DMN: Sporting News writer: Greg Hardy has rendered himself 'almost untouchable'

[skinsscalper]

It means not in words. I get the irony given the medium but the notion still applies. You have no basis but unsubstantiated claims.

I'm saying there is no objective reason to believe what you are saying. One claim is what Broaddus said that someone else could claim. The other is unprovable and gratuitous. It's not lost on me that you are not going to change your mind and I'm hardly going to insist you reveal your alleged sources.

Going from there to how he is putting undo onus on the coaches, martyring them, was a nice touch.

Again, I DON'T CARE if you believe what I'm saying. It couldn't possibly be more irrelevant to me. One more time, you are still searching for answers. I'm not. It DOESN'T mean that I'm right and you're wrong. Somehow (even though it's been spelled out for you) that still continues to elude you.

 

[skinsscalper]

That is a lot of words to basically say not much of anything. Smoke and sworn testimony? You aren't even talking about the matter at hand anymore.

No one is saying Hardy's market is rosey. The press backlash has been going on for two and a half years now. You don't need more than that. It doesn't justify everything else you are saying.

Rosey? It's non-existent. Holy **** what more needs to be said? Who needs your justification? You're simply not that relevant in the grand scheme of it all.

If you refuse to take into account the inaction by the team(s) and the "smoke" swirling around the club regarding Greg Hardy then congratulations for being obtuse and ignorant of the situation. I'm sure there's a medal lying around for you somewhere.

 

[DC Cowboy]

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones says the door is not closed on a return to the team by controversial free-agent defensive end Greg Hardy.
And ESPN NFL analyst John Clayton lists Hardy as his top remaining free agent.

However, Sporting News writer Vinnie Iyer is of the opinion that the door should be closed and Hardy isn't worth the risk for any NFL team.

Iyer writes: "Hardy mostly was a non-impact player in Dallas. And a headache. He reportedly wasn't well conditioned or a good teammate, and that combination wore on the coaching staff.

"Hardy had the best situation to resurrect his career and deliver again on an elite level. He instead dragged a struggling team marred by offensive injuries further down on defense.

"An offseason removed from his troubles, Hardy has rendered himself almost untouchable. Hardy has bigger baggage now, and a signing would require a team to come up with another creative contract and be willing to taking a huge risk with both player chemistry and community standing. Hardy was a distraction in Dallas and won't shake that label as long he's an active football player looking for work.

"The Cowboys made a desperate move last year with Hardy. It's tough to see another team repeating that mistake."

Read the entire story on sportingnews.com.

Continue reading...

I still would sign him to a very affordable one year deal.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Rosey? It's non-existent. Holy **** what more needs to be said? Who needs your justification? You're simply not that relevant in the grand scheme of it all.

If you refuse to take into account the inaction by the team(s) and the "smoke" swirling around the club regarding Greg Hardy then congratulations for being obtuse and ignorant of the situation. I'm sure there's a medal lying around for you somewhere.

How do you know what teams Hardy has or has not talked to? You are taking your ignorance as reality and that is not how things work.

What smoke? Be specific. The Cowboys brass have been decidedly neutral saying he is a free agent and they are keeping all options open. Some smoke with Woody hearsay, mythical PMs, and other unprovable nonsense.

 

[skinsscalper]

That ignores the fact that even if Hardy was a choir boy with no baggage (he isn't) the negotiation isn't cut and dried. Guys like Cedric Thornton and Alred Morris are cut and dried negotiations. You know their performance, their past pay, what price it will take to sign them etc.

Hardy was paid 13MM guaranteed, then 13MM on a completely incentive based contract. Is his agent asking for that kind of money again? Is he asking for guaranteed money rather than incentives?

You don't know one way or another. But your argument seems to be Hardy is willing to play for the minimum and no one will pay it. The off the field stuff is an issue for sure, but you have no idea what else is at play.

Wow, that's cute. Go ahead and show me where I assumed ANYTHING about Greg Hardy's contract demands, I'll wait.

My assertion the entire time has been that the ONLY issues at play is the off the field stuff and lack of production (in regards to the Cowboys). It's also my belief (I'll stress that one more time for the slow learners in the audience *and no I'm not referencing you*) that money isn't an issue.

 

[cowboyblue22]

if you listen to garrets press conference you know hardy is not coming back period.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Again, I DON'T CARE if you believe what I'm saying. It couldn't possibly be more irrelevant to me. One more time, you are still searching for answers. I'm not. It DOESN'T mean that I'm right and you're wrong. Somehow (even though it's been spelled out for you) that still continues to elude you.

