Each panelist speaking at the “Regulating Athlete Conduct” session at the Sports Lawyers Association meeting last month agreed that improving the behavior of athletes is a desirable goal.
Where the panelists – which included a professor, athletic director, agent and team counsel – differed was on how to accomplish that objective.
Perhaps the timeliest of the presentations was given by Worrick G. Robinson, IV, the agent for the Tennessee Titan’s beleaguered PacMan Jones.
“My perspective is obviously different (than the league),” Robinson said. “I agree with the league 90 percent of the time. My client has had multiple offenses, ranging from speeding tickets to the incident in Vegas. But that shouldn’t make PacMan Jones the poster child for off-the-field conduct.”
Robinson continued.
“Under the new policy, the Commissioner is the judge and jury. This was the first disciplinary hearing for off the field conduct. He was suspended for a year. This was way off the charts compared with incidents that have occurred in the past. We found 283 incidents over the last three years by NFL players. Some resulted in a letter from commissioner. Many did not. Pac-Man’s punishment was unprecedented. The goal is to modify behavior. It is not to be punitive.”
He went on to site an example involving University of Tennessee football players, who received a special deal from a booster on furniture. Robinson noted that the punishment, besides paying the booster for the merchandise, was that the players had to write a one-page essay on why they should not have accepted the merchandise and then to read the essay to the team.
Of course, there’s a big difference between getting a special deal on furniture and causing a disturbance at a nightclub that leads to a felony, which Jones is alleged to have done. The latter can negatively affect, not only the player, but the team and league.
In college athletics, such activity can damage the program and school. When Chris Monash, athletic director for St. John University, arrived at that school several years back, several players stood accused of committing sexual assault after going out for the night.
“It was devastating for our community,” said Monash, a panelist. “We had to take the approach that we were going to build it back up from the ground up.” Monash said he accomplished that by instituting a code on conduct.
He added that such a document not only protects the school, but introduces an element of fairness for the student athlete. “It’s important, for example, to address how you are going to handle a first, second or third offense.”
The code of conduct also put parameters around when to suspend a student athlete.
“As an athletic director, I am not looking to suspend athletes,” he said. “But at the end of the day, that is the hammer that has meaning with our student athletes. Young people make mistakes. If they aren’t too severe, you try to work with them.”
Barbara Osborne, an associate professor at the University of North Carolina, specializes in this area. One overriding “general principle” associated with such documents is that “restrictions on social conduct must be related to the educational mission of the institution or the campus community welfare” Osborne said.
She added that there are generally three issues involved in drafting codes of conduct:
1. The type of conduct the code covers
–moral issues (good citizens/embarrassment)
–team, university, conference and NCAA rules compliance
–dress and grooming standards
2. the procedures to be used when infractions are alleged, and
–due process
–who should make the decision? Coach? AD?
3. the sanctions for code violations.
–under what circumstances should athletes lose their eligibility to play?
–crimes (presumption of innocence)
On the topic of suspension, Osborne said athletic departments have tremendous latitude to suspend players because “athletes are held to a higher standard. That’s because participating in college athletics is a privilege, not a right.”
Nevertheless, she said, the “the most important legal concept is that it can’t be arbitrary. If you have a written code, you have to follow the code. It has to be even-handed. Stars and walk-ons have to be treated the same. Second, you have to make sure punishment is going to fit the situation.”
The final recommendation around a code of conduct came from another panelist, Kevin Warren, general counsel for the Minnesota Vikings.
First, he recounted for the audience his arrival at Minnesota and the fact that it coincided with the Lake Minnetonka incident, when several players were alleged to have sexual liaisons with exotic dancers.
Warren initiated a code of conduct that applied to the whole organization.
“We used the incident as an opportunity to grow as an organization. It didn’t matter whether you were a player, groundskeeper or receptionist. The Code of Conduct applied to everyone and we are better off for it,” Warren said.
Not surprisingly, he also concurred with how the NFL — both Commissioner Goodell and Gene Upshaw – were taking steps necessary to enforce a code of conduct.
“Everyone is taking this personal conduct code very seriously. It has already changed the behavior of some players and coaches. The cleaner the league’s image is, the better off the league will be,” Warren said.
