Well, I am going to give this another try even though I am not a "normal" contributor so I will probably get ripped because I post in the wrong spot or something.  Regardless, I have been personally interested in Roger Goodell's actions concerning discipline from a human resources perspective. 

Part I - Violating Working Rules

Goodell is using HR rhetoric as his basis for handling these situations (i.e. violating The Personal Conduct policy).  He is essentially referring to the "working rules" section of the NFL employee handbook and stating a player has violated a working rule just as you or I might face at any of our respective companies.

I do not wish to belabor the Big Ben suspension, but was irritated by the suspension when it was levied given the fact Ben was neither convicted nor formally charged with anything unlike Braylon Edwards, Cedric Benson, Vince Young, so on and so forth as we have all discussed endlessly.  The original Personal Conduct Policy was enacted late 2006/early 2007 and focused on criminal activity (see sample of policy from old ESPN article: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2798214) and then case interpretations led to the current, more hazy interpretation of harmful activity (see updated ESPN post from April 2010:  http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/21598/nfl-personal-conduct-policy#comments).

Now, Old Man Farve will probably get off with a stiff talking to about sending inappropriate pictures.  If that is the case, as a privately held corporation/trade association that is subject to national labor laws like any other corporation, the NFL would be running a risk of establishing inconsistent progressive discipline strategy.  Apparently, a national business periodical (Forbes) feels the same way . . . http://blogs.forbes.com/sportsmoney/2010/10/13/roethlisberger-farve-and-the-nfls-personal-conduct-policy/ (I also find the union/collective bargaining commentary in this article interesting).

Legally, I'm sure a lawyer can explain why their situations (Ben's & Brett's) are different and therefore not subject to the same discipline, but the NFL is still beginning to establish a line of inconsistent enforcement of rules.

Part II - Disciplinary Actions & The Investigative Process

Now, moving on to James Harrison - Goodell/the League is also stating there was a violation of working rules (in a basic sense) that results in a need for disciplinary action to "improve performance" (as a normal company might state).  However, Deebo was not the only "employee" to violate the exact same working rule in the exact same manner (i.e. Robinson & Merriweather).  However, for a seemingly similar violation, Deebo recieves a $75,000 fine for a hit that was while the two other individuals only received $50,000 fines.

HR policies primarily focus on establishing consistent, documented practices to ensure "the company" handles violations in a similar manner.  Whenever there is a violation, common practice is to conduct an investigative process that begins with fact finding, interviewing the employees involved, documenting everything along the way, and then determining discipline based on the facts.

In this situation you have three seemingly identical "violations".  I would be very interested to learn the quantitative measures that were implemented and the investigative process that the NFL used to determine and justify why Deebo's hit was $25K more valuable than the others.  Watching all three hits, I would have an incredibly hard time pinpointing FACTS that differentiate a difference.  Some might say he established "a pattern" after the hit on Cribb's earlier, but that was a legal hit that was not a violation of working rules or subject to discipline.  To use this would be the same as heresay or speculation if you are conducting a factual investigation.

Conclusion

Regardless of how you personally feel about Big Ben or Deebo, if the commish or "the company" is going to discipline on a violation of policy, an investigative process that focuses on facts, and punishment should be consistent for ALL employees. . . at least, that would be how you have to legally apply it at any normal company.  From a policy standpoint, this appears to be an extremely inconsistent application of rules and, if it was my company, I would be ethically upset.  And, well, I am ethically upset as a fan of the game (not just of the Steelers).

The Steelers special teams has been nothing special since Bob Ligashesky came aboard (and he does not have a good historical track record to make anyone think this is going to change) so there have been many grumblings that he might be let go along with Bruce Arians this off-season.  With the Bills firing their entire coaching staff, is Bobby April available?  Bobby helped the Bills get the #1 special teams ranking three out of five years from 2003 - 2008.  I realize it would also help to have a kicker that can put the ball back farther than the 20 yard line, but coaching definitely has to be a part of the poor performance the Steelers demonstrated this year.

Let me know what you think.

