9 comments Jemele Hill Thinks Roger Goodell Is a Racist

Jemele Hill loves to talk about race in her columns. She also likes to dispute arguments that are based on a fake argument that she has created (Questions like "Is Kobe Bryant a woman" and then 1,000 words with her disproving the hypothesis that she herself created). There is nothing wrong with talking about race, other columnists do it. It's just sometimes I think she talks about race when she doesn't have anything else better to talk about. It is her fallback topic of discussion.

Today she calls out Roger Goodell for treating Ben Roethlisberger differently from other athletes that have been in trouble and play in the NFL. It's a "slippery slope" she says in the heading below the title of the article. Of course, the very reason Roethlisberger is being treated "differently" by Goodell is all about race to her, there could be no other possible reason.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said this week at the NFL owners meeting in Orlando, Fla., that he'll meet with Pittsburgh quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, who is currently under investigation for sexual assault, at the "appropriate time."

How dare he be not quick to judge and penalize Ben Roethlisberger. He should have heard about what happened in Georgia and suspended Roethlisberger immediately. NFL players should not go to bars and try to pick up women. A person would never lie about a tryst with an athlete would they?

No offense intended to women, but I am sure there are a couple of women who would misremember or accuse an athlete of something. There are crazy people in the world. I do have to say the first woman that accused Roethlisberger of a crime against her can be explained, but a second woman? That is a big coincidence.

I don't really like Ben Roethlisberger and I think he is kind of a creep, but Roger Goodell has always waited for there to be some more resolution for first-time offenders of the NFL's conduct policy. He hasn't always suspended a first-time offender of the policy immediately after the arrest or accusations were made. He usually tends to wait until the person is charged or convicted. This is important to remember.

What's he waiting for? Nightly updates from Nancy Grace's show?

Hilarious joke! Actually he is waiting for Ben Roethlisberger to actually be accused of a crime by the police. I know it is a small detail in regard to the punishment he should receive in the eyes of JemeHill, but if he doesn't get accused of a crime by the police, there is a good chance he shouldn't get punished for anything at all.

I know, I know...these small details are so annoying aren't they?

Certainly, I'm not making light of Roethlisberger's situation or the complicated position that Goodell finds himself in now

Of course not. Jokes about Roger Goodell waiting for Nancy Grace to give him updates, that's not making light of the situation at all. Putting "appropriate time" in parenthesis also shows a complete understanding of Goodell's situation, since you are essentially quoting Goodell and questioning when the appropriate time actually is.

It sounds like JemeHill is neither making light of the situation, by making jokes, nor is she making light of Goodell's position, by insinuating Goodell will wait longer to make a decision on Roethlisberger's NFL fate because Ben Roethlisberger is white. This would be true in opposite world, which is apparently where JemeHill lives.

In truth, Goodell should already have met with Roethlisberger, even though the investigation into whether Roethlisberger should be charged with sexually assaulting a 20-year-old woman in a Milledgeville, Ga., bar remains ongoing.

Because I am a fair person, I can see this point of view. My only question is what would Roger Goodell ask Ben Roethlisberger and what the hell would Roethlisberger tell Goodell? Goodell is not a police officer so he can't force Roethlisberger to speak with him and Roethisberger isn't going to tell Goodell anything of importance because his attorney probably won't let him. It's not like Roethlisberger will just start telling Goodell things he didn't tell the cops.

Really, there is nothing for Goodell to find out at this point because the investigation is still open and even if there was something for Roethlisberger to tell Goodell (besides, "I didn't do it") his attorney would not let him anyway.

So I can see this point of view, but it is pointless to meet at this time.

And once he and Big Ben are in a room alone together, Goodell should absolutely castigate the two-time Super Bowl winner for bringing such bad publicity to his lucrative league.

It sounds like JemeHill just wants Roethlisberger to get yelled at my Goodell. Maybe instead of a suspension he should be tied to a chair and then yelled at by the NFL commissioner on live television. This would please JemeHill.

I'm aware Roethlisberger hasn't been charged with any crime

ARE you aware of this? It doesn't sound like you are.

and -- everyone say it with me -- is innocent until proven guilty.

It sounds to me like "everyone" doesn't need to say this, but JemeHill needs to say this to herself. Here she goes again making up a fake point of view and then why it is wrong to have this point of view. She is machine when it comes to creating fake arguments to disprove.

We have no idea what Georgia investigators will uncover,

Which is why it doesn't make sense to meet with Roethlisberger nor punish him until more facts are found.

or what will become of the civil suit filed against him last summer by a Lake Tahoe woman who accused him of raping her in 2008.

