50th anniversary of the ’58 Championship Game. We will be doing something special around that. Details are yet to be announced, but we went through some ideas with our clubs today. Next year will be the 50th anniversary of the AFL, and we started to advise our clubs of some plans we’re going to have to celebrate that significant time.

You know about the labor issue, of course.

Q: Personal conduct policy and if there is a set schedule for fining teams?
No, it’s part of our personal conduct policy. There will be a fine against the club if a player is suspended under the personal conduct policy. That will be paid to the league to help cover the costs of some of the resources and some of the things we’re doing to help support our players. It will escalate with the number of incidents that you have at any particular club, so if you have more incidents the percentage will go up, and it will be based off of the player’s salary.

Q: Is that for suspensions or arrests?
Suspensions. Any discipline under the personal conduct policy. In this case, specifically, the example I was giving you of personal conduct was suspensions.

Q: This is not until you’ve adjudicated it?
Yes, that’s correct.

Q: Whether the policy will include other penalties besides money, such as draft picks?
It could. I think, to start with, we didn’t outline that but there’s potential that it could grow into that at some point.

Q: The amount of the fine is not tied into the severity of the infraction but rather the player’s salary?
The way we’ve outlined it to date, and we’ve just outlined a draft, but that is something we’re considering. That’s a reasonable issue – depending on the severity of the issue – we might consider that.

Q: Any discussion of expanding rosters or playoff re-seeding?
We did not discuss that.

Q: Proposal by Competition Committee regarding anti-tampering rule?
We did discuss that. The Competition Committee has met on that a couple of times. We’ll continue to discuss that. As you know, that’s really not an issue in the next several months. We’ll raise it again by October. We need to do some additional work on that.

Q: Fan conduct?
First of all, it’s very possible, and likely, that people can come to a game and enjoy alcoholic beverages or beer and do it very responsibly. What we don’t want is there to be abusive behavior. That includes foul language; that includes disrupting other people who are there to enjoy the game. We’re just saying, come and enjoy yourself, but don’t ruin it for others.

Q: Can you police that without having security everywhere?
We think we can, and we think some clubs are doing some very creative things here to get help to specific areas and to let our fans know that we expect when you come here you act civilized and allow everyone to enjoy the game. Have fun, scream as much as you want, but do it in a way that’s appropriate. I think I’ve told you in the past that I went to a game last year as a fan. I went through the gates and went through the whole experience, and it was a terrific experience. But that varies from stadium to stadium and probably game to game, and probably time to time. There’s no question that we probably have a more difficult time in the evening games. In some cases that’s because the normal season ticket-holder isn’t at that game and they give it to somebody else. That’s not a license to be unruly. In our opinion, you have a responsibility to whoever you give those tickets to, and you’re responsible for their behavior. It’ll be discipline, enforcement, and making sure that we communicate our message effectively.

Q: Any indication that there’s been an increase in bad behavior?
What’s precipitated it is hearing from fans. I hear a lot from fans and our teams hear from their fans, people who have had a bad experience. I think it’s something that we believe should be addressed effectively by the NFL, and so we’re going to take the positive step to do it and do it in a responsible fashion. I think it’ll be good for all of us to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to make sure this experience is a good one.

Q: Which teams are doing a good job?
I’m not going to go there. I think we can all improve. I think all of us are going to learn from one another about what’s working in some stadiums. The situation is going to vary, and there are some new factors coming in. The secondary ticket market is a new factor and we have to figure out how to handle that. There’s not a one size fits all solution.

Q: Teams will get fined for personal conduct rather than drug policy violations?
That’s correct.

Q: Termination of contracts and the new rules that go into place today?
We’ll be happy to get them all for you. There is an acceleration of some of the rules and we’ll get them for you.

Q: Having the NFL Draft in Los Angeles – criteria?
I also got a letter from the mayor that indicated interest, saying that they think this would be a great spot for the draft. We are looking at that – that’s one of the cities that’s indicated an interest in doing that. We have an interest also. I think it goes in with all of the changes that we’re thinking about with the draft – whether we move it to prime time, which rounds go on which day, and including rotating the site. That’s one of the things that we’ll continue to look at.

Q: Time frame?
It could be as early as 2009.

Q: When will the decision be made?
I would guess sometime in the fall just because of the plans necessary.

Q: If a player gets fined but not suspended for a personal conduct policy violation, will the team get fined?
That’s something we’re still working out. We haven’t made a final determination on that. We have not implemented the policy; we discussed how we were going to proceed on this. We gave them some broad outlines, but that’s one of the issues we’re still addressing.

Q: Fan behavior issue and not having enough security manpower?
Certainly if that’s required, and they need more manpower to address their issues, then yes, we would seek to make sure that they have those resources available to them. Somebody made a comment earlier when we were discussing this issue about statistics. One of the things we want to do is get standardized information so we understand exactly what we are dealing with and, more importantly, understand what’s effective. So as we implement changes and we have various programs to address this issue, we know what’s working and what’s not working so we can focus on what’s working.

Q: Are there legal issues surrounding that?
I have yet to find something where there wasn’t a legal aspect.

