Passing Judgment – Brett Favre’s “Punishment”

After weeks and months of speculation as to what Commissioner Roger Goodell and the NFL might do in response to the allegations made by Jenn Sterger about Brett Favre’s illicit text messages and photographs, we finally have the answer – a $50,000 fine.  The central issue of the investigation was whether Favre’s actions with Sterger, then an employee of the New York Jets as a game-day hostess, violated the league’s Personal Conduct Policy.  In a statement released by the NFL on December 29, 2010, the league stated that “NFL policies do not extend to private conduct or make judgments about the appropriateness of personal relationships, except where that conduct or those relationships raise issues under the law or league policies.”  The NFL clearly has drawn a distinction between what constitutes conduct in the workplace and outside of the workplace.  But that distinction is paper thin.  Commissioner Goodell could not conclude that Favre violated the league’s rules regarding workplace conduct because “the forensic analysis could not establish that he sent the objectionable photographs to Sterger.”  However, the Commissioner also sent a memo to all NFL teams which said “every member of every club’s staff should be able to work in an environment free of harassment or hostility, and one in which every employee is valued, respected, and given a full opportunity to contribute to the goals of the club and the NFL.” 

This dichotomy between the fine imposed on Favre and the message sent along with it personifies why Commissioner Goodell did the right thing given the facts and evidence he had.  In a court of law, one is innocent until proven guilty.  The league clearly could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that photographs sent via text message of a person’s personal area were those of Brett Favre.  In fact, the editor in chief of Deadspin.com, the website that initially broke the story about Favre and Sterger, admitted that he paid a third party for the materials that were posted and he “couldn’t guarantee the material was genuine.” 

Despite a lot of circumstantial evidence and Favre’s admission that he did leave her various voice messages, it is fair to assume or conclude that the photographs were likely his.  But Commissioner Goodell and the NFL were in no position to draw assumptions.  They had to act on what facts and evidence existed and could be proven.  Because there was no conclusive proof that Favre sent the objectionable photographs, plus the fact both Favre and Sterger stated that they never met in person, the league was left with no other choice but to decide that there was no violation of the NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy. 

In the end, the decision to fine Favre $50,000 was based on his failure to cooperate with the investigation in a forthcoming manner.  Commissioner Goodell determined that Favre was “not candid in several respects during the investigation resulting in a longer review and additional negative public attention” for everyone involved.  According to Commissioner Goodell, had he found a violation of the NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy, he would have imposed a “substantially higher level of discipline.”

This decision drew the ire of Sterger’s attorney, Joseph Conway.  He accused the NFL of favoritism and said “it clearly shows that an NFL star player was given preferential treatment and tells all other players that failure to cooperate may cost you some money but will not result in other punishment.”  This reaction is undertstanable, and maybe even valid.  But without the requisite proof, how can the league be expected to impose harsher penalties?

The $50,000 fine is a fraction of the $11,600,000 salary he earned during 2010.  Based on the amount of money he earns per game, this fine represents only a few minutes of game time.  The fine will help fund a new training program on workplace conduct throughout the league.  That is a small consolation for Sterger, who is unsure whether she will pursue legal action against Favre, the Jets or the NFL. 

At the end of the day, the Commissioner acted in the best interests of the NFL by making his final decision once he had all the necessary facts, evidence and information presented to him.  There needed to be some closure and finality to this ordeal from the league’s perspective.  There is already public criticism for the lack of punishment being imposed on Favre, and that is certainly understandable.  If indeed Favre did send those photographs of himself, then maybe he does deserve a harsher punishment.  But only Brett Favre knows for sure whether those pictures were of him (ok and maybe his wife would know too).  Those who are upset at this decision can take solace knowing that Favre has tarnished his own legacy and persona with this scandal.  He was once revered as a good ole boy from Mississippi who wore his heart on his sleeve.  He stood by and cared for his wife while she treated for breast cancer.  And then to have this scandal flare up completely changed the public’s image of him.  I believe that this is something that will bother him forever.  There is no disputing or denying his talent as a professional athlete.  He will be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, and deservedly so.  But how Favre is remembered is another story.  We can take the advice of his peers, such as Trent Dilfer, who told us to forget about the drama that has surrounded Favre since he left Green Bay, and just remember Favre as one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time who set an NFL record with 297 consecutive starts.  Or, we can hold on to the fact that Favre became a selfish, egotistical caricature of himself who showed no regard for his family or self-respect.  Every individual person has the right to choose whichever memory they want.  But Favre will always be linked to this scandal and will always be associated with sending pictures of one’s junk through text messages.  That is probably not something he envisioned his legacy would be.

In summation, I applaud Commissioner Goodell for his decision.  He had to rule based on known facts and evidence.  Since there was no conclusive forensic proof, he could have let Favre walk away without any punishment at all.  But instead, he did impose the fine and criticized Favre’s actions in how he handled the subseqyent investigation – all of which implied guilt based on his evasiveness.  So Favre may have been found not guilty in the eyes of the league, but he also may have been sentenced to life in legacy prison by the court of public opinion.  Sometimes that is worse. 

Maybe someday he will write a book called “If That Was My Junk.”

Thoughts?  Comments?  Do you concur or dissent?  Send me an email to michael.stein@fantasyjudgment.com or find me on Twitter @FantasyJudgment.