49ers NT Glenn Dorsey - out for the season

[Scottemojo]

Logic be damned... I don't think it's any more than 3-4 games. They will say "significant" and then deduct the 4 or 5 weeks that he was in treatment from it as "time served" so to speak.

[edit] Besides, wouldn't that put a dent in Niner fan theories about the NFL setting SF up to win SB 49?

Before the Rice suspension I would have thought the automatic 4, but after Rice? Goodell will probably give Smith an extra game check, along with a rub and tug.

No way Smith gets more than 2 games for the gun convictions. If he does, either Goodell realized he made a mistake with Rice and he is paying attention (Smith did get 5 convictions) or Goodell is completely off his rocker.

I did think that. Until the media storm that followed Rice and his 2 games. Now I think poor Aldon is boned by bad timing. You don't want to be the next guy after the Commish gets called onto the carpet for being soft on crime.

Almost makes me feel sorry for Smith.

 

[Laloosh]

Logic be damned... I don't think it's any more than 3-4 games. They will say "significant" and then deduct the 4 or 5 weeks that he was in treatment from it as "time served" so to speak.

[edit] Besides, wouldn't that put a dent in Niner fan theories about the NFL setting SF up to win SB 49?

Before the Rice suspension I would have thought the automatic 4, but after Rice? Goodell will probably give Smith an extra game check, along with a rub and tug.

No way Smith gets more than 2 games for the gun convictions. If he does, either Goodell realized he made a mistake with Rice and he is paying attention (Smith did get 5 convictions) or Goodell is completely off his rocker.

I did think that. Until the media storm that followed Rice and his 2 games. Now I think poor Aldon is boned by bad timing. You don't want to be the next guy after the Commish gets called onto the carpet for being soft on crime.

Almost makes me feel sorry for Smith.

I prefer that you be right. I just don't see it. Then the endless press about other crimes being taken more seriously than spousal abuse/assault roll in. I almost think it would make things worse for Goodell.

 

[RichNhansom]

That's what I am worried about. Going harsh on Smith now says hitting a woman is not that bad. Goody has put himself in a really bad position. If he goes light he looks weak and if he doesn't he looks like a womanizer. I get the feeling we are going to see an 8 game suspension with time served. He misses three games. Challenges the ruling and knocks it down to bringing donuts to the comish.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I did think that. Until the media storm that followed Rice and his 2 games. Now I think poor Aldon is boned by bad timing. You don't want to be the next guy after the Commish gets called onto the carpet for being soft on crime.

Almost makes me feel sorry for Smith.

You know, the more I think about this, the more I think Goodell is simply playing the long con. I think he went light on Ray Rice on purpose because he was a first-time offender, and when the next CBA comes around, he's more likely to get stiffer penalties for a lot of the infractions that occur because many are repeat offenders and it'll be an easier sell to the players if "everybody can screw up once", so to speak.

 

[kearly]

The Rice suspension is historically right in line with previous non-convicted domestic abuse cases. It's just gotten more attention because Rice is a big name, because of the elevator video, and because in 2014 political correctness has suddenly become a torrential force in the media.

I don't really think Smith will get burned any more or any less because of Rice. There are arguments either way but I think Goodell will just go by the book with Smith like he did on Rice. Which probably means four to eight games since he's a repeat offender.

It is peculiar that Goodell is actually arranging to meet with Smith before handing down the suspension. It would be weird to arrange a special meeting with a player unless it was to prepare him for some bad news.

 

[loafoftatupu]

The suspension doesn't really matter. Smith being on the field brings the average IQ of the Niner defense down 30 points, on top of the other players slipping on his drool-pool.

He doesn't really present the Hawks that much trouble. He earns 3 points on a strip, but solely gives up a 3rd down conversion, a 4th down conversion and 7 points. Plus, Lynch has had some big runs when the Hawks start the run to the left.

Smith is a factor against other teams. I'm sure Romo will feel a lot better on opening day without Smith chasing him.

 

[loafoftatupu]

It is peculiar that Goodell is actually arranging to meet with Smith before handing down the suspension. It would be weird to arrange a special meeting with a player unless it was to prepare him for some bad news.