Q: The game he attended as a fan and his opinion on the perfect model of an ideal game for fans?
I went with my 13-year-old niece and I sat in two locations. I sat all the way at the top on about the 40 and I sat in the end zone, and they were two different experiences, to be honest with you. I was actually quite surprised at how different they were. I think the model is, from the time somebody goes to a stadium, and that includes getting into the stadium, going through the parking experience, going through the gates, sitting there, concessions, restrooms, the whole experience – making sure that they feel safe, that they’re comfortable and that they can enjoy the game without being interfered with. I think people have a right to do that, so I think that’s the experience. We want them to go home safely, and when they arrive home, feel good about what they just did that day.

Q: 26 players being arrested or cited since the Super Bowl this year vs. 27 players at the same time last year, and how much he feels the personal conduct policy is working when the numbers show that it’s not?
I don’t agree with that. If you look at any particular window, it might not look like there’s been significant progress, but I think there’s a greater recognition of the issue. We’ve showed that there was a significant reduction in numbers. I recognize there have been incidents in the recent few weeks which concern me, and that’s one of the reasons we’ve raised it again. We will continue to address this issue; it is still a priority for us. As I said last year, this is not going to get resolved simply by issuing a new personal conduct policy. It’s going to be continuing reinforcement of the message: you’re expected to act a particular way if you’re going to be involved with the NFL, period.

Q: Pacman Jones and a possible partial reinstatement so he can work out with the team?
I really wanted to get through today’s meeting, but I will meet with Adam. I will see what his progress is. Depending on his progress, I will make a determination on whether it’s appropriate to have him work out at the team facility or work out with the team. As you know, I gave him that right at the end of last season to use the facilities, and then he lost it. So, I’ll have to make a judgment about whether I think he understands his responsibilities as an NFL player and we’ll go from there.

Q: Has Adam made any attempt to meet with you to get this issue resolved while you are here in Atlanta?
I have not heard from him here.

Q: It sounds like that meeting could take place very soon?
Yes, it could.

Q: With regard to the CBA, could you say something to the fans about whether or not they should be worried at this point? What is your level of confidence about reaching a new agreement with the players before the deadline?
I think our fans should focus on enjoying NFL football. They have got that for the next three seasons at a minimum. It is our job to be able to address these issues off-the-field with the players, not through the media, but directly with the players and do it responsibly so that we reach an agreement that is good for the players, good for the NFL, and, most importantly, good for our fans.

Q: Any level of confidence?
I don’t go around making projections. It’s our job to reach something that is fair and appropriate. I’m sure I will be held accountable to that.

Q: Can you talk about the plan to have rookies tour the Hall of Fame and talk about the importance of this connection between rookies and players in the Hall?
It’s actually an idea that Michael Irvin gave me at the Hall of Fame last year and as you know he made what I thought was one of the most emotional and powerful speeches when he was inducted. We talked about the power of the Hall of the Fame. We talked about the power of the players who played the game and the coaches that coached the game. The players coming into the league should have an understanding of that history, that tradition, and the people that came before them. We actually looked at the possibility of moving the entire Rookie Symposium to Canton. That could not be done, at least in the short term, because of facilities. So, this was an alternative that we thought was appropriate, bringing the rookies to the Hall of Fame and letting them go through. Many of the clubs will be sending their own Hall of Fame players with them to give them an experience. I hope they’ll understand that they’re walking in some pretty big shoes and that they have a responsibility to the NFL and that they will someday hope to be in that Hall themselves as inductees.

Q: What evidence did you look at as far as the preseason?
We didn’t get specific. This was really more of a broader concept. We really talked about the journey that starts with the college players by going through the process of being selected in the NFL, making the NFL, and how compelling that story really is. We should really look at the preseason not as the beginning of the season, but actually as the end of the process where they learn how to become an NFL player. They either make it or they don’t, and that’s really very compelling content to us. We compared that to some of the other entertainment that is going on and how we thought that there is a place for this.

Q: Is this content for the NFL Network?
I think it would go beyond the NFL Network, but clearly it is why we believe a 24 hour, 7 days a week, 365 days a year channel talking about the NFL is a very compelling proposition because there are great stories. Other networks have other programming and they have other interests. We think talking football 365 days a year is good because there a lot people who want to talk about it and that’s good for us and it’s good for our fans.

Q: With the hair rule being tabled again, will players be able to wear their hair the way they have been for at least this season?
Yes, I think that is safe to say. We’re going to be meeting with the players again. We’re going to be discussing alternatives. We will be at least looking at some of those alternatives and maybe even trying some of those alternatives out if players are willing to do so in hopes we would have some sort of solution for this in the future. I would assume that it wouldn’t come in on a broad level for the 2008 season.

Q: Are there any updates on the Patriots scalping Super Bowl tickets or them allowing a player to practice while on injured reserve?
No.

Q: Was anything decided on the helmet communications system for the defense?
We passed it in March. Now it is just a question of implementing the actual communications system and making sure that it is in place and effective. We have done it within the policy we have passed in March.

Q: Have any teams experimented with it yet?
Not that I am aware of.

Q: Could there be fines levied against teams if there are too many rowdy fan incidents in their stadiums?
I never mentioned fines in that context. At some point that may be something that we entertain, but at this stage right now all the clubs believe that this is something we can do better at and we are going to be focused on how we can improve the experience. It is not a defining matter at this stage.

Q: Have you had any contact with Senator Specter since he called for an independent investigation last week?
No, I have not.

Q: Do you have any plans for that?
Nope.

###
Related Links: