Jonathan Dwyer Arrested on Domestic Abuse Charges

[chancellor]

It wouldn't surprise me if that is true..... but is it? With about 1300 players, we have 4 cases of known domestic abuse. That sounds like even less than what I bet is the figure for the general public.

I believe this is just the tip of the iceberg. No offense to Nate Silver, but anyone who thinks a tenth of these cases were actually reported just isn't understanding reality. Reggie Bush's comments are very instructive IMO

[Trautdiggity]

I believe this is just the tip of the iceberg. No offense to Nate Silver, but anyone who thinks a tenth of these cases were actually reported just isn't understanding reality. Reggie Bush's comments are very instructive IMO

This is a silly comment on a lot of levels. Five Thirty Eight doesn't posit that these are the only cases, but how can you analyze a non-existent statistic. Aside from that to think that domestic abuse is underreported when it is perpetrated by NFL players but not by John Q Citizen is ridiculous. Domestic Abuse is a generally underreported crime. I think the fairer assumption would be that it is underreported significantly in both populations. One could argue that financial implications could serve as a greater disincentive to reporting abuse by football players but there isn't and can't be any data to support any of this.

[chancellor]

This is a silly comment on a lot of levels. Five Thirty Eight doesn't posit that these are the only cases, but how can you analyze a non-existent statistic.

Well, then, why is Nate trying to analyze it then? IMO, Nate has a goodly amount of data, and a goodly amount of information to correct for standard underreporting, but my point is NFL players are reported even less due to their status and income. If you think that's silly, fine - your mileage may vary.

[Trautdiggity]

Well, then, why is Nate trying to analyze it then? IMO, Nate has a goodly amount of data, and a goodly amount of information to correct for standard underreporting, but my point is NFL players are reported even less due to their status and income. If you think that's silly, fine - your mileage may vary.

Your point is an assumption that could not ever be proven or disproven. The article analyzes what can be analyzed... Facts. There are reported cases which can be analyzed and unreported cases which only the victim and the perpetrator know about so an external observer could not analyze them. The point of the article is that domestic violence is disproportionate amongst nfl players relative to the general comparable age group and other offenses. It tries to make an income based caveat but misses. You're asking someone to make a rational analysis and argument based on the fact that you are sure of something of which it is impossible to be sure.

[Erik]

There was no reason for Silver to tackle this unless he was just looking for click bait. Too many unknown variables to generate anything meaningful.

[Trautdiggity]

There was no reason for Silver to tackle this unless he was just looking for click bait. Too many unknown variables to generate anything meaningful.

Couldn't disagree more wholeheartedly. There are many people (including several on this board and in this thread) running around saying that the NFL has a domestic violence crisis. Largely, these people are citing as evidence that rates of domestic violence amongst NFL players are so out of hand and in effect, worse than the average person. Neither of these two things is true. The NFL does not have a domestic violence crisis, the country does. The NFL has a crisis of how it deals with the perpetrators of domestic violence. Had the NFL dealt with Rice, Peterson and Hardy the way it did Dwyer we wouldn't be having any of these conversations. Silver takes the only data that can exist, reported crimes, to show that NFL rates are not worse than a comparable group. I disagree with their comparable group and think they should have highlighted a similar income earning group with a similar age range but at the very least he shows that in fact no, NFL players don't on average commit more REPORTED domestic violence. Anything outside of that are assumptions about whether victims are more or less likely to report a crime committed by an NFL player. I actually agree with Chance's ASSUMPTION that there is a higher rate of unreported crimes by NFL players but I can't make a judgement based on that assumption.

[chancellor]

Your point is an assumption that could not ever be proven or disproven.

Nonsense. It's an easy statistical assumption to test - a solid analysis could correct for income and status. There's very good studies out there that adjust for income - and I expect Nate tapped into those - and it would be only marginally harder to do an ANOVA on income, status, and both/neither.

That would put a statistical analysis behind something that I think is common sense, and something I suspect is well-known among those that cover the NFL.

[Trautdiggity]

Nonsense. It's an easy statistical assumption to test - a solid analysis could correct for income and status. There's very good studies out there that adjust for income - and I expect Nate tapped into those - and it would be only marginally harder to do an ANOVA on income, status, and both/neither.

That would put a statistical analysis behind something that I think is common sense, and something I suspect is well-known among those that cover the NFL.

We will disagree on that point but I won't beat a dead horse.

I have a question that's been bothering me a bit that I'm curious what some other people around here think... What of due process?

Ray Rice admitted what he did and there was video evidence. In no way shape or form should he have been defended, nurtured and promoted by the NFL. Greg Hardy was found guilty by a judge, same deal. AP admitted he beat his son to the point of the pictures we've all seen... Done. But what about Ray McDonald and Dwyer? Don't get me wrong, it sounds very much like they are both guilty... but doesn't it seem like now the NFL is going to the opposite extreme? I know the "letting the legal system do its job" line is just a way of the NFL deferring any of its issues while it continues to make money off the backs of these guys... but really aren't they entitled to due process? I haven't really decided how I feel about that and was curious what others think.

[madducks]

Couldn't disagree more wholeheartedly. There are many people (including several on this board and in this thread) running around saying that the NFL has a domestic violence crisis. Largely, these people are citing as evidence that rates of domestic violence amongst NFL players are so out of hand and in effect, worse than the average person. Neither of these two things is true. The NFL does not have a domestic violence crisis, the country does. The NFL has a crisis of how it deals with the perpetrators of domestic violence. Had the NFL dealt with Rice, Peterson and Hardy the way it did Dwyer we wouldn't be having any of these conversations. Silver takes the only data that can exist, reported crimes, to show that NFL rates are not worse than a comparable group. I disagree with their comparable group and think they should have highlighted a similar income earning group with a similar age range but at the very least he shows that in fact no, NFL players don't on average commit more REPORTED domestic violence. Anything outside of that are assumptions about whether victims are more or less likely to report a crime committed by an NFL player. I actually agree with Chance's ASSUMPTION that there is a higher rate of unreported crimes by NFL players but I can't make a judgement based on that assumption.

The NFL doesn't have a domestic violence crisis. At least not yet. But, they do now have a public relations disaster. Due in part to Goodell trying to sweep the Rice incident under the rug. He failed to act until he realized that the media had gotten their hands on the elevator video. And it doesn't matter if NFL players commit domestic violence crimes one thousand times less than the average male. How NFL players compare to the average Joe is irrelevant. They are in the public eye and looked up to as role models by millions of young boys. So they have an obligation to behave like role models. All professional teams need to stress that they are not just paying for game performance but for good behavior off the field as well to promote their product. Perhaps a crime clause for the life of every contract that voids the contract if a crime is committed would get everyone's attention.

[Pogues]

Couldn't disagree more wholeheartedly. There are many people (including several on this board and in this thread) running around saying that the NFL has a domestic violence crisis. Largely, these people are citing as evidence that rates of domestic violence amongst NFL players are so out of hand and in effect, worse than the average person. Neither of these two things is true. The NFL does not have a domestic violence crisis, the country does. The NFL has a crisis of how it deals with the perpetrators of domestic violence. Had the NFL dealt with Rice, Peterson and Hardy the way it did Dwyer we wouldn't be having any of these conversations. Silver takes the only data that can exist, reported crimes, to show that NFL rates are not worse than a comparable group. I disagree with their comparable group and think they should have highlighted a similar income earning group with a similar age range but at the very least he shows that in fact no, NFL players don't on average commit more REPORTED domestic violence. Anything outside of that are assumptions about whether victims are more or less likely to report a crime committed by an NFL player. I actually agree with Chance's ASSUMPTION that there is a higher rate of unreported crimes by NFL players but I can't make a judgement based on that assumption.

Mostly on the spot, Traut. But I must disagree with one thing you say. You wish for a comparison to men of a similar income level, but I would think a better comparison level would be of parents' income level when the perpetrators were children. Money doesn't automatically make one a "better person" and less prone to commit crime. These type of behaviors, I think many would agree, are learned when they are young.

[Pogues]

We will disagree on that point but I won't beat a dead horse.

I have a question that's been bothering me a bit that I'm curious what some other people around here think... What of due process?

Ray Rice admitted what he did and there was video evidence. In no way shape or form should he have been defended, nurtured and promoted by the NFL. Greg Hardy was found guilty by a judge, same deal. AP admitted he beat his son to the point of the pictures we've all seen... Done. But what about Ray McDonald and Dwyer? Don't get me wrong, it sounds very much like they are both guilty... but doesn't it seem like now the NFL is going to the opposite extreme? I know the "letting the legal system do its job" line is just a way of the NFL deferring any of its issues while it continues to make money off the backs of these guys... but really aren't they entitled to due process? I haven't really decided how I feel about that and was curious what others think.

