Greg Hardy's appeal is this week (May 28th)

USMarineVet

USMarineVet

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,686
Reaction score
2,923
Since a 2 game precedent has already been established in the Rice case, it will be a huge waste of taxpayer money for the NFL to fight this any further, which I fully expect them to do. My only concern is how long this will drag on.

Would a case such as this be fast-tracked due to time implications?

What Goodell needs to do is sit down with the owners, the NFLPA reps and all the lawyers and draw up a list of exactly what is punishable and concise penalties for such offenses. These punishments should also be variable as to how many times Player X has committed an offense.

The language should be crystal clear with no wiggle room for interpretation.

You would think a brand such as the NFL would have this figured out by now. As long as there is ambiguity the lawsuits will continue.

Collectively, we could all send our kids to college with the money saved just in paperwork over these hot messes.
 
AzorAhai

AzorAhai

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,511
Reaction score
8,901
bkight13 said:
It would be like giving a player 12 games for a first time PED violation because they took multiple injections. They would be ignoring the collectively bargained punishments and wording it differently to make it sound like a violation of the Personal Conduct policy. Then on appeal they would say, we'll give you 8 games if you take it right now.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If it was for anything other than DV, everyone would be clamoring for Godells head. What the NFL is doing/did to Rice, Peterson and Hardy is wrong. They can't just go around suspending players based on public perception. Morality aside, none of those 3 should have got more than 2 games. Now if it happens with a different player this year, I have zero problems with a 6 game suspension. It's what the policy calls for now, but Godell should have had more foresight into the brewing storm and acted before something like Ray Rice happened.

My question is what happens the next time a Ray Rice like incident happens? All of a sudden 6 games won't be enough for the public, so do they try to please them again and increase it again? This is a slippery slope the NFL is on right now.
 
burmafrd

burmafrd

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,820
Reaction score
3,379
The NFL cannot really argue conduct detrimental to the league when the case was dismissed. NOT to mention that Hardy got nowhere near the publicity of the Ray Rice case. If they claim detrimental to the league AFTER the court case is dismissed they set a precedent that no judge can allow to stand.
 
AzorAhai

AzorAhai

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,511
Reaction score
8,901
USMarineVet said:
Since a 2 game precedent has already been established in the Rice case, it will be a huge waste of taxpayer money for the NFL to fight this any further, which I fully expect them to do. My only concern is how long this will drag on.

Would a case such as this be fast-tracked due to time implications?

What Goodell needs to do is sit down with the owners, the NFLPA reps and all the lawyers and draw up a list of exactly what is punishable and concise penalties for such offenses. These punishments should also be variable as to how many times Player X has committed an offense.

The language should be crystal clear with no wiggle room for interpretation.

You would think a brand such as the NFL would have this figured out by now. As long as there is ambiguity the lawsuits will continue.

Collectively, we could all send our kids to college with the money saved just in paperwork over these hot messes.
Click to expand...

Rice, Hardy and Peterson’s cases were unique. They happened prior to the new policy, yet the NFL tried to suspend them under the new policy. All of this would have went away if the NFL just came out and told the public "We realize the policy as currently comprised is not strict enough and needs to be addressed. While we understand the reaction to these incidents and agree with public outcry, we cannot and will not act in a manner that differs from the policy currently agreed to with the NFLPA. We will make every effort to strengthen our stance on DV issues and do everything in our power to adjust the policy and make sure things like this will not happen again in the future." Some people would have been upset, but once the policy took hold and players started getting lengthier suspensions all of that would have went away, and whats more is it was the right way to handle it.
 
AzorAhai

AzorAhai

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,511
Reaction score
8,901
burmafrd said:
The NFL cannot really argue conduct detrimental to the league when the case was dismissed. NOT to mention that Hardy got nowhere near the publicity of the Ray Rice case. If they claim detrimental to the league AFTER the court case is dismissed they set a precedent that no judge can allow to stand.
Click to expand...

Thats what they're trying to claim. It was worded that way in his suspension. Frankly it's the only means they have right now since a 10 game suspension wouldn't have a chance to stand under the DV policy. It is a direct effort to circumvent the Doty ruling and a slap in the face of the court system. I don't see any possible way this suspension, be it 6 or 10 games holds up in court.
 

Vintage

The Cult of Jib
Messages
16,714
Reaction score
4,888
I predict nothing changes suspension wise.

I also predict a bunch of butthurt.
 
burmafrd

burmafrd

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,820
Reaction score
3,379
considering he already sat out 15 games how can the NFL argue with a straight face for more punishment for a crime in which the case was dismissed? This is orwellian 1984 garbage.
 
burmafrd

burmafrd

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,820
Reaction score
3,379
IF the NFL manages to grow a brain between now and the appeal, they will offer 4 games and hardy probably will accept it.
 
Nightman

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
RingOfHonor88 said:
Rice, Hardy and Peterson’s cases were unique. They happened prior to the new policy, yet the NFL tried to suspend them under the new policy. All of this would have went away if the NFL just came out and told the public "We realize the policy as currently comprised is not strict enough and needs to be addressed. While we understand the reaction to these incidents and agree with public outcry, we cannot and will not act in a manner that differs from the policy currently agreed to with the NFLPA. We will make every effort to strengthen our stance on DV issues and do everything in our power to adjust the policy and make sure things like this will not happen again in the future." Some people would have been upset, but once the policy took hold and players started getting lengthier suspensions all of that would have went away, and whats more is it was the right way to handle it.
Click to expand...

If they did what you suggested it would have been over last season. Hardy, Rice and Peterson would have served their 2 games suspensions and the League could announce "from now on all DV cases will be covered by the new policy".

Keeping it in the news cycle seems like a self inflicted wound. Just bring the hammer down on the next guy because it will happen again.
 
BigWillie

BigWillie

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,400
Reaction score
1,142
Jstopper said:
I really really want him to go to court and get it down to 2 games. Gut feeling says if the nfl offers up 6 Hardy will accept it with no court.
Click to expand...

Let's say Hardy can go to federal court and get 2 games. You think he's gonna give in to the NFL for 6 games when Hardy is basically get paid per game, and on incentives? He'd be giving up at least $2.5 million just to play nice with the NFL.

Yeah, that's not gonna happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top