Calvin Ridley Suspended for 2022 For Gambling on Football

Where I will say the NFL appears to be wrong is in its punishment priorities:
1646955896855.png
If violating the gambling policy (on an otherwise legal activity) is worth a season, I am not sure how to justify that Ezekiel Elliot's possible misdemeanor (getting you one to six months in jail) warrants only six games, which is what the NFL calls its baseline sanction on domestic violence.

I'm not arguing for less punishment for Calvin Ridley. I am suggesting that some level of proportionality, seemingly missing here, is called for, maybe in the form of a greater punishment for the other cases.

And on a lighter note, who knew Ray Rice was once engaged to a man?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bamabelle1991

UntouchableCrew

All-SEC
Nov 30, 2015
1,501
298
102
Where I will say the NFL appears to be wrong is in its punishment priorities:
View attachment 23438
If violating the gambling policy (on an otherwise legal activity) is worth a season, I am not sure how to justify that Ezekiel Elliot's possible misdemeanor (getting you one to six months in jail) warrants only six games, which is what the NFL calls its baseline sanction on domestic violence.

I'm not arguing for less punishment for Calvin Ridley. I am suggesting that some level of proportionality, seemingly missing here, is called for, maybe in the form of a greater punishment for the other cases.

And on a lighter note, who knew Ray Rice was once engaged to a man?
You're not wrong, per se, but I get it re: gambling. The integrity of the game is critical to their business in a way good behavior off the field is not. They want to send a strong message to make sure nobody is dumb enough to do this.
 

UntouchableCrew

All-SEC
Nov 30, 2015
1,501
298
102
Nothing says integrity like spousal abuse
Spousal abuse has nothing to do with football. The NFL only cares about it so much as public perception. Does the fanbase care about it? It's just optics.

Ray Rice is really the perfect example -- he got a "nothing" suspension initially. Nobody cared. Then the video became public and it literally ended his career. Why? Because once people saw the video they cared.

People within NFL orgs betting on games creates major issues for them. "Integrity of the game" isn't the same as "integrity." I'm just talking about competition.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: Bamabuzzard

DzynKingRTR

TideFans Legend
Dec 17, 2003
35,075
16,972
187
Vinings, ga., usa
Spousal abuse has nothing to do with football. The NFL only cares about it so much as public perception. Does the fanbase care about it? It's just optics.

Ray Rice is really the perfect example -- he got a "nothing" suspension initially. Nobody cared. Then the video became public and it literally ended his career. Why? Because once people saw the video they cared.

People within NFL orgs betting on games creates major issues for them. "Integrity of the game" isn't the same as "integrity." I'm just talking about competition.
One of the problems with it is the way contracts are written. The team sometimes has to still pay the player if he is arrested for a crime or the team has to take a salary hit to cut him. Look at the Braves and Ozuna. The team doesn't want him here anymore, but the will take a salary cap hit to just cut him. That is insane. At least the Braves did show they are just willing to take the hit rather than trotting him out and pretending nothing happened
 

CrimsonNagus

Hall of Fame
Jun 6, 2007
6,976
3,698
212
43
Montgomery, Alabama, United States
No one is saying he should not get a year off but, criminal activity like beating women and children should get a year or more off as well. But, whatever, we no longer ask people to be a decent human being anymore, not when they can make you a buck. "Oh, you beat you wife and kids. No problem, just sit out a few games but, then get back out there so your jersey sales don't slump."

The "integrity of the game" might be threatened by gambling but, the integrity of the league takes a hit when they allow criminals to continue to play.

As a Braves fan, I never want to see Ozuna in a Braves jersey again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DzynKingRTR

UntouchableCrew

All-SEC
Nov 30, 2015
1,501
298
102
One of the problems with it is the way contracts are written. The team sometimes has to still pay the player if he is arrested for a crime or the team has to take a salary hit to cut him. Look at the Braves and Ozuna. The team doesn't want him here anymore, but the will take a salary cap hit to just cut him. That is insane. At least the Braves did show they are just willing to take the hit rather than trotting him out and pretending nothing happened
I also think that in many cases spousal abuse is difficult to quantify. What exactly happened? How do we know that? Often domestic violence can be "he said she said" situations.

