Some troubling comments attributed to Terry Pegula (and denied by Pegula) and Jerry Jones from SI Writer Jim Trotter’s Lawsuit against the NFL

[Stoner]

4 minutes ago, SwampD said:

So you are one of the others, then. I didn’t just make it up and there is no way I’m going digging for them.

During the owners meeting at the time of the whole anthem BS. Good luck finding anything now. I’m sure the NFL big brother machine has scrubbed it.

No it's out there. I just read a breakdown with direct quotes. I have to find it again is all. Hold the phone, Thelma Lou.

[RochesterExpat]

10 hours ago, SwampD said:

Except that we heard reports about how bad he looked right after it happened. We wouldn't have heard those reports if he had said otherwise. Just my take.

I searched for supporting articles from that time and I came up with absolutely nothing. Not even an oblique reference. The complaint above doesn't provide any supporting evidence beyond statements (his other comment had a NYT reference). I think you are confusing the "back to Africa" comment with his comment about the need for a spokesman who is African-American (something else raised in the complaint that I addressed) while discussing the Kaepernick situation.

The latter comment certainly comes across as pandering when read out of context, and he was lightly criticized for it at the time (2018), but I found nothing about the 2020 zoom call. I think you are probably thinking of the former and mixing up the reports. Especially since the tape of the 2018 call wasn't released right away so there was a lot of media conjecture about content and comments.

I should add that the 2018 comment, while probably regretful in how it was perceived after-the-fact, appeared to be a genuine response to a black NFL player's comment. It was an open forum style phone call and none of the participants--people who would have the greatest merit in claiming the statement was offensive--ever publicly (that I can find anyway) spoke out against what Terry Pegula said as being pandering. Even the few articles that mention the comment generally do so in a manner leaving the reader to conclude the comment was meant to be pandering. Again, the comment was made to NFL players who are employees of the NFL by an owner of the NFL. Those players have every right to feel safe in their work environment. No one prior to Mr. Trotter have used this comment to allege a hostile work environment. Personally, I feel that's very telling.

This is entirely a subjective opinion, but I believe that, by and large, Terry Pegula has been an outspoken advocate for equality. I didn't realize the extent to which he's involved until I started searching to see if I could find anything related to the 2020 or 2018 comments. His personal advocacy includes both his "professional capacity" from a league and organizational perspective that one would expect, but also in a (relatively) smaller personal capacity (lines do get blurred with owners and I recognize that) with just his general willingness to go on record with public statements. There are other owners who are similarly active, and then there are owners who aren't. 

I realize this is starting to toe the line of political theater and I don't really want to open that can of worms whatsoever, but it's worth mentioning owner advocacy in the context of the complaint. The allegations in the complaint that league owners are part of the racist culture in the NFL is directly conflicted with the words and actions of several owners--to the extent it is far easier to find evidence against the complaint than in support. When I was trying to find other sources for the alleged 2020 comments by Terry Pegula, I was surprised to learn the extent action some owners have made in almost direct conflict with the allegations, and many of those actions started years ago--even before Kaepernick. 

Actions speak louder than words. Specifically, it's hard to avoid Art Rooney II's name on any of the social justice issues the NFL advocates. Full stop. I suspect that is why he gets a tacit endorsement in the complaint. Similarly, the names of Jimmy Haslam, Gayle Benson, Shahid Khan, Michael Bidwell, and Arthur Blank are almost always mentioned, frequently alongside one another and Art Rooney II. These six together seem to form a core of league owners who are, at least superficially, the exact opposite of how owners in the complaint are portrayed.

Terry Pegula, ironically, is another name that is frequently mentioned as being an involved advocate, but he comes across somewhat as an outsider in the world of NFL ownership. I don't know why. It might just be perspective. Football fans would have a better grasp. I know Jimmy Haslam once was a co-owner alongside the Rooney family, Gayle Benson and Arthur Blank have been around the league for decades, and the Bidwell family has owned the Cardinals since the 30s, so a clique of that nature is unsurprising. 

Also worth mentioning is that Stephen Ross of all people is heavily involved in social justice and his involvement started before Kaepernick ever took a knee on a football field--and his advocacy extends beyond just the NFL. That's the same 83-year-old white dude who is friends with Donald Trump and fundraised on his behalf. And, yes, he is the one who proposed players and owners march on Washington D.C.  during the 2018 meeting which I initially interpreted as pandering. If there was one surprise during the limited search, it was definitely seeing his name.

 

12 minutes ago, SwampD said:

So you are one of the others, then. I didn’t just make it up and there is no way I’m going digging for them.

During the owners meeting at the time of the whole anthem BS. Good luck finding anything now. I’m sure the NFL big brother machine has scrubbed it.

Sorry, now that I posted it, I see you were talking about the 2018 meeting and not the 2020 comments. I posted a link to the article from the NYT that featured their analysis of the tape in my original post as well as a short analysis of the comments. 

[Stoner]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/sports/nfl-owners-kaepernick.html

[RochesterExpat]

8 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

No it's out there. I just read a breakdown with direct quotes. I have to find it again is all. Hold the phone, Thelma Lou.

Assuming it's the 2018 meeting, I included a link in my analysis of the complaint because it was cited in the complaint. Here you go:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/sports/nfl-owners-kaepernick.html

[Night Train]

You guys like paysites, which some cannot read. The NY Times is my least favorite news source. 

[Eleven]

2 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/sports/nfl-owners-kaepernick.html

 

1 minute ago, RochesterExpat said:

Assuming it's the 2018 meeting, I included a link in my analysis of the complaint because it was cited in the complaint. Here you go:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/sports/nfl-owners-kaepernick.html

Can someone post the relevant excerpt with context?

[RochesterExpat]

2 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Can someone post the relevant excerpt with context?

 

18 hours ago, RochesterExpat said:

From the article:

The owners were intent on finding a way to avoid Trump’s continued criticism. The president’s persistent jabs on Twitter had turned many fans against the league. Lurie, who called Trump’s presidency “disastrous,” cautioned against players getting drawn into the president’s tactics.

“We’ve got to be careful not to be baited by Trump or whomever else,” Lurie said. “We have to find a way to not be divided and not get baited.”

The Buffalo Bills owner Terry Pegula sounded anguished over the uncertainty of when Trump would take another shot at the league. “All Donald needs to do is to start to do this again,” Pegula said. “We need some kind of immediate plan because of what’s going on in society. All of us now, we need to put a Band-Aid on what’s going on in the country.”

The Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shahid Khan countered that the worst was behind them. “All the damage Trump’s going to do is done,” he said.

The owners kept returning to one bottom-line issue: Large numbers of fans and sponsors had become angry about the protests. Boycotts had been threatened and jerseys burned and — most worrisome — TV ratings were declining.

Pegula complained that the league was "under assault." He unloaded a dizzying flurry of nautical metaphors to describe their predicament. "To me, this is like a glacier moving into the ocean," he said. "We're getting hit with a tsunami." He expressed his wish that the league never be a "glacier crawling into the ocean."

The Houston Texans owner Bob McNair was more direct. He urged the players to tell their colleagues to, essentially, knock off the kneeling. "You fellas need to ask your compadres, fellas, stop that other business, let's go out and do something that really produces positive results, and we'll help you."

After the Miami Dolphins owner Stephen Ross raised the idea of a "march on Washington" by N.F.L. players and owners, Eric Reid, Kaepernick's former teammate and the first player to kneel alongside him, brought the discussion back to Kaepernick. 

[...]

Pegula offered that he thought the league was battling a perception and “media problem.” He said it would be great for the league to find a compelling spokesman — preferably a player — to promote all of the good things they were doing together. He suggested that the league could learn from the gun lobby in this regard.

“For years we’ve watched the National Rifle Association use Charlton Heston as a figurehead,” Pegula said. “We need a spokesman.”

Anquan Boldin, a former N.F.L. wide receiver who was at the meeting, said that owners needed to be spokesmen, too. “Letting people know it’s not just the players that care about these issues, but the owners, too,” Boldin said.

Pegula didn’t address Boldin’s point except to add that it would be important for the spokesman to be black. (None of the owners in the N.F.L. are black.)

“For us to have a face, as an African-American, at least a face that could be in the media,” Pegula continued, “we could fall in behind that."

 

Edited September 15, 2023 by RochesterExpat
I can't copy-paste apparently

[Stoner]

My addled brain continues to vex me. Of course it was Roch's post where I read all the quotes.

2 minutes ago, Night Train said:

You guys like paysites, which some cannot read. The NY Times is my least favorite news source. 

FWIW the Times just let me read the whole thing without paying.

[nfreeman]

@SwampD -- is the 2018 stuff about TP saying, at a meeting with players and owners, that the NFL should have an African-American spokesperson the stuff you're referring to?

[That Aud Smell]

I recall reports of TP stepping in it - verbally - during the heat of the Kaepernick/BLM matters.

Why would this surprise anyone? It would strike me as utterly ordinary for a horseshoe up his butt Boomer billionaire from Podunk, PA to say some dumb sh1t about black people agitating for civil rights.

It doesn’t make him a bad person. It doesn’t mean he holds malice in his heart towards black people generally or any black person specifically (because they’re black). He’d just be a product of societal forces and norms with the potentiating force of ungodly wealth added into the mix.

[Curt]

Just now, That Aud Smell said:

I recall reports of TP stepping in it - verbally - during the heat of the Kaepernick/BLM matters.

Why would this surprise anyone? It would strike me as utterly ordinary for a horseshoe up his butt Boomer billionaire from Podunk, PA to say some dumb sh1t about black people agitating for civil rights.

It doesn’t make him a bad person. It doesn’t mean he holds malice in his heart towards black people generally or any black person specifically (because they’re black). He’d just be a product of societal forces and norms with the potentiating force of ungodly wealth added into the mix.

Just to add another data point (since it seems all we have to go off of here is individual memories), I don’t personally remember TP saying anything that got him in trouble during the height of BLM protests a few years ago.  Similar to you, it wouldn’t really surprise me though.

[Eleven]

3 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Why would this surprise anyone? It would strike me as utterly ordinary for a horseshoe up his butt Boomer billionaire from Podunk, PA to say some dumb sh1t about black people agitating for civil rights.

It doesn't seem to me that that is what he was doing, at least not from that excerpt.

17 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

FWIW the Times just let me read the whole thing without paying.

Yeah, I'm over-limit though.  

[That Aud Smell]

2 minutes ago, Eleven said:

It doesn't seem to me that that is what he was doing, at least not from that excerpt.

Has it been quoted? Is it the one where he’s suggesting that the Kaep/BLM stuff could be troweled over if the NFL could find an appropriate … black person* to serve as the face of the league on the issue? That’s how I recall hearing it.

* I typed and deleted other terms here.

[RochesterExpat]

5 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Has it been quoted? Is it the one where he’s suggesting that the Kaep/BLM stuff could be troweled over if the NFL could find an appropriate … black person* to serve as the face of the league on the issue? That’s how I recall hearing it.

* I typed and deleted other terms here.

“For years we’ve watched the National Rifle Association use Charlton Heston as a figurehead,” Pegula said. “We need a spokesman.”

Anquan Boldin, a former N.F.L. wide receiver who was at the meeting, said that owners needed to be spokesmen, too. “Letting people know it’s not just the players that care about these issues, but the owners, too,” Boldin said.

Pegula didn’t address Boldin’s point except to add that it would be important for the spokesman to be black. (None of the owners in the N.F.L. are black.)

“For us to have a face, as an African-American, at least a face that could be in the media,” Pegula continued, “we could fall in behind that."

[SwampD]

Yeah, the more I think about that quote, the more blockheaded it becomes, as if civil rights are only an African American issue. If anything, when you think about who was stirring that sh!tpot at the time, the spokespeople should have been the owners themselves.

An AA spokesperson would fall on deaf ears for those who were making this an issue.

[Eleven]

16 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Has it been quoted? Is it the one where he’s suggesting that the Kaep/BLM stuff could be troweled over if the NFL could find an appropriate … black person* to serve as the face of the league on the issue? That’s how I recall hearing it.

* I typed and deleted other terms here.

If you're referring to the excerpts above, that is a cynical interpretation IMO.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Eleven

[SDS]

43 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/sports/nfl-owners-kaepernick.html

My gift to everyone:
 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/sports/nfl-owners-kaepernick.html?unlocked_article_code=2sUvwJjd1l1_S3A9ndwivodCqhlHbNLmaGIbddrzz7D7lHeMF8cJDhe9m3CKlQe_1zntsO7udM-7VesqiZBfzmgMMT9xpmZ_QpE65xvI9CIER6QkBiGyH2sIddGNnf0AGpNx9auZoWHLzlLbinHDPqygfW-JscU6M9sbUsSrjqEt_LDAGB0sUXO5zRl35f51KwLohCaw0khyq_O3NTIs1eNxDAeDbtU56aQlVOQkgdylOtvqKOD8On3hVeLReRz453P7IW1i8daYkFjdSg6Btsr_4rqZsdpgUc1yz12n1_kmy5HlZQj3bqYK487QjF66DaHBojW-jRXlbAEdsy8&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
 

[Curt]

1 hour ago, RochesterExpat said:

“For years we’ve watched the National Rifle Association use Charlton Heston as a figurehead,” Pegula said. “We need a spokesman.”

Anquan Boldin, a former N.F.L. wide receiver who was at the meeting, said that owners needed to be spokesmen, too. “Letting people know it’s not just the players that care about these issues, but the owners, too,” Boldin said.

Pegula didn’t address Boldin’s point except to add that it would be important for the spokesman to be black. (None of the owners in the N.F.L. are black.)

“For us to have a face, as an African-American, at least a face that could be in the media,” Pegula continued, “we could fall in behind that."

 

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

Has it been quoted? Is it the one where he’s suggesting that the Kaep/BLM stuff could be troweled over if the NFL could find an appropriate … black person* to serve as the face of the league on the issue? That’s how I recall hearing it.

* I typed and deleted other terms here.

Regarding Terry’s quotes here:  he is expressing his opinion.  You could disagree with that opinion.  You could call that opinion misguided.  However, it’s not an inherently morally reprehensible opinion/comment.  It’s nothing like the quote being attributed to him in Trotter’s recent lawsuit.

[RochesterExpat]

8 minutes ago, Curt said:

Regarding Terry’s quotes here:  he is expressing his opinion.  You could disagree with that opinion.  You could call that opinion misguided.  However, it’s not an inherently morally reprehensible opinion/comment.  It’s nothing like the quote being attributed to him in Trotter’s recent lawsuit.

This is exactly how I feel about the comment published by the NYT. As @SwampD said, it's a "blockheaded" comment. It isn't racist. The fact that Trotter included it in his complaint is a stretch. From the complaint:

This statement exemplifies the NFL's focus on "appearing" inclusive when it is advantageous from a business or public relations angle, while not actually embracing the concept of diversity in any meaningful manner.

If anything, Terry's comment about hiring a black spokesperson shows him "embracing the concept of diversity" seeing as how I am assuming this is a paid position and the person would be the public face of the ownership group.

It's almost like a Catch-22. If the ownership group of the NFL takes no action on racial equality they are racist. If the ownership group takes any action, well, it's simply pandering.

Edited September 15, 2023 by RochesterExpat

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

Yeah, the more I think about that quote, the more blockheaded it becomes, as if civil rights are only an African American issue. If anything, when you think about who was stirring that sh!tpot at the time, the spokespeople should have been the owners themselves.

An AA spokesperson would fall on deaf ears for those who were making this an issue.

Except that only considers one of the two problems the league had at the time:

1.  There were a lot of players who were hurting because of racial injustice.  They needed a face and a voice because Kaepernick had been blackballed by the league (and I'm still angry about that).

2.  There was a sitting president who was criticizing the league and turning eyeballs off of screens.

A Black spokesperson is an attempt to address both issues.  That gives the people who are hurting a face and a voice, and also allows the league to respond to the president.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Eleven

[shrader]

12 hours ago, SwampD said:

They did.

At the time, it was pointed out how bad TP's statement was. I remember the reports. Others do, too.

Is it worthy of money changing hands, due to a civil suit?,… I don't know, and what's more, I don't really care.

I am sure, though, that it happened. You're not. I am sure that I also don't care about that.

None of this means that the person actually complained about it.  The suit says that the person shared a conversation that he had.  None of that comes off as a complaint to me but more of a "hey, wait until you here what this guy said".  I'm still catching up on the rest of the posts here, but the meetings you're talking about with Pegula should be a completely different event than this 40 media member zoom call.  Pegula's not on that call.  Whenever he came off looking badly (which I also  vaguely remember some comments about), it's not the same thing.

[RochesterExpat]

4 minutes ago, Eleven said:

A Black spokesperson is an attempt to address both issues.  That gives the people who are hurting a face and a voice, and also allows the league to respond to the president.