He can't jerk Smith off if he doesn't see him face to face. He is going to just ask Aldon if he is all better now from his rehab before he states it himself and doesn't suspend him at all. "Aldon, I just wanted to make sure you knew that we are doing the best we can to make sure that you aren't inconvenienced in any way. There might be a little heat for me bypassing any suspension, but please don't let it distract you. Now unzip that fly so I can get busy."

 

[Laloosh]

It is peculiar that Goodell is actually arranging to meet with Smith before handing down the suspension. It would be weird to arrange a special meeting with a player unless it was to prepare him for some bad news.

Rice and his wife met with Goodell before he was suspended.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... -on-monday

 

[Popeyejones]

and because in 2014 political correctness has suddenly become a torrential force in the media.

Yeah, unlike the good old days people tend to view beating a woman unconcious and dragging her limp body around by her hair a bit unfavorably. Goddamn political correctness.

 

[loafoftatupu]

Yeah, unlike the good old days people tend to view beating a woman unconcious and dragging her limp body around by her hair a bit unfavorably. Goddamn political correctness.

I'm sorry I did that Princess, it was a long time ago though and I thought you already awarded me forgiveness? Can we just let this one go?

Or do we need to take another elevator trip? :shock:

 

[kearly]

It is peculiar that Goodell is actually arranging to meet with Smith before handing down the suspension. It would be weird to arrange a special meeting with a player unless it was to prepare him for some bad news.

Rice and his wife met with Goodell before he was suspended.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... -on-monday

I did not know that. Interesting. Maybe Goodell is trying to change his "hardass" image?

and because in 2014 political correctness has suddenly become a torrential force in the media.

Yeah, unlike the good old days people tend to view beating a woman unconcious and dragging her limp body around by her hair a bit unfavorably. Goddamn political correctness.

I don't know who you are arguing with.

My point was that there are several domestic abuse cases every single year in pro sports and the media and twitterverse had previously not given a shit. But ever since the Sterling incident it's been knee jerk reaction central on anything PC related. First Sterling, then Cuban, then Rice, then Stephen A.

It's not that the NFL cares any less or any more than they used to. It's that since Sterling it has suddenly become fashionable for the media and internet community to be extremely outraged over PC issues.

Rice's case involved mutual domestic abuse which makes it non-prosecutable, in the eyes of the legal system Rice is effectively innocent. I understand why the NFL suspends Rice though because he set a bad example for kids who idolize NFL players. In that sense, I would like to see the NFL ammend the rules to increase the duration of these kinds of suspensions. That said, I don't blame the NFL for failing to knee jerk as quickly as society has over the past few months. Everyone in the media is treating Rice like he's the first guy to be involved in domestic violence, but to the NFL and pretty much any other pro-sport, they are jaded by how routine it is.

I remember when Rocky Bernard and Sean Locklear got busted for stuff like this and forgiveness from fans came very quickly. Back when fans cared less, the NFL still suspended those guys the same way they suspend guys today. They've been consistent.

 

[Laloosh]

It is peculiar that Goodell is actually arranging to meet with Smith before handing down the suspension. It would be weird to arrange a special meeting with a player unless it was to prepare him for some bad news.

Rice and his wife met with Goodell before he was suspended.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... -on-monday

I did not know that. Interesting. Maybe Goodell is trying to change his "hardass" image?

I wouldn't pretend to understand his personal reasoning. I support the practice though. Meet with the people that you're handing down punishment to. Lets players know that he can look them in the eye and tell them himself. He's not just sitting somewhere in a league office doling out suspensions from afar.

 

[Smelly McUgly]

Political correctness isn't the issue (and it's odd to call outrage over that incident a mere fascination with "political correctness"). The reason people are up in arms about Ray Rice, but not, say Greg Hardy, is that we had tape of Rice punching his fiance and dragging her out of the elevator. If we had tape of Greg Hardy bodyslamming a woman onto a bed full of guns, people would be just as pissed about him. If more DV incidents made tape, we'd get more pressure on scumbags like Goodell to not give a mere two-game suspension to players who did it.

It's easier to ignore DV until someone dies because of it (OJ Simpson/Nicole Brown) or unless someone catches it on tape, just like with anything else.

 

[kearly]

Political correctness isn't the issue (and it's odd to call outrage over that incident a mere fascination with "political correctness"). The reason people are up in arms about Ray Rice, but not, say Greg Hardy, is that we had tape of Rice punching his fiance and dragging her out of the elevator. If we had tape of Greg Hardy bodyslamming a woman onto a bed full of guns, people would be just as pissed.

