What the NFL should learn from the Kareem Hunt situation

Given the backlash over Kareem Hunt, how can the NFL make these types of situations better in the future?

Kareem Hunt was a borderline superstar.

The former Kansas City Chiefs tailback was arguably the third or fourth best running back in the entire National Football League. A rushing leader in his rookie season (only the sixth such player ever), Hunt was well on his way to a second straight Pro Bowl at a glorified position. But none of that mattered.

On the night of February 10, 2018, Hunt was involved in an altercation with a female at a Cleveland hotel. The matter was scarcely reported on at the time, charges were never officially filed, and the NFL, the Chiefs’ organization, and fans did not hear another word until ten months later. Then came the video, obtained and released by TMZ, that captured Hunt assaulting a woman and proving he’d lied about his side of the story.

More from Arrowhead Addict

It was obvious when the video was released the Chiefs would likely cut ties and they did.

A lot of this stings for multiple parties involved and for multiple reasons. One part that is particularly hard to stomach for Chiefs fans is that, in the blink of an eye, the Cleveland Browns swooped in and got a very talented player at a ridiculous bargain. Even though the Chiefs did what most fans would consider “the right thing,” it sure seems like the team was burned pretty badly. Kareem Hunt had put them in a frustrating position.

Naturally, there has been some backlash to the Browns’ signing—although arguably, there would have been backlash if he was signed now or two years from now. Still, if the league is as concerned about improving its image, like it claims, there is an easy fix to this problem.

All the league has to do is institute a simple compensation structure when these situations arise—similar to compensatory picks in free agency. This compensation structure could do two things. First, it could incentivize teams with stars who are involved in serious situations to cut ties and save the league from another PR nightmare. Second, it would deter teams looking for a bargain from picking that player up immediately, which happens all the time.

This compensation could be simple. For instance, if a player, like Kareem Hunt, was drafted in the third round and is eventually cut due to an arrest or some other incident, any team wishing to pick that player up within 12 months of the initial cut would have to award a pick one round later to the team that initially cut the player. You could easily add any number of caveats such as playing time, production, etc. to assess a more fair value for the player. In this instance, the Browns would owe the Chiefs a fourth-round pick if they want instant access to Kareem Hunt’s talents.

Now, I’m not saying players don’t deserve second chances. It’s reasonable to say that at a certain point, once Kareem Hunt had rehabilitated himself, which can take a while, he should have been given another chance. But the Browns signing seems too fast, too greedy. And if it wasn’t the Browns, it would have been some other team.

In the end, the Chiefs did what the NFL allegedly wants its franchises to do, and essentially got burned for acquiescing. I think this situation undoubtedly will make owners and GMs in the future think twice about handling a similar situation in the way the Chiefs did. If the NFL truly wants to avoid another PR nightmare, they should consider protecting teams that have to make tough choices to improve and maintain the league’s image.

Home/Kansas City Chiefs News