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

[AzorAhai]

which is a point I made. The initial sentence of the first post to which I replied was : "the vast majority of companies don't have dont have a policy that limits DV punishment. If your job..." It wasnt my comparison. And the last sentence of that post is just as incorrect about private companies.

I said 2 games once it goes to federal court and all the rest is posturing

Yeah it's why I tempered in the second paragraph. I just don't know why it's brought up. Well I get that people -not you- are trying to identify with what is going on but it simply does not apply.

It doesn't apply but how else do you relate it to the masses? The comparison I made was valid in the context of the reply. Most personal companies don't have any sort of outlined punishments period. If they did and went above that punishment it's not allowable and they would lose in court. While technically employed by the teams, the NFL office handles these issues. They have a set punishment and are trying to go above that punishment. I fail to see how the comparison is invalid or incorrect.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Thing is the club talked to prosecutors. They likely know exactly why the case had no legs. If they don't it wouldn't surprise me after the Rice debacle but that just underscores how flawed their process is.

Sorry but Goodell and the kangaroo court of polling and social media is not better than the US justice system for all of people's railing that businesses can do what they want.

 

[ThreeandOut]

Can we just skip to the part where Judge Doty reduces the suspension to 2 games?

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

Who are you to wave your fatty finger at me, you must a been out your head. Eye hole deep in muddy water, you practically raised the dead.

 

[Corso]

Who are you to wave your fatty finger at me, you must a been out your head. Eye hole deep in muddy water, you practically raised the dead.

Steal, borrow, refer, save your shady inference.
Kangaroo done hung the juror with the innocent.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It doesn't apply but how else do you relate it to the masses? The comparison I made was valid in the context of the reply. Most personal companies don't have any sort of outlined punishments period. If they did and went above that punishment it's not allowable and they would lose in court. While technically employed by the teams, the NFL office handles these issues. They have a set punishment and are trying to go above that punishment. I fail to see how the comparison is invalid or incorrect.

Greg Hardy doesn't work for the NFL. He has to agree to rules and bylines and the authority of certain NFL institutions but he signs a contract to work for the Dallas Cowboys. On the flip side, the NFL doesn't 'own' the Cowboys.

I know that there is a mining trust in Appalachia and they negotiate with labor unions who together utilize the CBA arrangement. Pro sports leagues are an illegal relic from the past. If you are trying to relate to people through their job, then you are leaving out the nature of the third party.

If you are trying to relate it to something that most people have dealt with then you can put it in terms of a neighborhood association. That would be the dynamic where they are the owner and the HOA president is Roger Goodell who is telling you that you cannot hire Joe the plumber because he is a convicted criminal.

 

[tyke1doe]

You many not like it beut the NFL is not a 'company.' The NFL is a trust and cannot just do whatever it wants whenever it wants. What happens ALL THE TIME is that both you and the NFL has to be reminded of this and be demonstrated to be wrong in the ultimate arbiters in this country. Also in a corporate environment, a company cannot just disavow company policy on a whim. The law of the shop is a legal principle that is brought up.

The Bears have the right to terminate him at whim. A club is an actual company and can do as you say. You have been pointed out this difference at least 3 times in the past month. Your willful ignorance is noted.

And yet the court didn't say anything about the NFL being able to punish but whether it is following its own rules.

But thanks for not understanding what my point was and is. And, once again, this will be my last post to you in this thread. You consistently show an inability to discuss matters civilly. I'm really not interested in debating people like you.

Peace.

 

[AzorAhai]

Greg Hardy doesn't work for the NFL. He has to agree to rules and bylines and the authority of certain NFL institutions but he signs a contract to work for the Dallas Cowboys. On the flip side, the NFL doesn't 'own' the Cowboys.

I know that there is a mining trust in Appalachia and they negotiate with labor unions who together utilize the CBA arrangement. Pro sports leagues are an illegal relic from the past. If you are trying to relate to people through their job, then you are leaving out the nature of the third party.

If you are trying to relate it to something that most people have dealt with then you can put it in terms of a neighborhood association. That would be the dynamic where they are the owner and the HOA president is Roger Goodell who is telling you that you cannot hire Joe the plumber because he is a convicted criminal.

Yes they work for the team, but the NFL holds disciplinary power. That power for a domestic violence policy was limited to 2 games for a conviction. My job comparison was to try and relate the similarities so people understand them.

In reality it can be applied to almost any punishment for anything. If I got a speeding ticket with a max fine of $200 but the court was really cracking down so fined me $1000. My grass was tall so I got a fine from the hoa with a max of $50 but they fined me $300. None of these things are perfect comparisons, but it should help paint a good picture of what exactly the NFL is trying to do and why any half decent judge will never side with the NFL on this.

 

[jazzcat22]

Why do the Stealer fans need appeased? What makes them so special?

They won't have to face Brady in game one.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And yet the court didn't say anything about the NFL being able to punish but whether it is following its own rules.

But thanks for not understanding what my point was and is. And, once again, this will be my last post to you in this thread. You consistently show an inability to discuss matters civilly. I'm really not interested in debating people like you.

Peace.

It's not 'their own rules.' It's by the letter of the CBA which is a set of rules negotiated with the NFLPA. In fact, Doty repeatedly indicated how the NFL had violated the 'law of the shop' in his most recent ruling. Federal court has trounced the NFL for going on 50 years with the general line of reasoning I am using. I am likely doing a poor job of presentation but there is a ton of cases and the NFL loses the vast majority of the time. The early 60s guys symbolized by Brown. Al Davis sued them and won to move to LA. The destruction of scheduled free agency and then plan B. Multiple cases now involving this specific disciplinary action we are talking about now.

