It’s only week two of the NFL season, and there has already been plenty of drama both on and off the field. On Monday, running back Ray Rice was cut by the Baltimore Ravens and suspended indefinitely by the NFL after another video of him was released physically abusing his then-fiancee (now wife) this past winter in an Atlantic City casino. The original video, that surfaced shortly after the incident, only depicted Rice dragging his wife’s unconscious body out of the elevator.
After the first video, the NFL utilized some reactive strategies to put a band-aid on the situation. It handed Rice a two-game suspension and held a press conference for Rice to apologize. Months later NFL commissioner, Roger Goodell, admitted that the punishment was too lenient and had the NFL adopt a new domestic violence policy. Under the new policy, players are suspended six games for their first offense and are permanently suspended for the second.
The wounds those band-aids covered were reopened with the release of the second video. Fans have been scrutinizing the league since the original incident, but it hit a pinnacle Monday morning. Suspending Rice was the NFL’s only real option, it was the only action that would satisfy fans and the media, at least for the time being. The suspension was a long time coming, and it would have been in the NFL’s best interest to enact it the first time. There was enough evidence against Rice immediately after the incident.
Some pundits have called this mishandling the biggest “black eye” in Goodell’s tenure as commissioner. For months, fans have been under the impression that the NFL cares more about players who abuse drugs than abuse women. I don’t understand how Goodell ever thought two games would be enough. Did he not listen to the outcry from fans and even NFL players themselves? Those are your target audiences, you need to keep them happy.
This has the potential to undo years of successful NFL marketing campaigns aimed at women. Almost half (46 percent) of all NFL fans are female. The original two-game suspension and support for Rice sent women the message, that the NFL tolerates domestic violence. Most women and men are not the same kind of football fans. What happens off the field matters more to women. They hold the family purse strings, and are reluctant to open them up for an organization with questionable values. It’ll be interesting to see how this precious demographic responds in the months ahead.
A PR nightmare for the NFL can actually be turned into a PR opportunity for other professional leagues, such as MLB, NHL and NBA. The NFL’s loss can be their gain, by taking a strict stance against domestic violence and implementing a zero tolerance policy for their players and staff members. They can show women that they value and genuinely care about their safety.
The NFL hasn’t seen the last of this crisis. It will surely reemerge when a team tries to sign Rice, or when another player is involved in a domestic dispute. The domestic violence policy gives the league a guideline for dealing with future issues, but I’m not sure it’ll be effective. No two cases are the same, and I don’t think there is a one size fits all punishment when it comes to domestic violence. The policy has already been disregarded in Rice’s case. Six games would not have been enough to stop further damage to the NFL’s reputation, so they were right to break their own guidelines.
Do you think this crisis will have any long-term effects on the NFL’s reputation? What was its biggest misstep in handling the situation?
The 2014-15 NFL season is set to kick-off tonight when the Green Bay Packers take on the Seattle Seahawks. However, in Washington it seems like more attention is being paid to the Redskins’ ongoing name controversy than the impending season.
ESPN aired an episode of “Outside the Lines” this week about the debate over the Redskins’ name. The sports cable giant also released some interesting statistics to go along with the segment. ESPN found that 71 percent of Americans think the name should not be changed. Among NFL players, 58 percent agreed that the Redskins should be able to keep their name.
After looking at these statistics, you might think that the Redskins are in the clear. Only 29 percent of the public has a problem with the name. If 71 percent of voters approve of a politician, that’s a pretty good margin, but this isn’t politics; it’s branding. Brands need as many consumers as possible to hold a favorable opinion. Choosing a name is the most important marketing decision a brand makes. It sets the stage for the brand’s success or failure. There is only negative equity in a bad name.
In my opinion, the Redskins need to change their name, and change it soon. The negative publicity is mounting, and it’s showing no signs of waning. It seems like every week a new media outlet or personality is publicly announcing their refusal to call the Washington franchise by its nickname. Unfortunately for the Redskins, these opinion leaders strongly influence the general public. If they call for the franchise to change its name, more and more consumers are bound to follow.
Branding isn’t about what’s fair and what’s unfair; it’s about pleasing consumers. Regardless of if the name is offensive or not, it needs to be canned. The Redskins’ name is associated with mostly negativity and controversy. It might be expensive to rebrand, but a new name would give the team a fresh start. They can focus on football and not off-field drama. The Washington football team will always be the Washington football team, regardless of its nickname. It might take a few years for fans to warm up to the new name, but true fans support their team no matter what they’re called.
NFC North: Green Bay Packers. This was a difficult pick, I think the NFC North is the most evenly matched division in football. The Bears, Packers, Lions and Vikings all have the potential to win at least ten games. That being said, the Packers are still the slight favorite. Green Bay still boasts playoff experience, one of the best quarterbacks in the league and a much improved running game.
NFC East: New York Giants. Just like years past, I think the battle for the NFC East will come down to the wire. The Redskins, Giants and Cowboys all look good enough to get into the playoffs, but no one really separates themselves from the pack.That being said, I think the Giants will solidify the division crown during their week 17 matchup with Washington at the Meadowlands.
NFC South: Atlanta Falcons. There’s really no logical reason not to pick the Falcons to win the NFC South. Atlanta’s formidable offense only got better over the offseason with the arrival of Steven Jackson and now they’re out to smash some scoring records. Even though the South in improving, no other team has the firepower to take down the Falcons.
NFC West: San Francisco 49ers. For the past few years, the NFC West has been the laughing stock of professional football. Last year, epic late-season performances from the Seahawks and Niners proved that the west could indeed be best. The two teams will likely be neck and neck again this year. It’s a close call, but I think San Francisco squad is better rounded and has a slightly more favorable schedule.