Say what you want about whether Tomlin should or should not have called the onside kick with a little over three minutes remaining (my two cents is that Tomlin knew his secondary couldn't stop him when we was playing at William & Mary let alone Driver, Jennings, Finley, Jones, et. al. with 3 minutes), but I found the craziest thing to be that Ike Taylor actually caught a ball that hit his hands!  Was that the first time this has happened since the Superbowl against the Seahawks?  Now, if we could just transfer those wicked onside kick skills to defense we would have something.

As a side note, I did not understand why Clay Matthews did not get a personal foul penalty on that play.  Sure looked like he threw a punch to me, though I guess he was going for the ball.  I thought the ref work was pretty atrocious overall throughout this game.  Well, a wins a win and I'll happily take it after 5 losses!

First of all, let me state that I am in no way proposing that Dennis Dixon is a better quarterback than Big Ben in this post.  Big Ben is our starter and franchise quarterback, and is far better than Dennis Dixon - period. 

For these last three games, however, I wonder if it may not be in the best interest of the teams future to let Ben play backup and give Dennis some game time.  First, Ben has been sacked 11 times over the past three games he has played against the power house defenses of KC, Oakland, and Cleveland (granted, 8 of those did come against Cleveland).  As we all know, he also sustained a concussion against KC.  Moving forward, the Steelers face 3 decent defenses in GB, the Rat-birds, and Miami (howdy Mr. Porter), who can put some pressure on the QB.  Also, to the ire of all of Steeler's Nation, the Steeler season really is over barring a miracle.  What will this team gain by letting Ben play the last three games and get bounced around several more times?

Also, Dennis Dixon played admirably in the Ravens game, and may not give the Steelers much worse of a winning chance since they have apparently given up anyway.  If Dixon goes out and has a couple of decent games, the Steelers may have a great piece of trade bait to help with some of their secondary and O-line woes for next season.

Just some food for thought, so let me hear what you have to say.

Wow, could that have sucked anymore?  I was sticking in there after the tough loss to the Bengals thinking the Steelers still had a good, focused team, but this game just proved that the Steelers are officially not going anywhere this year.  Say what you want about home field advantage for the Chiefs, or that the Steelers offense put up good yardage numbers, or whatever pearls you want to try and pick out of this turd but it will all come down to one thing - this stunk.  A championship caliber team does not go into a game with a seriously overmatched opponent and get beat by committing stupid mistake after stupid mistake.  I don't know if this team has lost some it's focus on details or what the problem is, but they just don't have what it takes to win another ring.  Maybe they can pull it together for next year, but I'm jumping on the bandwagon that this ship has sailed.  I really hope I am wrong.

I thoroughly enjoyed Blitz's analysis of Timmons being the guy that needs to step up and make some big play in Troy's absence, and I agree he is a big piece of the puzzle.  At the same time, I have to ask what has happened to the Beast (yes, stupid Wolverine pun intended) that was to be LaMarr Woodley this year?  I have not been able to rewatch either of the games and break down how he has been doing, but I do see that he has recorded only 1 tackle and 1 tackle assist through the first 2 games.  Can anyone lend any thoughts/ideas as to how he has been stymied?  Furthermore, it is clear teams are loading up on Deebo, so how is LaMarr not getting free on the other side?  Or are teams just using the max protect to combat Deebo and Woodley?  Last year he came out with a real bang against Houston, and I (for one) was expecting some big time plays from him this year, too.  Not seeing it so far.  What do you guys think?

How many of you watching the game tonight imagined the season crashing down as tubby Algae (who name's their kid that anyway) Crumpler rolled up on Troy's knee!  Well, that may be a tad dramatic, but nevertheless I was pretty worried.  It appears the Madden Jinx may have struck again.  All I can say is beware Mr. Fitzgerald - the bell tolls for thee.

Otherwise, great game and great win for the men of the Black and Gold.  If Troy's injury is just a strain as early report indicate, it may be a good opportunity to get the backups some time after getting a tough first win.  Still excited about the season and can't wait to see what happens next!!!