I am not looking for anything. I am saying that if you are going to make claims that you should back it up with proof. You have not done that so there is no reason for anyone to believe you.

You do realize that other people are reading our posts? I'm not only talking for your benefit.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Go ahead and show me where I assumed ANYTHING about Greg Hardy's contract demands, I'll wait.

It's also my belief (I'll stress that one more time for the slow learners in the audience *and no I'm not referencing you*) that money isn't an issue.

Didn't have to wait long.

 

[skinsscalper]

But it's not, and I gave a specific argument for this. This was not happening last year, so if it's not happening this year either, then nothing can possibly be said about this being a contributing reason as to why there is no change.

If it's not enough for you, with all due respect, that's your issue not mine. Like I said earlier. Some people need the whole truth and nothing but to arrive at their own conclusion or to be satisfied with the outcome. And, again, there's nothing wrong with that. As far as this issue is concerned, I've seen and heard enough to know that I want nothing to do with the guy. I think he's a chump. You, obviously, need more than that. That's o.k.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

if you listen to garrets press conference you know hardy is not coming back period.

I did and didn't come to the same conclusion. He said that he was a free agent and that was all that he would say. But hey if you want to analyze his tone, body movements, or the like then we can play that game. Your serve.

 

[skinsscalper]

I am not looking for anything. I am saying that if you are going to make claims that you should back it up with proof. You have not done that so there is no reason for anyone to believe you.

You do realize that other people are reading our posts? I'm not only talking for your benefit.

Dude I don't give two ***** who is reading this or who believes what. How many ******* times do you have to be told? Seriously.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Like I said earlier. Some people need the whole truth and nothing but to arrive at their own conclusion or to be satisfied with the outcome. And, again, there's nothing wrong with that.

Just because someone demands a higher standard of proof including dispassionate specific facts and you are unable to provide them doesn't mean that we need the whole truth.

We just need something that makes sense and that is verifiable. The best you have come up with is jobberone's deduction that you have piggy backed off of about him not yet having a contract. You try to wish away that contract demands or timing play a role tanking the deduction.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Dude I don't give two ****s who is reading this or who believes what. How many ******* times do you have to be told? Seriously.

Well, I do. It's a public forum after all. You fail to realize that while you deserve a voice that you are hardly the only person that matters.

 

[skinsscalper]

Just because someone demands a higher standard of proof including dispassionate specific facts and you are unable to provide them doesn't mean that we need the whole truth.

We just need something that makes sense and that is verifiable. The best you have come up with is jobberone's deduction that you have piggy backed off of about him not yet having a contract. You try to wish away that contract demands or timing play a role tanking the deduction.

If you were paying attention, I referenced the fact that there was a reason he was unsigned well before jobberone posted. I didn't need to piggyback on anything. Nice try, though. Circles. You talk in them.

 

[Kaiser]

Wow, that's cute. Go ahead and show me where I assumed ANYTHING about Greg Hardy's contract demands, I'll wait.

Its right here:

Like I said the ONLY evidence required, so far, is that Hardy is unemployed in a league starving for pass rushers.

Saying there is ONLY one piece of information rules out salary demands - which you know nothing about.

 

[skinsscalper]

Well, I do. It's a public forum after all. You fail to realize that while you deserve a voice that you are hardly the only person that matters.

And I implied that I'm the only one that matters, when? In fact I've gone out of my way to state that others' points of view on the matter are just as relevant just different than my own. For such an intelligent guy you sure are an ignorant chap.

 

[skinsscalper]

Its right here:



Saying there is ONLY one piece of information rules out salary demands - which you know nothing about.

Touche, sir.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And I implied that I'm the only one that matters, when? In fact I've gone out of my way to state that others' points of view on the matter are just as relevant just different than my own. For such an intelligent guy you sure are an ignorant chap.

Right here:

Dude I don't give two ****s who is reading this or who believes what. How many ******* times do you have to be told? Seriously.

And just because you don't care doesn't make what I am saying to the audience irrelevant. Whether or not you have a compelling case backed by verifiable evidence, you don't, might be important to people. Again, I think so thus my saying it.

 

[skinsscalper]

Right here:



And just because you don't care doesn't make what I am saying to the audience irrelevant. Whether or not you have a compelling case backed by verifiable evidence, you don't, might be important to people. Again, I think so thus my saying it.

You've mastered the reach. Congratulations.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You've mastered the reach. Congratulations.

That isn't even an argument.

Do we have an audience here on this public forum that will read our posts? Yes or no?

Did you or did you not say you don't care what other people say or believe? Yes or no?