NFC Wild Card: Seattle Seahawks. It’s no surprise that the Seahawks are landing in the first wild card spot. They could easily win the Super Bowl, but unfortunately got stuck in a division with the 49ers. Expect them to make some noise in the playoffs. Seattle may well finish with a better record than most division winners.
NFC Wild Card: Washington Redskins. Despite losing in the first rounds of the playoffs last year, Washington ended the regular season on a tremendous run. They are an up and coming team with playmakers all over the field. I probably would have picked the Redskins to win the NFC East if not for RG3’s knee injury. I can see them struggling the first few weeks and then bringing it all together to close out the season.
The NFC Wildcard has the potential to be a fun race to watch, there are so many teams in the conference that have the ability to win nine or ten games. The Rams, Bears, Vikings, Lions, Saints, Buccaneers and Panthers could all claim the final spot. I definitely think the race for the first pick of the draft will be in the AFC.
Let’s just admit it, a winning team makes any PR pros job that much easier. In the spirit of paying attention to standings, here is Packing the Stand’s first ever NFL playoff predictions. Let’s start with the AFC…
AFC North: Cincinnati Bengals. The AFC North is shaping up to be the toughest division in football. They have three legitimate playoff contenders with the Bengals, Ravens and Steelers. At the end of the day, I think the Bengals will win this tight race. Cincinnati has enough talent on both sides of the ball to overcome even mediocre play from the quarterback position.
AFC East: New England Patriots. It would be a shock if the Patriots fail to win the AFC East. Even with their tight end troubles, the Patriots are still far more talented and experienced than the other three members of the division. New England always seems to find a way to overcome adversity, and that’s how they’ve become a perennial powerhouse.
AFC South: Houston Texans. This will probably be a two horse race (pun intended) between the Texans and the Indianapolis Colts. However, it is difficult to pick against the Texans’ stellar defense and recent playoff success. Indy should challenge for the wild card, but this team is still only two years removed from a dismal 2-14 season.
AFC West: Denver Broncos. The Broncos may well be the largest division favorite in the entire NFL; with their only competition being the revamped, but still mediocre Kansas City Chiefs. A weak schedule and a potent offense should help the Broncos overcome Von Miller’s six-game suspension.
AFC Wild Card: Baltimore Ravens. While they are the reigning Super Bowl champions, the Ravens lost valuable players on both sides of the ball during the offseason. However, their combination of playoff experience and ability to win on the road should guide them into January.
AFC Wild Card: Kansas City Chiefs. A year ago, the Colts bounced back from a 2-14 season to make the playoffs. In 2013, I believe the Chiefs have the chance to turn it around and steal a playoff spot from that same Colts team. While Alex Smith is no Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, he’s a vast improvement over what the Chiefs have been trotting out lately. Also, a weak schedule should help the Chiefs sneak into the playoffs.
That’s it for the AFC predictions, NFC should be up as soon as I decide on a tight wild card race.
This week the NFL was met with a minor advertising crisis. Apparently, they decided to hang some banners around the city of Denver to promote the league’s kickoff game between the Broncos and Ravens this Thursday. So there’s nothing new about gigantic banners of players hanging on the stadium, but they’re usually not players from the opposing team. Yes, the NFL did indeed think it was a good idea to hang banners of Raven’s players in Denver. The people of Denver seemed to react like typical sports fans, by honking at the stadium and drawing in Joe Flacco’s enlarged face.
I would have loved to be a fly on the wall when the NFL decided to purchase these banners. Why did they think putting Broncos on the banners wouldn’t be good enough, for all the Rocky Mountain Raven fans? It’s understandable that the NFL wanted to promote their big game. They want to encourage ticket sales and get fans pumped up about the season. However, they could have accomplished this without the banners. I really don’t think giant Joe Flacco is persuading anyone in Denver to buy tickets or tune in to the game (which by the way, is not on NFL Network).
This was just a strange marketing move, and to make matters worse the Broncos have a bit of a sordid history with the Ravens. Last year, the Ravens eliminated the Broncos from the playoffs with a thrilling overtime victory at Sports Authority Field before going on the win the Super Bowl. That makes these banners an even bigger blow and a reminder of Denver’s heartbreaking 2012 season.
I think we all agree that the banners are ridiculous, but what do you think the NFL’s rationale was?
For the past eight years, the NFL has held its draft every April at the Radio City Music Hall in New York City. However, due to a scheduling conflict, plans for the 2014 draft are up in the air. Roger Goddell announced at a press conference today that the draft will likely move to May next year. Now, I’ve worked as an event planner enough to know losing your venue is usually a huge blow to any event. However, this move may actually help the NFL in the long run.
The NFL is already the most popular league in the United States, and moving the draft back will only help it command even more attention. The April draft date already takes away media coverage from the other three major sports leagues. It occurs around the time of MLB’s opening day, as well as NHL and NBA playoffs. If anything, it gives sports media outlets two or three extra weeks to finalize their mock drafts and provide extra analysis.
NFL officials should also consider taking the show on the road. Finding a new location to host the draft should not be that difficult, especially since there are 31 vacant NFL stadiums sitting around the country. This would give fans outside of New York a chance to attend. I know that one reason the draft is held in New York is because if its proximity to the league offices, but if the combine can be in Indianapolis why can’t the draft be moved to a different city as well? Personally, I think that gigantic, over-priced stadium in Dallas would be an excellent venue to host a future NFL Draft.
Do you think the NFL Draft should move out of New York? If so, what cities would you like to see it in!