I agree. The issue is really that in polite society, you aren't supposed to actually state the obvious like "the spokesperson should be black." Stating it was a mistake on Terry's part. It's not racist like the suit alleges. It's just not the wisest choice of words he could have made in that situation.

[Eleven]

6 minutes ago, RochesterExpat said:

I agree. The issue is really that in polite society, you aren't supposed to actually state the obvious like "the spokesperson should be black." Stating it was a mistake on Terry's part. It's not racist like the suit alleges. It's just not the wisest choice of words he could have made in that situation.

It was at a meeting with a LOT of Black players and a Black NFLPA president (who praised the meeting).  I think he was capable of reading the room.

[RochesterExpat]

16 minutes ago, shrader said:

None of this means that the person actually complained about it.  The suit says that the person shared a conversation that he had.  None of that comes off as a complaint to me but more of a "hey, wait until you here what this guy said".  I'm still catching up on the rest of the posts here, but the meetings you're talking about with Pegula should be a completely different event than this 40 media member zoom call.  Pegula's not on that call.  Whenever he came off looking badly (which I also  vaguely remember some comments about), it's not the same thing.

Two different comments. The zoom call was the "back to Africa" comment. 

In that situation, a reporter allegedly shared a conversation he had at a dinner two years earlier with Terry Pegula during which Pegula said the alleged comment. The reporter shared this on the 40 person zoom call in 2020 and the comment was made in 2018. There are zero sources that I can find from that time that reported on this. I can't find anything to suggest this event occurred prior to the publishing of Trotter's complaint. That's not to suggest it didn't occur, but it simply didn't leak outside the 40 person call (the likelihood of that happening I leave to the reader).

From the complaint we know that Trotter, as any reasonable person would, took offense to this comment attributed to Terry Pegula. A comment he is hearing second-hand two years later. Trotter voiced his concerns to his immediate management. Management responded to him that the NFL was investigating. 

A year (or so?) later he was told it was an HR matter by the NFL. He claims this makes it a sham investigation because he was never interviewed; however, why would the NFL need to interview him? He wasn't a primary source. Buffalo News has since released that the NFL interviewed the reporter who made the comment during the zoom call as well as all the people who were at dinner with Terry Pegula in 2018 when the comment was allegedly made. Not a single person corroborated the allegation in Trotter's complaint. 

In the context of the complaint, Trotter is trying to argue that the NFL was a hostile work environment and discriminated against him on the basis of his race. One of his arguments is the NFL's failure to investigate complaints. An example is his duly reported complaint about Pegula's alleged "back to Africa" comment. Based on what he said in his own complaint, he was told that (1) the NFL was investigating based on his report to his management and (2) the NFL concluded its investigation and it was an HR matter.

Based on what's been apparently leaked to the Buffalo News, we now know the NFL really did investigate and concluded the alleged comment was never made. Giving Trotter the benefit of the doubt, it's reasonable to assume he didn't know this because he had no reason to--but it doesn't change the fact he received a response to his complaint. It's hard to argue the NFL didn't follow up unless more information comes out.

8 minutes ago, Eleven said:

It was at a meeting with a LOT of Black players and a Black NFLPA president (who praised the meeting).  I think he was capable of reading the room.

Once again, I agree with you. That's why I noted earlier that "It was an open forum style phone call and none of the participants--people who would have the greatest merit in claiming the statement was offensive--ever publicly (that I can find anyway) spoke out against what Terry Pegula said as being pandering."

When the comment is taken out of context and tone, it's a problematic statement only because it's not something that realistically should be said aloud. It's not racist. It's not criminal. It's just against polite society. Since the likelihood of a transcript or recording leaking (which it did) was pretty high, he should have thought about phrasing a little more. That's my only concern with his comment. It's just not the smartest thing to say. It happens to all of us.

Edited September 15, 2023 by RochesterExpat

[Pimlach]

20 hours ago, RochesterExpat said:

I read the full complaint--all 53 pages 🤮--and it's worth the read if you care about this. This is what happens when you spend 6 hours at your desk waiting for data science to deliver code to you. Still waiting...

Full disclosure on my personal bias so you have context for my commentary: First, I don't watch football anymore and I was never really a fan of the Bills (lets just say I'm happy that the Rooney family is called out in the complaint in a positive light for bringing change). Next, I believe at least some of the league owners are probably on some level, whether they realize it or not, racially biased. Hate to say the obvious, but it's a bunch of old white dudes AND WOMEN (my bad, fixed in edit) from a different generation and the socially acceptable standards for speech and behavior change with time (thankfully).

After reading the full complaint (granted, it's one side of the argument): I believe Mr. Trotter was not offered a new contract due to the questions he was asking the commissioner and league owners and his, frankly, antagonistic and seemingly hostile attitude toward his employer. I don't think he comes across as a "team player" or anyone I would ever like to work with. I don't believe he was racially discriminated against and I don't believe that was a consideration on his contract renewal.

Disclaimer: These are my opinions. This is not legal advice. If either the NFL or Mr. Trotter are seeking legal advice from the SabreSpace forum, they've already lost.

Things unrelated to the topic of this forum:

1. He's demanding a jury trial. That's interesting. Too lazy to search demographics for the original jurisdiction, but I'm guessing that's the play there.

2. His own account of events honestly makes him appear antagonistic toward his employer

• obviously this is subjective, but that's my personal interpretation. I also understand it's probably meant to read that way to portray him--rightfully or not--as a champion of civil rights. Just a peanut gallery comment.

3. He argues: 8 of 32 teams have black general managers, 3 of 32 teams have black head coaches, 1 in 6 EVP and above are black. 

