Eight years ago NFL commissioner Roger Goodell announced the NFLs new personal conduct policy and everything in pro sports changed. Up until Goodells announced policy in April of 2007 for the entire history of American sports pro sports leagues had never punished players for actions that had nothing whatsoever to do with competition. (Players or athletes were punished for performance enhancing drugs, gambling, or, in a move that I disagree with, non performance enhancing drugs. But never for entirely off the field activities unrelated to their sports.) Goodells policy, prompted by a slate of off the field criminal issues, gave the NFL commissioner unquestioned power to discipline players for any incident that reflected poorly upon the NFLs brand. A central tenet of Goodells new policy was that punishments wouldnt be governed entirely by guilt or innocence in the eyes of the criminal justice system, Goodell would have the right to suspend players even in the absence of convictions or, amazingly, even in the absence of charges themselves. Whats more, Goodell would act entirely on his own as both judge, jury and executioner. He would also hear all appeals to his punishments.

With one fell swoop Roger Goodell replaced the protections of the American judicial system and installed a new system of punishment entirely predicated on the personal decision-making of one man. Meet Roger Goodell, dictator of football. It was a sweeping power grab without parallel in the history of professional sports. And it received nearly universal praise. In fact, the policy was so popular with the public that the NFLs own players association, in a sign of stunning weakness and abdicated leadership, acquiesced to the commissioners new powers — which werent then permitted by the collective bargaining agreement — and allowed Goodells power grab to go unchallenged. Every player meekly submitted to Goodells punishments without challenging them either. When the time for a new collective bargaining agreement to be negotiated arrived, the players association formally acknowledged Goodells power and gave him sweeping authority to punish players for entirely off the field action. It was a stunning coup by Emperor Goodell, the new unquestioned supreme ruler of pro sports.

In short order every other pro sports league fell into line behind the NFL. The NBA, NHL, Major League Baseball, and the WNBA have all now suspended players for entirely off the field actions that had nothing to do with the sport itself. (Colleges have also strengthened their punishments for off field behavior, but there is a different set of issues at play here since college athletes are students governed by school rules. Playing college sports is, ostensibly, anyway, a recreational activity and college student-athletes have always been subject to penalty for behavior that has nothing to do with their sport since theyre students first. So thats a different issue entirely. Playing a college sport is, at its root, a privilege.) Eight years after Goodells power grab, its now accepted belief that pro sports leagues should punish players for behavior, criminal or otherwise, that is entirely unrelated to their on court or on field performance.

But how did this idea take root? And why do we accept it with so little questions being asked? Since when did pro sports leagues become the police or moral arbiters for our country? Moreover, why do the leagues want this responsibility, since, rather than cleanse the league of blame for a players actions, it actually connects the league to the players actions more inextricably than ever before. Remember, no one demanded that the NBA take action when Kobe Bryant was charged with rape. No one said the NBA was at fault for Kobes charges. The public accepted that the players off court behavior and his on court behavior were different spheres. It wasnt the job of the NBA to punish Kobe Bryant, it was the job of the judicial system.

No longer. Now the public blames leagues when players get in trouble. Indeed, Goodells own power grab blew up in his face when he miscalculated the correct punishment for Baltimore Raven running back Ray Rice after a domestic violence incident. Amazingly, the public didnt vent its anger over Rices lenient sentence from the actual criminal justice system, it became obsessed with what Roger Goodell and the NFL knew and when they knew it. Think about how crazy this is, the public was more angry at Rices employer for its lenient treatment of domestic violence than it was with our actual criminal justice systems lenient treatment of domestic violence. The public had so bought into the idea, set forth in Goodells own personal conduct policy, that a players employer should be meting out punishment that a pro sports leagues decision on player punishment was more severely critiqued than the actual justice systems. Moreover, the NFLs own investigation into a criminal matter was held at fault by the public.

Let me repeat that for you in all caps — THE PUBLIC WAS MAD THAT THE NFL, AN ORGANIZATION THAT EXISTS TO PLAY FOOTBALL GAMES, DID AN INADEQUATE JOB OF INVESTIGATING AND PUNISHING DOMESTIC ASSAULT.

Holy hell.