People don't usually react strongly to it until there is visual evidence, the Ray Rice thing being an extreme example.
 
Whether or not this is true...
I also think that in many cases spousal abuse is difficult to quantify. What exactly happened? How do we know that? Often domestic violence can be "he said she said" situations...
...in Ezekiel Elliot's case the NFL, applying a lower standard of proof than the law, found enough reason sanction him even though charges were never filed. So either they believed he was guilty and gave him a penalty that looks weak versus Calvin Ridley's much stiffer punishment for violating a rule, not a law; or they didn't believe Elliot was guilty but felt political pressure to "do something" anyway. In neither context can I see how, morally, the relative punishments for the two transgressions is defensible...
 

UntouchableCrew

All-SEC
Nov 30, 2015
1,501
298
102
In neither context can I see how, morally, the relative punishments for the two transgressions is defensible...
Right but it's not about morals. It's about money.

If NFL fans cared about domestic violence and didn't want to watch abusers the punishments would be more severe. Time and time again it's been demonstrated that by and large fans don't care.

By contrast, interest in a competitive product (where gambling on the outcomes drives a lot of interest) could potentially be damaged by any notion of game fixing. Is Ridley being overpunished? Yeah. But I can see why the NFL feels the need to come down hard and crush any whiff of players, coaches, etc. betting on football.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: Bamabuzzard

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Aug 15, 2004
27,549
6,930
237
46
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
Right but it's not about morals. It's about money.

If NFL fans cared about domestic violence and didn't want to watch abusers the punishments would be more severe. Time and time again it's been demonstrated that by and large fans don't care.

By contrast, interest in a competitive product (where gambling on the outcomes drives a lot of interest) could potentially be damaged by any notion of game fixing. Is Ridley being overpunished? Yeah. But I can see why the NFL feels the need to come down hard and crush any whiff of players, coaches, etc. betting on football.
People show how much they "care" by continuing to buy tickets to games, watch on tv, and/or buy merchandise. Ray Rice two pieces a woman in an elevator, like Mike Tyson knocking out someone in his prime, and I could name other players who morally have done A LOT worse than Ridley and didn't near the punishment. Yet within a week, the stands are packed full and viewership just keeps climbing. 🤷‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: UntouchableCrew

Guido

All-SEC
Feb 24, 2017
1,409
1,245
187
People show how much they "care" by continuing to buy tickets to games, watch on tv, and/or buy merchandise. Ray Rice two pieces a woman in an elevator, like Mike Tyson knocking out someone in his prime, and I could name other players who morally have done A LOT worse than Ridley and didn't near the punishment. Yet within a week, the stands are packed full and viewership just keeps climbing. 🤷‍♂️
One has nothing to do with the other. The gambling punishment is a NFL rule, their call. The punishment for domestic violence was a agreement between the players and the league. It's part of the CBA. The NFL has some wiggle room here, but the basic tenants of the abuse punishment was a negotiation. If you want to argue the the abuse punishment is too light, i think a case can be made here but the year off for calvin is consistent with the others who have been caught, all were reinstated the following year.
 
Last edited:

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
31,119
22,682
187
South Alabama
Where I will say the NFL appears to be wrong is in its punishment priorities:
View attachment 23438
If violating the gambling policy (on an otherwise legal activity) is worth a season, I am not sure how to justify that Ezekiel Elliot's possible misdemeanor (getting you one to six months in jail) warrants only six games, which is what the NFL calls its baseline sanction on domestic violence.

I'm not arguing for less punishment for Calvin Ridley. I am suggesting that some level of proportionality, seemingly missing here, is called for, maybe in the form of a greater punishment for the other cases.