This was the same woman who filed criminal charges against Roethlisberger that were eventually dropped. My guess is that her civil suit won't go too far, but I am not a judge nor am I an attorney, so I could be wrong. Regardless, I feel like if the cops didn't press the case then a civil suit may not work to this woman's advantage either.

In a perfect world, there would be no pressure for the commissioner to act until Roethlisberger's situation plays out completely.

Right...but JemeHill is the one applying the pressure by writing this column. She has control over whether she does this or not, yet she is acting like she HAS to write this column...because we live in an imperfect world and all, of course. Unless she has gotten a mandate from God to write a column about Ben Roethlisberger, I think this column could have avoided being written entirely.

And surely the commissioner has noticed that Roethlisberger's case is becoming a racial litmus test.

Partially because JemeHill is writing columns stating this Roethlisberger case is becoming a racial litmus test. JemeHill is acting like the reason she is writing this article is because of the pressure on the commissioner to make a decision on Roethlisberger now and because the case has become a racial litmus test. This article is part of what is putting pressure on Goodell and making this case a racial litmus test, so it is the call-to-action for Goodell, not the response to the call-to-action for Goodell.

Fair or not, the perception is that Goodell has been eager to punish black athletes regardless of the status of their criminal investigations;

Certainly there were factors with Adam "Pacman" Jones and Michael Vick -- the most high-profile measuring sticks of how the NFL can enforce its code of conduct -- that prompted the commissioner to dole out punishments before they were convicted in a court of law.

I am fairly sure the NFL never punished Mike Vick until he actually was convicted by a court of law and then they suspended him indefinitely because he had plead GUILTY to federal dog fighting charges. Yes, he had admitted he was guilty. Adam "Pacman" Jones had also been charged with several crimes when the commissioner suspended him for the season.

Obviously because JemeHill isn't interested in the truth, but pushing an agenda, she will ignore the major difference here. I will highlight the difference for her. Both Vick and Jones had either plead guilty or had charges filed against them when they were suspended. Roethlisberger has neither pled guilty nor has he had charges filed against him by the police.

It's not a racial issue, but an issue of whether the player has been charged or convicted of a crime. It's that simple. Anyone who claims there is another issue going on, that's fine, but you can't ignore this difference in the situations. Good day to all.

But the only factor that matters to those African-Americans keeping close tabs on the Roethlisberger case is this: The commissioner didn't wait to meet with Jones and Vick when they had criminal investigations hanging over their heads. Every time a prominent black athlete is involved in a legal situation, it seems as if the long, lawful arm of Goodell is ready to react.

I hope JemeHill knows these sit-downs with the commissioner are fairly useless. It's not like it is a punishment or anything, it is just the commissioner wanting to know what is going on. So now JemeHill's argument is that Roethlisberger should have gotten called to the principal's office like Jones and Vick did for simply because accused of a crime.

I will hear this argument out...but let me give you a hint, I find no precedent for this to occur.

The commissioner announced Jones' season-long suspension in 2007 less than two months after he was allegedly involved in an altercation and shooting outside of a Las Vegas strip club -- which was two months before Jones was officially charged by Vegas police and a week after Goodell brought Jones into his office for one of his infamous sit-downs.

Unfortunately, JemeHill is doing the typical ESPN act of misleading her reading audience to try and fool them into believing what she is writing is correct. Let's look at the timeline really quickly.

On March 26, 2007, Pacman Jones was officially charged with one count of felony coercion as well as one misdemeanor count of battery and one misdemeanor count of threat to life. He was charged with a crime.

On April 3, 2007, Jones met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell to discuss his future. March 26, 2007 is before April 3, 2007 and therefore Goodell talked to Jones AFTER he was charged with the crime. Unless the Internet articles I have read about this issue are lying to me, JemeHill is wrong.

So while JemeHill wants us to believe Goodell sat down with Jones BEFORE he was charged, this is absolutely incorrect.

Do some fucking research if you are going to write an article and don't try to mislead and lie to the audience to trick them into believing your facts are correct. This is terrible.

Has Roger Goodell met with Santonio Holmes to discuss his current legal problems? It sure doesn't seem that way and the last time I checked Santonio Holmes is not a white person. Under JemeHill's argument that Goodell is treating different players differently according to race, shouldn't he have sat down with Holmes by now?

JemeHill's argument fails on so many levels it amazes me. Only a person who hasn't looked into the differences in the Jones, Vick, and Roethlisberger cases could see signs of racism.

