Mixon case shows need for NFL policy
Terrelle Pryor was suspended five games at the start of his career as a stipulation for the NFL allowing him into the 2011 supplemental draft following his role in trading memorabilia for cash and tattoos while at Ohio State.
Despite the league’s implementation of its overdue domestic-violence policy in 2014, there presently is no language concerning initial suspensions for players who enter the league with a history of violence against women.
That is absurd, by comparison. But that sort of wording and disciplinary action needs to be added, perhaps even in exchange for allowing such incoming players to participate at the league’s scouting combine, as a solution for Joe Mixon and others being excluded from this week’s festivities.
The police report and video of the Oklahoma running back punching a female student in the face in 2014 are rightfully bound to shadow him throughout any potential professional career, and the footage certainly will be aired on repeat if/once he is selected in the 2017 NFL draft.
Obviously, Mixon cannot go back now and change what happened that night.
But the NFL’s mixed messages are in full force this week, with Mixon and a few others absent from the combine as part of a policy established last year to prohibit invites to any prospects “who have misdemeanor or felony convictions involving violence or use of a weapon, domestic violence, a sexual offense and/or sexual assault.”
I was disgusted by Mixon’s actions in slugging Amelia Molitor nearly three years ago, as anyone should be.
And I previously have criticized Oklahoma for levying a wrist-slapping suspension — which essentially amounted to nothing more than a redshirted year that didn’t affect his college eligibility — and for ESPN announcer Brent Musburger essentially taking a look-the-other-way approach on Mixon during the Sugar Bowl on Jan. 2.
Even now, I am extremely uncomfortable defending Mixon in any way following such a despicable transgression.
But the NFL also wants it both ways here, as usual, giving the impression of taking a strong stance against domestic violence — especially following its high-profile mishandling of cases involving Ray Rice and others — while also denying its 32 teams centralized access to vetting a player with a troubled past who is fully eligible for consideration for employment in the league.
If you’re letting Mixon and others like him be eligible for the draft, they should have been allowed to participate.
“We’re going to leave the door open on Joe. I think it’s really disappointing that Joe’s not here,” Lions GM Bob Quinn said on Wednesday. “You know, we come here to see the best college football players... and for him not being here because of those issues, personally I don’t think that’s real fair because we have a lot of investigation that we want to do on him. To get him in one spot for all the teams would have been great.”
Sure, teams with interest in giving Mixon — who is considered a top-5 talent among running backs in the draft, yet projected to slide to the middle rounds because of his history — that opportunity for a second chance simply can attend his upcoming pro day workout and/or bring him in to their respective facilities for in-depth interviews.
But we all know that Mixon’s inclusion as one of 300plus players at the combine also would make him the overwhelming story in Indianapolis if he were in attendance. And you can be sure that the league doesn’t want him detracting from its week of made-for-TV workouts, interviews, etc.
“If you’ve been in trouble and you handle yourself the right way, positive things can happen for you. We’re in America, and America is forgiving to a point,” Chiefs coach Andy Reid, who made Tyreek Hill a controversial pick last year following a domestic abuse incident while he was attending Oklahoma State, told reporters. “But you can’t go backward. You’ve got to stay forward. Most of those guys will probably have an opportunity. The coaches, scouts and general managers are going to have to go to them or have them come into their facility to take care of business… I don’t know all of the guys that are out there, but I’m sure they’ll get a look.” Just not this week in Indy. Implementing a suspension policy for players with such histories of violence before they enter the league makes sense as a potential trade-off.
It’s surely a far more serious issue than trading a few jerseys for cash and tattoos, isn’t it?