Ray McDonald and the Dangers of Draft Pick Penalties for Character Risks
By Jason Lisk
The Chicago Bears and owner George McCaskey are justifiably catching heat for the Ray McDonald signing, which blew up in quick fashion. Yesterday, news came out that McDonald again got arrested in a domestic violence incident. The Bears announced his release shortly after the news broke.
Just a month ago, when the signing was announced, owner George McCaskey was asked about what went into the process of signing McDonald, and whether he had reached out to the accuser to get another side. He responded, “[a]n alleged victim, I think — much like anybody else who has a bias in this situation — there’s a certain amount of discounting in what they have to say.”
This mentality is prevalent, as we’ve seen with the Frank Clark case in Seattle recently, where they also did not seek out the opposite view of a situation.
I am critical of those moves, and every organization should have to answer for its decisions and be subject to criticism. However, something mentioned by Mike Florio today would go to far, in my opinion. Florio is no doubt connected to discussions within the league, so it must be taken seriously.
"The only way to get the attention of teams inclined to roll the dice on the Ray McDonalds of the world will be to attach the loss of future draft picks when a player with a propensity for getting into trouble gets into trouble. Last October, owners discussed the possibility of removing draft picks from teams with players who have multiple incidents under the Personal Conduct Policy."
So you know this could be coming. It’s an easy headline, kind of like saying you are against crime, or you are pro-puppy. It will garner some PR points.
It’s also a solution that will open a pandora’s box of problems if it actually happens (which means it can get in line with everything else Goodell has opened with his disciplinary track record.)
We know a couple of things are probably going to ring true. If you are talented enough, you will get more chances because of off-the-field problems, legal issues, or perceived distractions. On the other hand, certain players are less likely to be signed because of their past. Ray McDonald’s market for a job in the NFL was not what it was going to be if he did not have the prior arrests.
As I said earlier, I fully support criticism of specific cases like McDonald, or Clark, or Greg Hardy, especially when there is some hypocrisy involved. Teams should be free to make those bad choices.
How are we going to enforce a draft pick penalty? Here are just some of the issues that pop up once you go beyond the headline.
Who qualifies? What kind of offense means a team is potentially at risk going forward?
Like, is a weed arrest enough to say the team is on notice? A bar fight as a freshman in college while intoxicated? Or is it the amount of outrage and notoriety of the person involved?
Is there a statute of limitations?
If Ray McDonald had been out of the news for three years and then this happens, is that different from signing a guy who had been arrested, and then having it happen again a month later? Consider a draft pick who dropped for character reasons. I can think of several who are now playing who I have not heard a negative peep on in four years.
What’s the standard for losing picks?
The standard better be communicated clearly beforehand, I would think, otherwise you could get into a whole host of issues. Oh, he was a third round pick worthy loss because you knew he once did this in college. That guy, he’s a first rounder, I mean, he did list Aaron Hernandez as a character reference. That special teams contributor? 7th rounder at best.
How can a league say it’s okay to employ a guy but say that it’s not okay to employ him only on the condition that something bad could happen in the future?
This seems like a potential ripe for legal disagreement. The league has suspended players for substantial periods of time in the past. Some of those suspensions are written into portions of the collective bargaining agreement. Yet, here, we are talking about a league deciding a player is employable, but telling potential employees, “yeah, but you will lose other potential good employees if he screws up.”
Depending on the penalty possibilities, it could serve as a de facto ban. Great, then, you say. Some of these guys need to be banned. I’m not crying specifically for Ray McDonald. But if you are going to ban somebody, do it, within the confines of the rules. This seems like a situation that will lead to all sorts of unintended consequences.