So given all of that what is your point in pointing out dissimilar businesses?

And spare me the sanctimonious condescension. You want to talk about civility and then speak to me as 'people like me.' I know that categorization and marginalization is extremely incivil. I used the exact same presentation as you complete with the "ALL OF THE TIME" to emphasize important facts. I thought it approriate in the context of how often we have had this conversation. Sorry you didn't like it. Notwithstanding, I have tried to appeal to your rational mind. Well, the fourth time you come back with that take we can come right back here again. I can't wait!

 

[Nightman]

The idea that the NFL can hand down a bogus 10 game suspension and then offer 6 on appeal when the most they can give is 2 on a conviction and 0 without one is what needs to be settled.

Hardy and the NFLPA need to keep fighting it all the way and if the season approaches they need to fight for an emergency injunction. He is the last player that falls under the old rules so I have no idea why the League is fighting the Courts so hard on this one. There will be plenty more players to make examples of.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes they work for the team, but the NFL holds disciplinary power. That power for a domestic violence policy was limited to 2 games for a conviction. My job comparison was to try and relate the similarities so people understand them.

In reality it can be applied to almost any punishment for anything. If I got a speeding ticket with a max fine of $200 but the court was really cracking down so fined me $1000. My grass was tall so I got a fine from the hoa with a max of $50 but they fined me $300. None of these things are perfect comparisons, but it should help paint a good picture of what exactly the NFL is trying to do and why any half decent judge will never side with the NFL on this.

You are talking about a corporate third party being involved. The league does not have sole authority in disciplining players by any stretch. Teams have all manner of fine and suspension systems and of course due to the nature of contracts, wield a very big stick as Ray McDonald just experienced. The Cowboys have a very robust player development system that includes rehabilitation of troubled players. If that is not all considered then you are missing the entire point of what is going on.

NFL players have to worry about the club they work for and the NFL itself which really is incomparable to what most people have to do deal with. The dynamic of contractor-homeowner-HOA is similar to player-club-trust. Over 3/4 of all homes have them.

 

[Nightman]

You are talking about a corporate third party being involved. The league does not have sole authority in disciplining players by any stretch. Teams have all manner of fine and suspension systems and of course due to the nature of contracts, wield a very big stick as Ray McDonald just experienced. The Cowboys have a very robust player development system that includes rehabilitation of troubled players. If that is not all considered then you are missing the entire point of what is going on.

NFL players have to worry about the club they work for and the NFL itself which really is incomparable to what most people have to do deal with. The dynamic of contractor-homeowner-HOA is similar to player-club-trust. Over 3/4 of all homes have them.

You guys are getting lost in the minutia.

We all know that both the League and the Teams can punish and/or waive players.

But they have agreed upon rules and precedence for these violations and they have to follow them.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

The idea that the NFL can hand down a bogus 10 game suspension and then offer 6 on appeal when the most they can give is 2 on a conviction and 0 without one is what needs to be settled.

Not quite true, the league can suspend without a conviction depending on the circumstances, ala Ben Rothlisberger. However, if this goes to court, I don't see how this is reduced to 2. If the NFL wanted to seem "tough" they would agree to reduce it to 4 in order to avoid going to court. Only way I see them saving face.

 

[Little Jr]

my hope is he gets the full 10 games. But that won't happen. He'll go to court and it will get reduced to 2 games.

 

[AzorAhai]

You are talking about a corporate third party being involved. The league does not have sole authority in disciplining players by any stretch. Teams have all manner of fine and suspension systems and of course due to the nature of contracts, wield a very big stick as Ray McDonald just experienced. The Cowboys have a very robust player development system that includes rehabilitation of troubled players. If that is not all considered then you are missing the entire point of what is going on.

NFL players have to worry about the club they work for and the NFL itself which really is incomparable to what most people have to do deal with. The dynamic of contractor-homeowner-HOA is similar to player-club-trust. Over 3/4 of all homes have them.

The NFL is the entity handling these suspensions. They are the only ones abusing the CBA and are the only ones being discussed. You are making this overly complicated and it is coming off as an "I'm smarter than everyone else" thing despite what your signature claims. My comparisons were valid and easy to comprehend. As far as this debate, I'm done with it.

 

[Nightman]

Not quite true, the league can suspend without a conviction depending on the circumstances, ala Ben Rothlisberger. However, if this goes to court, I don't see how this is reduced to 2. If the NFL wanted to seem "tough" they would agree to reduce it to 4 in order to avoid going to court. Only way I see them saving face.

Not according to Doty and "the law of the shop". If every DV case that didn't result in a conviction received 0 games, then they have to go with that.

Ben was suspended under the Personal Conduct policy after he admitted to providing underage college students with alcohol and the having sex with one of those underage students. His actions went to the integrity of the League and the commish has a lot more leeway with those cases.

 

[Nightman]

my hope is he gets the full 10 games. But that won't happen. He'll go to court and it will get reduced to 2 games.

Should Dez get 10 games as well? He was accused of beating up a pregnant woman and there is video to prove it, somewhere.

 

[Little Jr]

Should Dez get 10 games as well? He was accused of beating up a pregnant woman and there is video to prove it, somewhere.

Silly comparison. You're better than that

 

[Nightman]

Silly comparison. You're better than that

You are the one that wants to give Hardy 10 games without a conviction and I'm being silly