The Wells report on Deflategate, the Mitchell report on steroids, and the Freeh report regarding Penn State all suffer from three fundamental flaws. First, the investigator and author of the report serves as the judge and juror regarding the facts of the event. This condition lacks fairness because the author will obviously agree with the report’s findings. Second, the accused is neither given the opportunity to present arguments or evidence nor the ability to challenge those in the report. Third, confidentiality is not maintained, and individuals are viewed as guilty even if they were innocent. This hurdle can be impossible to overcome, and individuals can be permanently scarred. A better system would be for both sides of a controversy to conduct their own investigations and have an independent party review the evidence and come to a conclusion. In short, it would be best to replicate the American system of jurisprudence in these controversies.
The NFL and NFLPA should create a new investigatory and disciplinary system in the next collective-bargaining agreement.
Michael B. Abramson
Atlanta
LET US HEAR FROM YOU
Street & Smith’s SportsBusiness Journal welcomes letters from readers on any topic that is making headlines in the world of sports business. Letters must be signed and include the writer’s city and state. All letters are subject to standard editing for style, grammar and length. Send letters to letters@sportsbusinessjournal.com.