• That's 25%,  9.4% and 16.7% black representation. Compared to overall US population of 13.6% black. Kind of makes the point moot from a stats perspective.
• "60-70% of the players are Black. Clearly the NFL's lack of diverse leadership led to a league and organization where Black people are not being given equal opportunities to obtain and/or advance to positions with meaningful authority" is a pretty terrible statement. It implies wide receivers are promoted to general managers, coaches or EVPs and ignores the entirely different skill sets.
• Honestly it's only really relevant if the 60-70% number is a reflection of general interest in football, wherein 60-70% of NFL fans are black, which is untrue.

4. He argues: "in the NFL Media newsroom, there are no black managers, no Black copy editors, and no Black full-time employees on the news desk."

• really NFL?
• I guess it depends on the overall number of jobs. If it's one manager, one copy editor and four employees on the news desk, it's hard to argue underrepresentation. In a vacuum this fact is pretty disturbing. I also don't know what the black representation is in the news media as a whole, but I suspect it's underrepresented in the industry anyway.
• This is probably the strongest point in this section.

5. Unsubstantiated accusation against the league that weakens his point:

"The NFL has consistently acquiesced to and participated in outright discrimination and continues to refuse to take remedial action to solve this obvious problem."

• If this is true (and it's "consistent" and "obvious") he should have been able to point to specific examples in this part of the complaint as he does above. He doesn't. The lawyer dropped the ball here. I realize it's meant to be attention grabbing, but statements like this can prejudice a judge.

6. Claims and Relief section:

• He is asking for remedies available under law (normal)
• He seeks "equitable relief to force the NFL to remedy and change its discriminatory and retaliatory practices and comply with the law" which would be implemented via a "court-ordered monitor to review the NFL's policies and/or practices and implement necessary changes with respect to hiring, retention and advancement of Black people throughout all levels of the NFL organization and hierarchy." He also wants a "full-scale investigation" in to the "discriminatory and/or retaliatory animus of all persons in positions of power within the NFL, including NFL team owners"
• Yeah, the first is a reasonable ask. The latter... not happening. 

7. Admin/Jurisdiction/Parties sections

• Same ***** different complaint

8. Points/Comments from factual allegations:

• The league was biased against black players in the 1930s and specifically says George Preston Marshall may have been personally biased.
  - this kind of broadly generalizes and era where this was unfortunatel normal (***** League) and Mr. Marshall died in 1969 so...
• Makes arguments that it took too long for the first black head coach, manager, etc.
  - valid points, but this is still 20+ years ago
• Argues that because it's the same owners who were biased then which, apart from Virginia McCaskey, is arguably untrue. The children of the owners aren't the same as the original owners themselves.
• Keeps saying the league profited off of Black people which is certainly an attempt to allude to slavery. Kind of a risky play depending on the judge
• Brings up the Colin Kaepernick situation and references former President Trump
  - The league never admitted racial bias over this. Mr. Trotter's own statements point to the fact Colin Kaepernick was sidelined for political speech which the courts have long held is not protected speech in the context of employment. It's also a public fact that Kaepernick's actions cost the league financially, so it's not a surprise he was blackballed. It's still a business. You don't intentionally hurt your business.
• Jon Gruden emails
  - Points to John Gruden's now public emails as evidence of pervasive racism, sexism, etc. 
  - Ignores the fact Gruden was fired (should mention he was brought back for a workout)
  - Ignores that the emails were only between two people and it's entirely within the realm of possibility that no one else knew their privately held opinions
• "Race-Norming in the NFL's Concussion Settlement" -- Put another way, the NFL not only insisted that white people simply have better cognitive function than Black people, but the league also did this in a context that would lead to reduced recovery for Black players relative to white players. The NFL’s assumption that someone is not as cognitively advanced as another person because of the color of his skin is the very definition of racism and is abhorrent.
  - Not touching this with a 10 foot pole except to say "there's more to it." Here is an article from WaPo if you're interested.
  - This is the strongest argument (in my opinion) of the league's bias, but the settlement agreement which allowed it was agreed to by the players so...
  - Also the NFL did cease doing this so they responded to it. For whatever that's worth.
• Alleges the NFL pandered to minorities following "widespread societal racial protests"
  - Quotes Goodell, "we were wrong" and later covers Goodell's past comments about Kaepernick. I guess people can't admit they were wrong?
  - His whole point kind of goes against the rest of his complaint, frankly, since it implies when the NFL takes the action he wants, it's just pandering.
  - This is really weak across the board
• Alleges the NFL attempted to pander to minorities after the Brian Flores' lawsuit
  - Points out the NFL responded to the suit by stating it was without merit.  That's standard practice.
  - Complains that the cases were sent to arbitration by a judge and suggests it's further evidence against the league. Also pretty standard practice.
  - Should add the lawsuit isn't even settled/heard yet.
  - Actually provides examples of the NFL taking action to change (mentions the Coach and Front Office Accelerator Program). Works against him again.
• NFL Owners Have Engaged in Numerous Instance of Bigotry
  - Mentions a 1957 photograph with Jerry Jones "a youth at the time" protesting desegregation and criticizes Jones' response once it became public
  - Mentions the owner of the Jets was subjected to an investigation by the State Department over reports he made Black staff members uncomfortable when he was a US ambassador. It's worth noting this is true and the State Department investigated, but ultimately concluded the allegations were "unsubstantiated"
• As another example, in 2017, at an NFL owner’s meeting, Bob McNair, then-owner of the Houston Texans, stated of Mr. Kaepernick and others’ racial injustice protests, “We can’t have the inmates running the prison.” Of course, referring to players, the majority of which are Black, as “inmates” has obvious racial meaning. Mr. McNair apologized, but later retracted his apology stating, “I didn’t really have anything to apologize for.”
  - Yikes. First that we are automatically associating black people with criminals. Second because the owners think they have that much control. Reality is, in context, McNair meant something akin to "you don't have students running the school." I'm available for PR contracting if Mr. McNair is interested.
• NFL Has Barriers of Entry for Black Leaders
  - Once again mentions zero black owners. For this to be relevant whatsoever, someone needs to prove a minority owner tried to buy a team and was denied for racial reasons. Is it unfortunate the league is white? Yes. Is it more likely a due to wealth distribution and not racial discrimination in the NFL? Also, yes.
  - Once again doesn't understand how stats work
  - Once again implies playing wide receiver has the same skill set as a GM and there's some kind of promotion track from one to the other
  - Criticizes the "Rooney Rule" for leading to sham interviews which is fair, but ignores the reason the rule was adopted because it helps the NFL's case
  - Mentions the Flores suit again even though that hasn't been settled or gone to court yet so it's not a big strength per se
• Jim Trotter's Impecable (sic) Resume as a Journalist
  - It's his CV and, like most CVs, has a spelling mistake.
  - Unsurprisingly, he has a genuinely impressive CV. 
   