And on a lighter note, who knew Ray Rice was once engaged to a man?
Well they did finally suspend Burfict for an entire season
 
It's part of the CBA. The NFL has some wiggle room here, but the basic tenants of the abuse punishment was a negotiation. If you want to argue the the abuse punishment is too light, i think a case can be made here…
Assuming that’s true, I have to admit that I didn’t know it. That doesn’t make it right, but at least it explains it in the short run…
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
55,969
38,549
362
crimsonaudio.net
If violating the gambling policy (on an otherwise legal activity) is worth a season, I am not sure how to justify that Ezekiel Elliot's possible misdemeanor (getting you one to six months in jail) warrants only six games, which is what the NFL calls its baseline sanction on domestic violence.
But the NFL's position makes sense - they're not law enforcement, it's really not their job to punish players for domestic violence, etc. The only reason the NFL does this is so the public doesn't revolt.

I mean, what other job punishes an employee for domestic violence? Not many I can think of.

That said, gambling on NFL games - games where the player can impact the outcome - that's a fundamental issue that directly impacts the game, or at least the perception as to whether the NFL is 'above board'.

IOW, I'm not equating gambling with domestic violence, I'm simply saying that it's logical that gambling on NFL games would carry a heavier punishment than something like domestic violence.
 
But the NFL's position makes sense - they're not law enforcement, it's really not their job to punish players for domestic violence, etc. The only reason the NFL does this is so the public doesn't revolt.

I mean, what other job punishes an employee for domestic violence? Not many I can think of…
That’s a fair point…
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
41,952
33,648
187
But the NFL's position makes sense - they're not law enforcement, it's really not their job to punish players for domestic violence, etc. The only reason the NFL does this is so the public doesn't revolt.

I mean, what other job punishes an employee for domestic violence? Not many I can think of.

That said, gambling on NFL games - games where the player can impact the outcome - that's a fundamental issue that directly impacts the game, or at least the perception as to whether the NFL is 'above board'.

IOW, I'm not equating gambling with domestic violence, I'm simply saying that it's logical that gambling on NFL games would carry a heavier punishment than something like domestic violence.
I would be fired if convicted of any felony. Even a DUI would see me fired. There are a lot of great companies out there with a social conscience. Sadly, there are many, many more that just care about profits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DzynKingRTR

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
55,969
38,549
362
crimsonaudio.net
I would be fired if convicted of any felony. Even a DUI would see me fired. There are a lot of great companies out there with a social conscience. Sadly, there are many, many more that just care about profits.
Yah, there are some that care about what their employees do outside of work.

I'm just pointing out that most do not - most companies operate as if it's beyond their purview unless it has a direct impact on their duties or job performance. The NFL isn't a social pariah due to this, so it's no surprise that they're unwilling to jeopardize their product.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
41,952
33,648
187
Yah, there are some that care about what their employees do outside of work.

I'm just pointing out that most do not - most companies operate as if it's beyond their purview unless it has a direct impact on their duties or job performance. The NFL isn't a social pariah due to this, so it's no surprise that they're unwilling to jeopardize their product.
You also have to factor in their average consumer. I love the NFL games, but the organization and many of its fans are lost in a misogynistic past that most of us find disgusting.
 

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Aug 15, 2004
27,549
6,930
237
46
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
One has nothing to do with the other. The gambling punishment is a NFL rule, their call. The punishment for domestic violence was a agreement between the players and the league. It's part of the CBA. The NFL has some wiggle room here, but the basic tenants of the abuse punishment was a negotiation. If you want to argue the the abuse punishment is too light, i think a case can be made here but the year off for calvin is consistent with the others who have been caught, all were reinstated the following year.
I fully agree with the Ridley punishment. I was pointing out that the public's outcry of "care" on issues such as domestic abuse obviously doesn't run very deep when the stands continue to be full and viewership continues to climb.

The NFL really doesn't care about nor wants to care about what goes on in these players' personal lives (just as the fans really don't either). They are forced to "care" when players' dirty laundry is made public. That's when we see the public statement by the NFL denouncing that type of behavior, a very hollow "program" is started to show the public they care and then they go about tending to what they really care about, and that's making money. Players gambling on the sport they play is more important to the NFL than domestic abuse. One ultimately will impact their revenue stream and one will not. Take a guess which one is which. LOL!
 

Latest threads

Shop the TideFans.shop !


Your purchase through our TideFans.shop links helps support the site! Thanks!