The mess at the NFL

National Football League commissioner Roger Goodell had a lot to be thankful for this past holiday weekend. His whopping $35.1 million annual salary. Shamelessly unwavering support from NFL team owners. And the advantageous timing of an independent arbitrator’s decision to throw out Goodell’s indefinite suspension of running back Ray Rice—on the day when many of us were still in a post-turkey-feast stupor. Goodell doesn’t deserve to get off that easy. Last Friday’s ruling exposed what we had long suspected. Goodell knew from the start what Rice did in that Atlantic City elevator last February—he cold-cocked fiancee Janay Palmer, sending her crashing, headfirst, into a steel handrail. Goodell is not the right leader for the NFL if this gigantic, influential sports machine wants to make serious progress in how everyone associated with it treats women.

Goodell initially suspended Rice, then with the Baltimore Ravens, for only two games. After a second, more violent recording of the attack surfaced—and with Americans increasingly aghast and angry—Goodell attempted a do-over and indefinitely suspended Rice. Former U.S. District Judge Barbara Jones ruled that Goodell’s second punishment was arbitrary and an “abuse of discretion.” After all, she said, Goodell knew the facts when he imposed the first suspension. The NFL commissioner must live with his original sorry decision.

After the release of the second video, the commissioner talked a lot about supposedly ambiguous statements Rice initially made about what happened in that Atlantic City elevator. It sounded like Goodell was blaming Rice for any misunderstanding. Yet Jones’ ruling concluded that Rice didn’t lie to Goodell, nor try to mislead him.

Rice is now eligible to play again—assuming any team wants to sign him.

Here’s another example that illustrates how wrongheaded the Goodell-led front office of the NFL proves itself to be when it comes to domestic violence. In arbitration, the NFL tried to argue that it believed Rice only slapped Palmer and that she “knocked herself out” on the railing.

As if slapping a woman—and with such force that she ends up unconscious—is somehow less egregious than hitting her. Or that she’s to blame for the head injury.

What kind of organization would think such a misguided argument makes any sense?

One that seems more worried about slick PR campaigns than fundamental internal change. And one that continues to let the wrong leader call the shots.