9. Section on his time at the NFL:

• The NFL Team Owners, the NFL and NFL Media are a Single Enterprise
  - this part breaks down the relationship between the different entities
• Mr. Trotter's Employment at the NFL
  - Mr. Trotter also asked Mr. Sperry, the head of the news desk, to confirm his understanding that there was not a single full-time Black employee working on the news desk. Mr. Sperry confirmed in writing that Mr. Trotter’s understanding was correct, though also expressed concern regarding Mr. Trotter’s inquiry and implored Mr. Trotter not to speak publicly regarding this lack of diversity.
  - Thankfully, Mr. Marvel—Mr. Trotter’s manager when he started at the NFL—was a champion of Mr. Trotter and his unwillingness to accept the status quo. However, Mr. Marvel also let Mr. Trotter know that not everyone in the NFL was as accepting of diverse opinions that were critical of the NFL’s record on race discrimination. Mr. Marvel reminded Mr. Trotter that the newsroom and NFL Media reported to the NFL league office. It was clear to Mr. Trotter that he had to tread carefully whether speaking about these matters informally or reporting on these matters externally in connection with his journalistic work because the NFL and the team owners were ultimately his employer. But Mr. Trotter is highly principled and was undeterred.
  [several examples of him doing what his boss told him not to do]
  - Unfortunately, in or around June 2021, Mr. Marvel was let go and replaced by Ali Bhanpuri. Mr. Bhanpuri did not share Mr. Marvel’s support for Mr. Trotter or Mr. Totter’s critical view on the NFL’s problems with racism. Mr. Bhanpuri deterred Mr. Trotter from speaking up about these matters within the workplace or engaging in critical reporting about racial injustice within the NFL.
  - So he was told not to do something and he did it anyway. This is getting a bit more suspect on why he was fired. Now looking like insubordination.

10. Jerry Jones:

I don't know how to summarize this other than to say to go read it. In short, Mr. Trotter got upset that he wasn't allowed to report on a comment made by Jerry Jones directly to him until after his manager and others addressed it. Once again, Mr. Trotter does not come across in anyway as a coworker I would like to work with and certainly not as someone I would like as a subordinate. That's neither here nor there.

The actual comment made by Jerry Jones was "If blacks feel some kind of way, they should buy their own team and hire who they want to hire." which was made in response to Mr. Trotter asking him why there are "so few black decision makers."

In response to Mr. Trotter, Mr. Jones dodged the question and stated that players get a large percentage of league revenue and the majority of players are Black. In effect, Mr. Jones was stating that Black people should “be happy for what they have” and not seek further advancement of their rights, positions in society or equality. Mr. Trotter reiterated his question, and Mr. Jones responded, “I’m starting to feel a little defensive.” However, notwithstanding Mr. Jones’ previous answer or history of conduct, Mr. Trotter made it clear that he was not attacking him, or even speaking about the Cowboys, but just asking about the league generally. Mr. Jones finally responded: “If Blacks feel some kind of way, they should buy their own team and hire who they want to hire.” Mr. Trotter responded by asking if the NFL was going to change its rules requiring purchasers to buy at least 30% of the team and finance deals with no more than $1 billion in debt. Mr. Jones ignored the question. Towards the end of the conversation, Pittsburgh Steelers owner Art Rooney II arrived. At that point, Mr. Jones said in sum and substance that he and Mr. Trotter should “agree to disagree” about the NFL’s issues with race. It was an awkward moment for Mr. Rooney who had joined a rather contentious conversation without knowing the topic being discussed. The following morning, Mr. Trotter apologized to Mr. Rooney for being brought into that situation.

I'd love to see a real transcript of this conversation. The comment made is pretty bad. I suspect, based on how the rest of this complaint reads, Jerry Jones just wanted to get away from Mr. Trotter and found him pretty annoying. Not that it excuses his comment, but it does explain why Mr. Trotter may not have been offered a new contract.

11. Pegula (see below)

12. Once again brings up the Flores suit. Now he includes a quote wherein he's asking Goodell directly about underrepresentation during the "state of the league" press conference. Mr. Trotter alleges that, because he said "where I work" and "as a member of the media group" he was not asking his question (again, this is literally at a press conference) "in his capacity as a journalist. He was asking as an employee of the NFL" and was "engaged in protected activity address to Mr. Goodell directly." That's a leap.

13. Lack of sincerity with the accelerator program (kind of builds off of his earlier allegations about pandering):

Mr. Trotter felt that the Accelerator Program was another example of a public relations stunt with little chance of making any meaningful difference. Accordingly, Mr. Trotter drafted a column in which he was critical of the NFL’s efforts to achieve diversity in the coaching ranks and counted the Accelerator Program as yet program which was ill-conceived even if it had an appearance of being well-intentioned.