As an employer, I don't see any problem with the way the teams are handling Dwyer and McDonald. The Cardinals are protecting their brand by removing Dwyer from the team, but still paying him. The Niners are playing it differently, but I would guess they are going to go the deactivation route soon enough. But standing by an employee until found guilty is OK in my book. I just don't think it's a wise choice.

[Hornsby]

We will disagree on that point but I won't beat a dead horse.

I have a question that's been bothering me a bit that I'm curious what some other people around here think... What of due process?

Ray Rice admitted what he did and there was video evidence. In no way shape or form should he have been defended, nurtured and promoted by the NFL. Greg Hardy was found guilty by a judge, same deal. AP admitted he beat his son to the point of the pictures we've all seen... Done. But what about Ray McDonald and Dwyer? Don't get me wrong, it sounds very much like they are both guilty... but doesn't it seem like now the NFL is going to the opposite extreme? I know the "letting the legal system do its job" line is just a way of the NFL deferring any of its issues while it continues to make money off the backs of these guys... but really aren't they entitled to due process? I haven't really decided how I feel about that and was curious what others think.

As ELD pointed out, this is a common mistake that people make, that players are being denied their "due process" They are not. Due process applies only to the legal system, and this current trend of the commissioners exemption, while probably not designed specifically for this purpose, works perfectly for the player to actually get his "due process" in the system. Peterson and Co. are being paid to attend to their affairs, while not being burdened with any other activities. What happens in the off season is another story entirely...

[Trautdiggity]

As ELD pointed out, this is a common mistake that people make, that players are being denied their "due process" They are not. Due process applies only to the legal system, and this current trend of the commissioners exemption, while probably not designed specifically for this purpose, works perfectly for the player to actually get his "due process" in the system. Peterson and Co. are being paid to attend to their affairs, while not being burdened with any other activities. What happens in the off season is another story entirely...

That's not really what I meant by the due process question. Without a doubt they are all getting their day in court and have no gripes against the legal system. I meant more that is it fair or right for the nfl to take action against them based on the accusation alone? It's hard to think its wrong since they are all still getting paid to not play, but it could cost them in the long run. Take Hardy as an example (and he's the worse example since the legal system has already found him guilty) but based on playing situation he makes the best example. Hardy sits because of his legal troubles. Yes he's still getting paid... Good for him. But let's imagine he goes to appeals but that doesn't happen until august 2015. A guy that would otherwise have commanded a massive contract will likely sign on somewhere at a major discount due to the timing and the character questions. I dunno it just feels slightly off to me to punish someone on accusation alone.

[Hornsby]

That's not really what I meant by the due process question. Without a doubt they are all getting their day in court and have no gripes against the legal system. I meant more that is it fair or right for the nfl to take action against them based on the accusation alone? It's hard to think its wrong since they are all still getting paid to not play, but it could cost them in the long run. Take Hardy as an example (and he's the worse example since the legal system has already found him guilty) but based on playing situation he makes the best example. Hardy sits because of his legal troubles. Yes he's still getting paid... Good for him. But let's imagine he goes to appeals but that doesn't happen until august 2015. A guy that would otherwise have commanded a massive contract will likely sign on somewhere at a major discount due to the timing and the character questions. I dunno it just feels slightly off to me to punish someone on accusation alone.

I see what you're saying, and I agree with it for the most part. There will undoubtedly be financial repercussions for all of these players down the road...I still believe that AP is going to be cut by the Vikings in the off-season, and that 44 million and change that he's owed for the next three years is long gone. He'll be lucky to sign somewhere for half of that, probably on a one year deal. Also, none of these guys are ever going to get an endorsement again, no matter how great their redemption story is.

So yes, perhaps the punishment doesn't fit the crime in all cases...

[Trautdiggity]

I see what you're saying, and I agree with it for the most part. There will undoubtedly be financial repercussions for all of these players down the road...I still believe that AP is going to be cut by the Vikings in the off-season, and that 44 million and change that he's owed for the next three years is long gone. He'll be lucky to sign somewhere for half of that, probably on a one year deal. Also, none of these guys are ever going to get an endorsement again, no matter how great their redemption story is.

So yes, perhaps the punishment doesn't fit the crime in all cases...

Yeah and with AP he has admitted fault so tee him up as far as I'm concerned. Aside from that, the vikes might have cut him even without the controversy. That contract was never going to return positive value.