(This article was written with the help of Castmagic, an AI tool, and examined by our editorial team to ensure accuracy. Please contact us if you notice errors.)
Exit from Justin Tucker by the Baltimore ravens Offers an overview of the team culture and how NFL tends to manage uncomfortable or controversial situations – especially when legal or personal driving problems are involved.
Advertisement
Of “Interior cover“Podcast, Jason Fitz of Yahoo Sports, Frank Schwab and Jori Epstein discussed the complexity of the decision and what she really says about the Ravens and, by extension, the League.
The trio agreed: this situation will be quietly swept under the carpet, and once Tucker is out of sight on the ground, it will quickly be out of the spirit for the league and most fans. It is a process that we have seen before, and, unless any criminal development, the Ravens and the NFL will probably move with little more.
The Ravens were very deliberate in the labeling of Tucker's release a “football decision”, repeating this language in their official declaration. As Epstein said: “When people really make football decisions, they generally do not say that it is a football decision.” This suggests that the organization used this sentence to avoid treating serious allegations off scope directly against Tucker (multiple accusations of inappropriate driving of massage therapists, investigating by the League).
Advertisement
Epstein also pointed out that Ravens have a history of location of players with allegations of sexual assault or domestic violence. This portrays an image from a team that often chooses to manage and get around these problems rather than taking a clear moral position.
Schwab noted the “coldness” and the legal calculation behind the language of the Ravens, stressing that they want to avoid responsibility or be taken in denial if they turn out that they knew something.
Justin Tucker is no longer with the Ravens. (Photo of G FIUME / GETTY Images)
(G FIUME via Getty Images)
Avoid discussion of allegations involving Tucker
The conversation of the trio “inside coverage” underlines that the team and the league generally prefer “to dance around” of these subjects and rarely face them unless it is absolutely forced. As Schwab says, the game book is to “skate from this without ever having to face the allegations”, and Fitz adds that the league investigation and possible press releases will probably be “buried on Friday afternoon when no one pays attention”.
Advertisement
The crew also brought the comparison with Deshaun Watson, noting indignation and selective examination as a function of the position and value to a team. There is a cynicism around whom the NFL chooses to protect and for how long, which suggests that stars get more latitude than players or aging veterans.
In the end, the moving of the Ravens and the probable driving line of the NFL emphasizes that, when the calculation leans towards the distraction or the reduced value (and especially if the performance of a player decrease), the teams and the league will reduce the links quickly and silently. The pride of “no distractions” prevails over almost all other considerations.
The release of Tucker is a microcosm of the way Ravens – and the NFL as a whole – hiered their commercial interests and their public image on transparency. These situations are generally managed with strategic public relations, legal maneuvers and an eye on the minimization of controversy rather than solving the root problem or making an example for better driving.
To hear more NFL discussions, connect to Interior cover on Apple,, Spotify Or YouTube.