Mr. Bhanpuri gave Mr. Trotter substantial pushback regarding his critique of the NFL. Mr. Bhanpuri told Mr. Trotter that the article had to be more “balanced,” i.e. more favorable to the NFL. Mr. Trotter was also told that his article was “dismissive” towards the NFL and was told that “this week’s event was positive” and that sentiment had to be reflected in the article.

Mr. Trotter said he was being forced to write the article in a manner that NFL leadership wanted and not in a manner that reflected his genuine beliefs and opinions. In one particular email, Mr. Trotter said, “The only reason we’re doing it this way is because there is no way I’d be allowed to write what I really feel about it—which, ironically, is supposed to be the point of a column.”

This doesn't prove racism. The NFL has a self-interest here and it's Mr. Trotter's an employee of the organization. Also, frankly, Mr. Trotter just appears biased. It continues that he wouldn't let it rest and he had a zoom call with management which "appeared to be some level of unanimity that the article would run" but it never did. So I can understand why he'd be upset from a professional aspect, but he's also an employee of the NFL.

14. More complaints about lack of diversity in the news room and lack of action.

15. Told to stand down regarding the NFL's handling of the Damar Hamlin Incident 

• basically, the league didn't want the fact it intended to resume the game (initially) getting out. Mr. Trotter wanted to report on it. Got told no.
• Mr. Trotter, being a tenacious reporter, pushed further that he needed to speak to the individual or at the very least needed a comment from that person. Mr. McCarthy responded, knowing that Mr. Trotter was not “merely” a journalist but also an NFL employee, “I will call your supervisor if you don’t let this go.” Mr. Trotter responded that he was “fine with” Mr. McCarthy calling his supervisor because he was doing his job. Soon after, Mr. Trotter received a text message from Mr. Sperry. Mr. Sperry directed Mr. Trotter to “stand down” in his reporting on the story. Mr. Trotter responded, “I thought it was our job as journalists to always pursue the truth. Is that not the case?” Mr. Sperry never responded to Mr. Trotter’s text message—which speaks for itself.
• Employee of the NFL is told what he can and can't do in the capacity of his job working for the NFL. News at 11.

16. Other examples of Mr. Trotter's attempts to raise awareness about lack of diversity but nothing really worth repeating.

17. This is the part where he covers the actual contract renewal (or lack thereof).

• He basically admits to harassing Goodell. It's a pretty bad look.
• Mr. Goodell responded, “As an employee, you should have my email and phone number.” Mr. Trotter explained that he had reached out to Mr. Goodell’s team and tried several times to have Mr. Goodell on his (now former) podcast without success.
  - Oh boy. You wanted him on your podcast? This is drifting further and further from racial bias.
• It goes into detail on a conversation between Ms. Nunez and Mr. Trotter about whether or not he was willing to get "in alignment" at which point it's like a full page soap box by Mr. Trotter about standing up for views and speaking out. He then asks if he's getting a renewed contract and was told "I don't know, it's getting discussed."
• After that conversation, he stopped getting assigned writing pieces.
• He was then told his contract wasn't getting renewed.
• Therefore, retaliation (probably true in a very broad sense of the term?)
• Once again, he's supposed to be arguing he was discriminated against based on his race. You have to connect the dots, I guess.

18. I'm not breaking down the causes of action but he's listing a bunch of statutes that prohibit race-based discrimination. 

For the parts that are actually relevant to Bills/Sabres fans:

Complaint:
Mr. Pegula stated his opinion that Mr. Kaepernick's disenfranchisement was a "media problem" and proposed that the NFL needed a spokesperson to promote the league's image. Mr. Pegula suggested that the spokesperson be Black in order to placate the media: "For us to have a face, as an African-American, at least a face that could be in the media, we could fall in behind that." This statement exemplifies the NFL's focus on "appearing" inclusive when it is advantageous from a business or public relations angle, while not actually embracing the concept of diversity in any meaningful manner.

The statement references this article for the sources of the quotes: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/sports/nfl-owners-kaepernick.html

From the article:

The owners were intent on finding a way to avoid Trump’s continued criticism. The president’s persistent jabs on Twitter had turned many fans against the league. Lurie, who called Trump’s presidency “disastrous,” cautioned against players getting drawn into the president’s tactics.

“We’ve got to be careful not to be baited by Trump or whomever else,” Lurie said. “We have to find a way to not be divided and not get baited.”

The Buffalo Bills owner Terry Pegula sounded anguished over the uncertainty of when Trump would take another shot at the league. “All Donald needs to do is to start to do this again,” Pegula said. “We need some kind of immediate plan because of what’s going on in society. All of us now, we need to put a Band-Aid on what’s going on in the country.”

The Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shahid Khan countered that the worst was behind them. “All the damage Trump’s going to do is done,” he said.

The owners kept returning to one bottom-line issue: Large numbers of fans and sponsors had become angry about the protests. Boycotts had been threatened and jerseys burned and — most worrisome — TV ratings were declining.

Pegula complained that the league was "under assault." He unloaded a dizzying flurry of nautical metaphors to describe their predicament. "To me, this is like a glacier moving into the ocean," he said. "We're getting hit with a tsunami." He expressed his wish that the league never be a "glacier crawling into the ocean."

The Houston Texans owner Bob McNair was more direct. He urged the players to tell their colleagues to, essentially, knock off the kneeling. "You fellas need to ask your compadres, fellas, stop that other business, let's go out and do something that really produces positive results, and we'll help you."