In regard to Mike Vick, Goodell didn't sit down and punish Vick until he had pled guilty to the charges. I am sure they had talked about it prior to that in an informal manner (I remember them coming out on stage together at the draft after the massacre at Virginia Tech and this is about the same time Vick's name surfaced in regard to dog fighting), but no punitive action or a meeting was had where Goodell discussed any punishment for his role...that was until Vick pled guilty.

The commissioner wasn't wrong for punishing Jones before he had his day in court.

He did punish him after he was charged for the crime though. That is the huge difference in that case and the current Roethlisberger case.

Goodell, though, officially set a precedent with Jones. For the commissioner, the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

I am ignoring this "evidence of absence" statement because it just feels overly retarded to me. Goodell did set a precedent and I could hop right on JemeHill's bandwagon of racism accusations as soon as Roethlisberger is charged with a crime and the commissioner still doesn't meet with him OR if Goodell meets with Santonio Holmes in regard to his current legal problems when he isn't formally accused of a crime. Until then...there is nothing to meet about or for me/JemeHill to get worked up over.

Roethlisberger might not have the same track record as Jones, but being accused of sexual assault twice in less than a year is an embarrassment not only to the Steelers, but to the entire NFL.

It is an embarrassment, but the key word here is "accused" not "charged" or "convicted" of a crime, but "accused" of that crime. Until Roethlisberger is charged or convicted there is no inequality in Goodell's actions.

No matter what happens with the criminal investigation or the civil case, these accusations will follow Roethlisberger forever and be used to judge the character of other NFL players.

Larry Fitzgerald was not suspended when he was accused of slapping his baby's momma, Jon Beason wasn't suspended when he was accused of using cocaine, and Shaun Rogers nor Joey Porter were called into Goodell's office after their latest run-in with the police. All of these players are not white and also none of them were convicted or formally accused of the crime...or if they were accused the charges were dropped.

There is no double standard present. As soon as Roethlisberger is charged, Goodell will speak to him, but until then they are just accusations.

In the past, Goodell has made it clear that protecting the NFL's brand is his foremost concern. When Goodell barred Vick from training camp while dogfighting charges were pending against him, he wrote this to Vick: "While it is for the criminal justice system to determine your guilt or innocence, it is my responsibility as commissioner of the National Football League to determine whether your conduct, even if not criminal, nonetheless violated league policies, including the Personal Conduct Policy."

I am repeating myself now. Charges were PENDING. There are no charges pending in the Roethlisberger case. Roethlisberger could very well be guilty, but the NFL can't and won't do anything until charges get filed or are pending.

Given that stern position, Goodell should not only already have met with Roethlisberger, but he should already have come to the conclusion that no matter how this investigation turns out, Roethlisberger should be suspended.

Wow. That is a pretty harsh punishment for being accused of a crime. Suspending Roethlisberger even though charges are not filed against him?

I hate saying this, I really do...but imagine if a writer wrote this about a non-white player who was accused of a crime. Imagine if the a writer stated a non-white player should be suspended by the commissioner regardless of whether this player was charged with a crime or not. I have a feeling JemeHill would not be on the side of the commissioner in that case.

This is the same person who wrote over a month ago that Britney Griner should be suspended 2 games for punching an opposing player on the court. JemeHill seems to have a warped sense of crime and punishment based in certain circumstances. I don't think this is a racial situation, but if JemeHill wants to turn it into one, I feel like I have to wonder if she would recommend the same harsh punishment she just suggested by the commissioner for non-white player who was not charged of a crime.

When Goodell sat Jones down for a year, he wanted to send a message that irresponsible behavior could cost an NFL player his livelihood.'

He met with Jones AFTER he was charged with the crime.

If Goodell doesn't schedule a meeting with Roethlisberger immediately, it feeds the perception that white NFL sta
rs under criminal investigation are treated differently and will receive more benefit of the doubt than their black counterparts.

No, he will not be sending this message. He will be sending the message the commissioner won't have a sit-down with you if you have not been charged, convicted or have pending charges against you. If you have been accused, then you are safe from having to speak with him until the case is resolved. I can't think of a time when Roger Goodell has suspended a first-time offender player for merely being accused of a crime.

There is a simple difference in all these cases JemeHill brings up, and the difference is something she chooses to ignore to further her argument. The simple difference is that Ben Roethlisberger hasn't been charged with a crime yet, so Roger Goodell has to wait for that to happen and then he can take action against Roethlisberger on behalf of the NFL. There is no double standard to anyone who cares enough to pay attention.