It's easier to ignore DV until someone dies because of it (OJ Simpson/Nicole Brown) or unless someone catches it on tape, just like with anything else.

I say political correctness because in our culture there is a "no excuse" mentality towards these issues, even when a more nuanced or legal interpretation of the events reaches a very different conclusion.

Nice metaphor on Hardy btw. You are right, Hardy deserves the grief far more than Rice does (beating plus death threat vs. retaliatory hit plus awkward videotaped aftermath). Reading up on Hardy's case it is eerily similar to OJ before the murders (physical abuse, threats, ultra controlling, insecure, manipulative). Unlike Rice, Hardy actually faced prosecution and was convicted by a judge.

With Rice, You are 100% right, the video plays a big role in that... it is the instigating factor for the media and online community, who tend to react more on emotion.

 

[Smelly McUgly]

Political correctness isn't the issue (and it's odd to call outrage over that incident a mere fascination with "political correctness"). The reason people are up in arms about Ray Rice, but not, say Greg Hardy, is that we had tape of Rice punching his fiance and dragging her out of the elevator. If we had tape of Greg Hardy bodyslamming a woman onto a bed full of guns, people would be just as pissed.

It's easier to ignore DV until someone dies because of it (OJ Simpson/Nicole Brown) or unless someone catches it on tape, just like with anything else.

I say political correctness because in our culture there is a "no excuse" mentality towards these issues, even when a more nuanced or legal interpretation of the events reaches a very different conclusion.

If you are talking about our inability to discuss the role of both members of the couple in incidents like these without getting shouted down, I agree to some extent. I think that I understand why some people are reticent to allow this "but she also had a part in this" talk to get going. It sounds like "she asked for it," which is another short step from blaming the victim. Let's face it: This sort of talk makes abusers of all types bolder because they see people saying "hey, the victim asked for it." I understand that this is a worry for some folks.

In terms of this particular incident, unless she had a weapon that she was about to use on him with deadly force, I cannot see any excuse for him knocking her out and dragging her off the elevator, no matter how much she might have egged him on.

 

[kearly]

In terms of this particular incident, unless she had a weapon that she was about to use on him with deadly force, I cannot see any excuse for him knocking her out and dragging her off the elevator, no matter how much she might have egged him on.

The law doesn't see it that way though.

My personal opinion is that the real damage of domestic abuse in all but the most extreme cases is not physiological but psychological. In that sense, attacking a person with insults, spitting, and hitting is very much a genuine form of abuse, regardless of gender, and the law agrees.

They both messed up, had a bad episode, got help, and later got married. This might be the last time we hear of it. Just like Warren Moon in 1995. That doesn't excuse Rice, but it is what it is.

I get what you are saying about having a hard line mentality on this issue to prevent people from thinking it's okay. I still think the biproduct is bullshit. I also think the amount of violence would be less if BOTH men and women were educated on how to handle these situations with discipline and a level head. If Rice's fiance isn't committing abuse herself this incident never happens. That's not blaming the victim, that's just stating common sense.

 

[Smelly McUgly]

In terms of this particular incident, unless she had a weapon that she was about to use on him with deadly force, I cannot see any excuse for him knocking her out and dragging her off the elevator, no matter how much she might have egged him on.

The law doesn't see it that way though.

My personal opinion is that the real damage of domestic abuse in all but the most extreme cases is not physiological but psychological. In that sense, attacking a person with insults, spitting, and hitting is very much a genuine form of abuse, regardless of gender, and the law agrees.

They had a bad episode, they got help, they later got married, and this might be the last time we hear of it. Just like Warren Moon in 1995.

I get what you are saying about having a hard line mentality on this issue to prevent people from thinking it's okay. I still think the biproduct is bullshit. I also think the amount of violence would be less if BOTH men and women were educated on how to handle these situations with discipline and a level head. If Rice's fiance isn't committing abuse herself this incident never happens. That's not blaming the victim, that's just stating common sense.

You are correct that emotional abuse is as big a problem as physical abuse, and I agree that everyone regardless of gender should be trained not to emotionally abuse anyone. Regarding some of the media pushback against people trying to make that point, I'll just say that it takes a smarter guy than Stephen A. on a more reasonable platform than First Take to cogently make the point that you just made.