After the Miami Dolphins owner Stephen Ross raised the idea of a "march on Washington" by N.F.L. players and owners, Eric Reid, Kaepernick's former teammate and the first player to kneel alongside him, brought the discussion back to Kaepernick. 

[...]

Pegula offered that he thought the league was battling a perception and “media problem.” He said it would be great for the league to find a compelling spokesman — preferably a player — to promote all of the good things they were doing together. He suggested that the league could learn from the gun lobby in this regard.

“For years we’ve watched the National Rifle Association use Charlton Heston as a figurehead,” Pegula said. “We need a spokesman.”

Anquan Boldin, a former N.F.L. wide receiver who was at the meeting, said that owners needed to be spokesmen, too. “Letting people know it’s not just the players that care about these issues, but the owners, too,” Boldin said.

Pegula didn’t address Boldin’s point except to add that it would be important for the spokesman to be black. (None of the owners in the N.F.L. are black.)

“For us to have a face, as an African-American, at least a face that could be in the media,” Pegula continued, “we could fall in behind that.”

 

Commentary:

• He's using this to reiterate his point about pandering, but this came from a league-wide meeting in which players were free to speak up and apparently none objected to this (again, 60-70% are black). So it somewhat weakens that point.
• Didn't realize a league owner proposed a march on Washington. Neat.
• In context, Pegula's comments make a more sense now. Doesn't really prove anything relevant to Mr. Trotter's suit except to confirm that the owners are white and they recognized they needed a more representative spokesman. 
• If anything, after reading the article, it makes me think the league actually tried to do meaningful change regarding racial issues which I didn't believe prior

 

Complaint:

The NFL Takes No Action in Response to Racist Conduct by Buffalo Bills
Team Owner Terry Pegula; Complaints “Swept Under the Rug.”

On September 3, 2020, a large NFL Media zoom meeting was held which included approximately 40 newsroom employees. The purpose of the meeting, during the
middle of the pandemic, was to connect people who were not working together in-person and discuss various stories people were working on.

During the meeting, an NFL Media reporter described a conversation he had with Buffalo Bills owner Terry Pegula in which Mr. Pegula was speaking about the recent emphasis on social activism by NFL players, and in particular support for Black Lives Matter.

As reported, Mr. Pegula stated that, “If the Black players don’t like it here, they should go back to Africa and see how bad it is.” This remark was so offensive and racist that the people in the meeting appeared to be frozen, unsure how to even react.

Mr. Trotter would not stand by and spoke up. In front of everyone in attendance, Mr. Trotter asked Mr. Marvel and Mr. Sperry if there was going to be a discussion about what Mr. Pegula had said given that it was so highly offensive and racist. They responded that they would speak to the reporter about it further and decide how to handle the matter.

Thereafter, Mr. Trotter sought out Mr. Marvel and Mr. Jurenka on a near weekly basis about what was being done to address Mr. Pegula’s discriminatory remarks. Mr. Trotter was repeatedly brushed off and told that “the league office is investigating it.”

However, this went on for months and Mr. Trotter never received any further update beyond this superficial statement. Notably, no one from the NFL’s league office ever reached out to Mr. Trotter to interview him in connection with any supposed “investigation” that was supposedly ongoing. Clearly it was not a priority to investigate an NFL team owner’s discriminatory animus and discriminatory remarks in conversations with employees.

Nearly one year after the incident, Mr. Marvel told Mr. Trotter that the league had provided him with a response. He told Mr. Trotter: “New York says it’s an HR matter and that’s the end of it.”

Thus, in response to an allegation by an employee (the reporter) and complaint by another employee (Mr. Trotter) that an NFL owner (an employer) made racist remarks that ridiculed Black players (also employees) for their social activism, the NFL did absolutely nothing.

Mr. Trotter said to Mr. Marvel, “So we are sweeping this under the rug?” Mr. Marvel responded, “I can only tell you what I’ve been told.”

Commentary

It's a bit self-contradictory to state that "the NFL did absolutely nothing" when the league did issue a response that it was an HR matter. I'd argue "doing nothing" means completely ignoring the complaint. That's neither here nor there.

So this is a reporter repeating a conversation he had with Terry Pegula in which Terry Pegula allegedly made an unacceptable comment. This should be pretty easy to follow up on in the discovery phase. Did the NFL investigate? There would presumably be a record of it. If there was no investigation, why? Where did it die? Or, you know, just depose the reporter.

Based on the text above, the league investigated. This complaint is trying to paint this as a sham investigation, at least in part due to the NFL's league office not interviewing Mr. Trotter. Additionally, the league responded to Mr. Marvel--apparently unsolicited because if it was done only after Mr. Trotter pressed, that would have been mentioned--and said it was an HR matter.

I suspect the actual chain of events--and what will be revealed during discovery--is the following:

• Reporter repeats conversation he had with Terry Pegula
• Mr. Trotter takes offense and lodges a complaint with his management
• Management clearly notified the NFL
• The NFL investigated. They talked to the reporter.
• the reporter refused to go on record to confirm or deny the conversation... why? Possibly over fear of retaliation which is a serious issue if true
• The NFL concludes hearsay isn't enough evidence and without the source confirming, nothing more is done.
• End of investigation

Unlike a lot of the allegations in this complaint, it's not directly contradicted by other portions of the complaint and there aren't other news sources which covered it. If the reporter made the comment in a zoom meeting which resulted in "people in the meeting [appearing] to be frozen" and there were 40 people in the meeting, I'm somewhat shocked this wasn't out earlier.

Assuming that the reported really did say what he allegedly said in this zoom meeting (should be easy to verify considering 40 witnesses), I suspect there's some truth in it and that's a bad look for Terry Pegula.

This is really great work, thanks for your time on this.  

Reading the whole post, including your thoughts/opinions, helped me a lot.