Being mad at the NFL for inadequately investigating domestic assault is as illogical as being mad at McDonalds for not doing a better job of investigating a murder involving its fry guy. McDonalds does an okay job of making hamburgers, because, like the NFL, its in the business of producing things for paying customers. No one expects any other employer to conduct criminal investigations and levy punishments for non-work behavior. If the CEO of McDonalds, following a slew of employee arrests, announced that McDonalds was now going to clean up its image by conducting investigations of employees for what they did outside of work hours and, when their behavior wasnt appropriate in the mind of the CEO, the restaurant would suspend employees without pay, wed all think that was absurd, and potentially illegal, right?

Yet thats exactly what the NFL did. And the public applauded so vociferously that every other pro sports league followed suit. The result is that this is now what every pro sports league does — punishes and investigates players for things that dont involve their jobs at all.

Hell, what was the first question most people asked when allegations arose that Adrian Peterson beat his children? Whats the NFL going to do about this? Let me reiterate this, our first thought was — WHAT IS THE NFL GOING TO DO ABOUT ADRIAN PETERSONS POTENTIAL CHILD ABUSE?

How insane is this?

(Inevitably, people want to email and Tweet, Yeah, but if I did what (x player did), Id get fired at work. Youre probably right. But thats because youre not as good at what you do as those players are at what they do. They are highly skilled professionals who are demonstrably better at what they do than you are at what you do. Youre probably expendable and replaceable at your job, they arent. Regardless of your job, youll always be employed so long as your talents exceed your problems. If you have an issue with that, you have an issue with capitalism.)

As a result weve somehow turned our pro sports leagues into pseudo-judicial bodies, required to investigate alleged criminal wrongdoings and render justice. And no one even thinks thats the least bit strange? Have you ever heard anyone question whether this idea makes sense? What in the bloody hell is going on here? Am I totally crazy for thinking that if youre not in jail you should be eligible to play pro sports in America? Now, individual teams can make their own decisions about whether they want people with criminal issues in their past to represent them — just like every other business in the country can — but why in the world should we allow pro sports leagues to punish players more severely than the actual criminal justice system? And how in the world did the player unions all roll over and play dead when these issues were being debated? Can you imagine what would happen if Tom Cruise got investigated for sexual assault, wasnt charged, and someone in Hollywood tried to ban him from making movies for a year? What about if Taylor Swift got popped for a tour bus full of psychedelic mushrooms and someone in the music industry announced that her albums wouldnt be released until shed served a music suspension of six months?

I mean, this would all be absurd, right?

Yet thats exactly what were doing right now in pro sports and no one even blinks an eye.

Whats the justification?

Please spare me the false morality arguments. Fans are total hypocrites when it comes to their teams winning. If you gave fans this hypothetical — the starting quarterback of your favorite NFL team will be charged with attempted murder and beat the charges this summer. This fall he will lead your team to the Super Bowl and win the game. Would this be okay with you? Just about every fan would be fine with that deal. But even if you arent okay with that arrangement and wouldnt want the accused attempted murderer representing your team on the field, the NFL isnt in the morality business, its in the football business. If playing felons actually hurt the NFLs business model, it would have happened a long time ago. Point is, it doesnt. Fans dont stop watching football because of off-field player actions.

If you have an issue with inadequate punishments in our criminal justice system, take that up with our criminal justice system. Lord knows our criminal justice system has many flaws that need to be remedied. But getting upset with pro sports leagues for their responses to actual criminal issues isnt the answer. Worse, it totally misses the larger issue: The criminal justice system received minimal criticism over Ray Rices or Greg Hardys punishments, instead the public was focused on what the NFL was doing. Thats so misguided it boggles the mind. The NFL shouldnt be in the criminal punishment business, our justice system should.

Back in 2007 Roger Goodell made the first of many truly stupid decisions when he implemented the personal conduct policy and tried to take responsibility for protecting the NFLs brand. A brand, by the way, that didnt need any protection. Worse, most of us were so stupid, we applauded him so fervently that every other league implemented similar policies lest they be considered soft on crime. (Yes, pro sports turned into politics in the 1990s, when every politician was afraid of being called soft on crime and as a result we overpunished trivial offenses with significant prison sentences). Yet up until now I havent heard a single person, or shockingly, a players union asking a really big question — why should pro sports leagues be in the business of punishing players for activities that are entirely unrelated to sports?

Its time that some of us start to ask that question. Because once you do, the answer is readily apparent and contrary to our present trajectory — leagues shouldnt be punishing players for activities entirely unrelated to sports.

Period.