Sports Round-Up: NFL Can't Discipline Aaron Donald Despite Obvious Assault, Jersey Retirements are Out of Control & NBC isn't Taking NASCAR Seriously

by Julian Spivey

Screenshot

How Can NFL Not Have Jurisdiction Over Joint Practices?
​Many people, including myself, were horrified on Thursday (August 25) when images of a brawl at a joint practice between the Los Angeles Rams and Cincinnati Bengals were published showing three-time Defensive Player of the Year Aaron Donald of the Rams wielding two Bengals helmets as weapons, including contacting the helmet of a Bengals player.

The incredibly dangerous scenario had me thinking when I first saw the images that it would be at least an obvious fine for Donald and potentially a suspension. He could’ve seriously injured or killed somebody, after all. But then I saw the tweet from Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio that the NFL doesn’t have jurisdiction over joint practices, meaning it couldn’t act against players during joint practices. I wonder if that would have changed had the Bengals player assaulted by Donald been hauled off the practice field on a stretcher?

The Rams, which do have the right to discipline Donald, have said they would do so, but that the punishment would remain “in-house.” Whatever the Rams do to discipline Donald will simply not be enough to fit what he did. Using multiple helmets as weapons against your fellow competitors should be at least a multiple-game suspension. It seems the league’s best defensive player will get away with essentially less than a slap on the wrist.

The league must do what it can to wrangle disciplinary control over its teams in all scenarios. 

---

---

Screenshot

Jersey Retirements Have Gotten Out of Control
I’ve never thought too much about jersey number retirements in sports except for how dumb it is that the Miami Heat in the NBA has retired Michael Jordan’s No. 23 despite never playing a minute for the franchise. But lately, jersey retirements have been on my mind. Shortly after the death of NBA legend Bill Russell in late July, the league decided it would be retiring his No. 6 leaguewide. Except Jackie Robinson’s No. 42 in Major League Baseball, because he integrated the game-changing it forever and it was truly a landmark moment in American Civil Rights, I don’t believe jersey numbers should be retired league-wide. I think the NHL retiring Wayne Gretzky’s No. 99 leaguewide was ridiculous. If the NBA has retired Russell’s no. 6 shouldn’t it also retire Jordan’s No. 23, as he’s almost unanimously considered the G.O.A.T? Russell already has the NBA Finals Most Valuable Player award named in his honor. Isn’t that enough?

I was shocked recently when catching bits of a New York Yankees game to see it was Paul O’Neill’s jersey retirement day at Yankee Stadium. O’Neill was an important part of the Yankees late ‘90s dynasty, but he couldn’t even make it past his first time on the Baseball Hall of Fame ballot. This is the Yankees organization, the most esteemed franchise in all of the professional sports and they’re retiring O’Neill’s No. 21? Doesn’t that tarnish many of the other retired numbers in the franchise’s history like Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, or modern stars like Derek Jeter or Mariano Rivera? O’Neill isn’t even in the same stratosphere as legends like that.

Some of these jersey retirements have gotten out of control. I believe that in most circumstances a player should be a hall of famer before his number is retired by a franchise. I’m fine with rare moments like the Yankees retiring catcher Thurman Munson’s No. 15 after he was killed midseason in an airplane crash, but at least he was a league MVP and seven-time All-Star.

O’Neill was the 23rd Yankees player or manager to have his number retired. That franchise is going to run out of numbers at this rate, especially with cheap retirements like No. 21.

On Saturday (August 27), the New York Mets announced they were retiring Willie Mays’ No. 24. Mays is one of the five greatest baseball players of all time (he’s likely top three), but he played 135 games over the span of two seasons with the Mets at the very end of his career. I understand he spent a handful of his Giants years in New York before the franchise moved to San Francisco and thus means a good deal to the history of baseball within the city, but this seems too much, even for a man on baseball’s Mount Rushmore.

Teams and even leagues are taking some of the specialness out of jersey retirements. 

---

---

How Are We Supposed to Take This Sport Seriously?
NASCAR and the media covering the sport had been hyping the regular season-ending Cup Series race at Daytona International Speedway scheduled for Saturday (August 27) as potentially the biggest race of the season thus far (or at least the second biggest after the season-opening Daytona 500). The race on Saturday was postponed to Sunday morning due to rain. I understand NASCAR can’t control the weather, but it can control its schedule making. The sport wants this race as the cutoff race for its 10-race playoff at the end of the season because of the unpredictability of the pack style of racing on the track and the fact that it essentially levels the playing field allowing any and every driver the chance to win the race, which is a free ticket into the playoffs. The second Daytona race of the season was run on July 4 weekend for most of its existence and was plagued by rain often, but the sport moving it to its current place in the schedule at the end of August/beginning of September has moved it to the rainiest time of the year statistically for Daytona Beach, Fla. Again, July wasn’t much better. But NASCAR could have a similar final playoff race excitement meter pegged moment and help some of the weather issues by moving Daytona into the playoffs in October, a much less rainy time of the year on average for the city, replacing it as the final regular season race with the similarly styled Talladega Superspeedway in Alabama, which holds an October playoff spot.

That’s only my second biggest issue with the Daytona rainout. The biggest is NASCAR’s decision and NASCAR’s network partners’ decision to attempt to start the race at 10 a.m. EST on Sunday on CNBC, a network dedicated to covering the financial market. The race was originally scheduled to run on NBC. What does NBC view as more important to air at 9 a.m.? It’s a weekly news program “Meet the Press” and then the affiliates have the next hour after that (my local NBC is showing church service hosted by religious charlatan Joel Osteen and then paid programming).

So, NASCAR’s potentially biggest race of the year is set to start at 10 a.m. EST (or when most of its west coast fans will still be sleeping) on a stock market watch network because Chuck Todd is going to be blabbing about politics.

How can this be taken seriously as a sport when its major events are being moved in favor of “Meet the Press” and shown on a network most racing fans have never spent two seconds watching?

It probably won’t matter anyway. It’s supposed to rain in Daytona Beach all day tomorrow, even at 10 a.m. EST … because NASCAR scheduled the race at this venue’s rainiest time of the year!