Contact The Editor
Articles By This Author
But the confidence might be misplaced. Yes, the National Football League appears mightier than ever, but to borrow from Asimov, the hollow tree looks as strong as ever until the storm-blast breaks it to pieces.
And the storms are gathering.
Let's look at a couple.
First, the elephant in the stadium: The league's domestic violence problem isn't going away. Although NFL players seem somewhat less likely to be charged with violence against women than men in the general population, that's the wrong comparison. The right one is that they're far more likely to be arrested for the offense than males in other fields who earn similar compensation.
The NFL has a strongly worded policy on domestic violence, but a 2021 study found that the policy is, to put it mildly, underenforced. At the same time, the league has been accused of applying the policy mainly when the player involved isn't a star. Informal reports suggest that NFL players are more likely than the general population of men to have domestic violence charges dropped. Moreover, accused players rarely display remorse.
I'm certainly not suggesting that everyone accused is guilty. But the perception of a link between football and violence lingers. To defeat it, the league will have to be firmer and fairer in enforcing its policies.
Another suggestion: draft carefully. NFL teams often pick players who were charged with violent crimes in college, a practice sportswriters call "taking a chance." But the numbers tell us that football is like other arenas of life. The best predictor of whether a player will commit a crime of violence in the future is that he's committed one in the past. It isn't the team that's taking the chance, but the player's girlfriend or spouse.
Now let's talk television ratings. Although this column was written before we had overnight numbers for the Super Bowl, many in the news media have been touting the forecast from analytics firm PredictHQ that this year's game would be the most-watched ever.
But this year's gaudy numbers might be outliers. Before this past weekend, Super Bowl household ratings (percentage of households watching) were on a six-year downward trend. Last year's 38.2% figure was the lowest since 1969. Moreover, in the target 18-49 demographic, the numbers have cratered. In 2021, just 26% of the demo tuned in, by far the lowest on record. In short, it's too early to tell whether the spiraling decline has reversed; and even a temporary surge won't matter in the long run if the league can't draw back younger viewers.
Moreover, what's causing the surge matters. NFL ratings for regular season games had been falling steadily until 2017, when the U.S. Supreme Court did the league a favor by striking down the federal statute barring most states from legalizing sports betting. Since then, the league's audience has risen every year, except for pandemic-disrupted 2020. Perhaps the renewed interest is related to the explosion of sports betting.
Wagering on professional and college games is now legal in at least 30 states. The NFL partners with (that is, gets endorsement money from) a number of gambling entities. Fans don't just bet on the games, but on what are called props: who'll score the first touchdown, how many times a quarterback will be sacked, you name it. They can even bet on whether the team that wins the coin toss will start on offense. (Hint: Always bet "defer.") The league itself has made a big wager by deciding to accept advertisements for gambling sites, and the typical telecast now seems to feature more ads for sports betting than for the league's traditional mainstays, cars and beer.
But does the NFL really want to bet the house on a future where what draws viewers is the chance of winning cash? Beware the backlash! Even the Supreme Court, in striking down the federal ban, warned that whether a state should license sports gambling was "an important policy choice" because of the potential for corruption and addiction, along with the possibility that "people of modest means" might "squander their savings and earnings."
Please don't misunderstand my point. The libertarian in me certainly doesn't think gambling should be outlawed. I'm just not sure how long the NFL can survive in its current form if its plan is to become the televised equivalent of a day at the track.
There are other challenges - politics, concussions, the coming collapse of the player pipeline as high school football participation rates plummet, and of course the racial issue, on which I've recently written - but there's only so much space.
My storm warnings come with no sense of pleasure. I've been a committed fan since November 12, 1967, when my mother took me to D.C. Stadium to see my first game. (Washington 31, San Francisco 28. You can look it up.) But the data are what they are, and I'm uneasy as I contemplate the future of the game I love.
(COMMENT, BELOW)
Stephen L. Carter is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Yale, where he has taught since 1982. Among his courses are law and religion, the ethics of war, contracts, evidence, and professional responsibility.