DMN: Babe Laufenberg: Why NFL won’t reduce Hardy suspension; a sleeper to watch at Cowboys camp

cowboyvic

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,817
Reaction score
735
A decision has already been made.
They are waiting to announce it, they have a plan, no telling what that is.

The decision was made the day Goodell sent the appeal to his Lap Dog H. Henderson. Henderson and Goodell have know for weeks what the decision is. the delay is for two things. to hurt Hardy. and to hurt the cowboys. that's the reason for this big delay.
 

cowboyvic

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,817
Reaction score
735
I think everybody needs to settle down. I mean, it's understandable why it's taking so long. Whatever decision gets made has to be approved by Mara. Obviously, he's kinda busy right now, dealing the the JPP thing and he's probably got his focus on that. Settle down people.......

:grin:

If Hardy had signed with the Giants, he never would have got 10 games in the first place. Mara runs the NFL. remember the 10 million dollar cap hit ?
 

TwoCentPlain

Numbnuts
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
11,084
Anything over two games will most likely be appealed by Hardy.
An appeal will cost a lot of money in legal fees and the NFL will most likely lose.

Given that, I think the league will stick with two games. Maybe the NFL will try to get cute and claim victory by making it 3 games.

I expect the decision to coincide with the Brady appeal decision, both in timing and number of games.
 

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
yea, but how screwed would we be if the judgment was 2 games, but the case was finished week 16 or 17 right before a potential playoff run.

We would have the Suh precedent to fall back on since his loss would be bad for the team and fans at that point. After all it worked against us that way last year.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,202
Reaction score
64,708
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
The NFL has responded to the twitter lynch mob by setting up a kangaroo court that administers severe punishment based on one-sided investigations. The U.S. has a higher percentage of its population incarcerated than any other country that keeps records that can be trusted, so our criminal justice system is quite capable of finding people who are guilty of crimes and administering punishment. The NFL should leave it to them.

This, this and this.
 

Rogah

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,473
Reaction score
793
Anything over two games will most likely be appealed by Hardy.
An appeal will cost a lot of money in legal fees and the NFL will most likely lose.

Given that, I think the league will stick with two games. Maybe the NFL will try to get cute and claim victory by making it 3 games.

I expect the decision to coincide with the Brady appeal decision, both in timing and number of games.
Considering the vast majority of fans (outside this and the Patriots' forums) think they're both guilty, that would be a PR disaster. Last year, people were not happy that the punishment for beating a woman was worse than the punishment for getting caught smoking weed. History would repeat itself if the punishment for attacking a woman was as bad as the punishment for an equipment violation.

The NFL will not significantly reduce Hardy's suspension unless some sort of deal is made where he agrees not to sue. They don't care if they get sued and lose, they just want to make sure they are not seen as being soft on domestic violence. As we learned last year, public sentiment is that 2 games is pretty soft.
 

Hoofbite

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,868
Reaction score
11,569
A friend of mine, who is a fellow Cowboys fan, suggested something recently. He said the league may be handing out these controversial discipline decisions to lay down a mental foundation towards negotiating the next collective bargaining agreement. He suggested the owners would offer the players an opportunity to re-writie league disciplinary policies, along with adjusting the commissioner's authority to punish players, in exchange for more adding games/weeks to the regular season. If a large enough segment of the NFLPA is reacting to league disciplinary measures like some fans, I can see how that kind of bargaining ploy would work to the owners' benefit.

Doubt it. The vast majority of the league doesn't need a "get out of jail free" card. Doubt any of them would want to add games to the season just so guys can be punished to a lesser degree for beating the piss out of women.
 

DallasEast

Cowboys 24/7/365
Staff member
Messages
62,320
Reaction score
64,017
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Doubt it. The vast majority of the league doesn't need a "get out of jail free" card. Doubt any of them would want to add games to the season just so guys can be punished to a lesser degree for beating the piss out of women.
It wouldn't surprise me that the owners didn't propose increasing league salaries correlating with the added games. There is already resistance to the idea but sweetening the pot might offset some of it to a degree. And I think there have been controversial punishments beyond the ones dealing with "beating the piss out of women" to consider.
 

dallasdave

Well-Known Member
Messages
32,326
Reaction score
88,063
It wouldn't surprise me that the owners didn't propose increasing league salaries correlating with the added games. There is already resistance to the idea but sweetening the pot might offset some of it to a degree. And I think there have been controversial punishments beyond the ones dealing with "beating the piss out of women" to consider.

If the owners can make more money by adding games they will.
 

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
Considering the vast majority of fans (outside this and the Patriots' forums) think they're both guilty, that would be a PR disaster. Last year, people were not happy that the punishment for beating a woman was worse than the punishment for getting caught smoking weed. History would repeat itself if the punishment for attacking a woman was as bad as the punishment for an equipment violation.

The NFL will not significantly reduce Hardy's suspension unless some sort of deal is made where he agrees not to sue. They don't care if they get sued and lose, they just want to make sure they are not seen as being soft on domestic violence. As we learned last year, public sentiment is that 2 games is pretty soft.

Apples and oranges. Rice hit her on camera and the league either did not investigate or lied about seeing the video, that is what caused the outrage.

Hardy was suspended after the case was dropped. Anyone looking at it beyond the headlines knows that all Hardy was guilty of was getting near a woman that was a headcase. The timing of his suspension makes all fans outside of NY go hmmmm. He signs with Dallas, gets 10 games, and then the schedule comes out and we see he will miss both Giants games.
 

CrownCowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,167
Reaction score
1,791
Of course the NFL is dragging it's feet on this. It's fairly obvious now.

The matter and justification in which the NFL came up with 10 games for one incident in this case is insanely ridiculous and I wouldn't be unreasonable considering now the time it has taken to come out with a ruling by saying that the NFL has it out for the Cowboys and Hardy.

If Hardy were playing for the Steelers, Patriots or Eagles then this issue very well may be resolved by now in my opinion.
 

DallasEast

Cowboys 24/7/365
Staff member
Messages
62,320
Reaction score
64,017
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
What this needs is a Gif of Cavel eating a bullet. LOL.........
It's funny. I kept the final season of Battlestar Galactica on my DVR for years. I could have made a gif of just that if I hadn't finally gotten around to deleting it.
 
Top