Is Hardy taking the reduction or going to court?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

True. And if the suspension is for "Conduct detrimental to the league" or whatever it is, and not specifically DV, wouldn't the league have had more leeway in regards to penalty they could give (even under the old rules)?

For the umpteenth million time, semantic gymnastics like you are talking about have never worked in court for as much mileage the public gives them. It's already been ruled that domestic violence IS conduct detrimental and not mutually exclusive. It's akin to saying 'he's not a football player, he's a mammal.'

 

[Rogah]

But that is still combining policies. The precedence for a DV arrest with no conviction was 0 games.That happened around 16 times.

Since when do you care the slightest about precedence when the league is doling out punishment???

I would argue a compromise is order. Let Hardy take his 4 game suspension as a back dated 4 game fine with time served from last years time on the Commissioner's List. Peterson would also pay a 2 game fine and all the old cases would be resolved.

I believe the maximum allowable fine of a player under the current CBA is $250,000 (it might be higher, I am not 100% sure). The union might not support a player taking a $3 million fine in lieu of suspension because that creates the precedent of giving players excessive fines in exchange for suspensions, essentially forcing them to work for free. (Yes I know Hardy didn't actually play those games last year, but that might not be relevant.... still sets a precedent the union might not want)

 

[Rogah]

I think he announces today, and I think he just accepts the four games. (I actually think this might have negotiated in the background because I was surprised the league caved this much on their own ruling.)

I think he will accept the 4 games too. Therefore is virtually no sentiment (outside this forum) that he has even the slightest chance of getting fewer than 2 games. He may decide it is not worth it when the best case scenario is going from 4 to 2. There are pictures out there I am sure he doesn't want made public. A federal lawsuit would increase the chances of that.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I think he will accept the 4 games too. Therefore is virtually no sentiment (outside this forum) that he has even the slightest chance of getting fewer than 2 games. He may decide it is not worth it when the best case scenario is going from 4 to 2. There are pictures out there I am sure he doesn't want made public. A federal lawsuit would increase the chances of that.

2 games vs 4 is the difference in almost 2 million dollars to Hardy....and in all likelihood much more as he has several performance incentives built into his contract.

 

[Rogah]

2 games vs 4 is the difference in almost 2 million dollars to Hardy....and in all likelihood much more as he has several performance incentives built into his contract.

And those pictures being released to the public could cost him much, much more.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

And those pictures being released to the public could cost him much, much more.

Pure speculation.

 

[Rogah]

Pure speculation.

Actually it's not pure speculation. We know the pictures exist and we know they have been described as showing "that Ms. Holder was severely traumatized and sustained a range of injuries, including bruises and scratches on her neck, shoulders, upper chest, back, arms and feet."

The only speculation is thinking Hardy doesn't want those pictures on the front page of every sports section in the country. I think that is some very safe speculation.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Actually it's not pure speculation. We know the pictures exist and we know they have been described as showing "that Ms. Holder was severely traumatized and sustained a range of injuries, including bruises and scratches on her neck, shoulders, upper chest, back, arms and feet."

The only speculation is thinking Hardy doesn't want those pictures on the front page of every sports section in the country. I think that is some very safe speculation.

The Cowboys signed him to a big money year. They will sign him long term if he performs. They likely did their due dilligence into signing him.

This appeal also does not directly deal with his crime. Moreso it deals with the NFL's response to it. Whether images surface or not has nothing to do with this process.

But hey if you think a 26 year old pass rusher coming off a double digit sack season who is in no trouble with the law won't get a deal because of some pictures.

Well tell me how much Adrian is making this year and how hard the Vikings fought to keep him.

 

[Rogah]

The Cowboys signed him to a big money year. They will sign him long term if he performs. They likely did their due dilligence into signing him.

Pure speculation.

This appeal also does not directly deal with his crime. Moreso it deals with the NFL's response to it. Whether images surface or not has nothing to do with this process.

You're absolutely right it has nothing to do with the process.

However, it has everything to do with how the public perceives him, and if the whole country sees 7 pictures of a bruised and battered woman barely half his size, that's some pretty bad P.R.

But hey if you think a 26 year old pass rusher coming off a double digit sack season who is in no trouble with the law won't get a deal because of some pictures.

Of course he will get a deal of some sort, but it incorrect to think that a player's value on the open market could not be impacted by something like that.

 

[joseephuss]

But that is still combining policies. The precedence for a DV arrest with no conviction was 0 games.That happened around 16 times.

Ray Rice didn't have a conviction.

 

[Plumfool]

Pure speculation.

Especially considering per this press release:


"The DA’s Office allowed the severely limited use of these photographs because the NFL agreed to keep the photographs confidential and demonstrated its need for the photos in a disciplinary hearing based on the same conduct that was the basis of the criminal charges that involved alleged domestic violence."

The DAs office never relinquished the photos. Just allowed the NFL to view them.

 

[USMarineVet]

Isn't that a big part of what a joke the ruling is though? He's charged in a domestic violence incident - which the league had established penalty for. But in an effort to look tough to people on the outside, the league tries to change its' own rules and call it 'conduct detrimental' so they can change the penalty.

Anyone in any legal profession can easily see right through the league's attempted bait and switch on this one. It wouldn't take but 5 minutes to make that decision. And in all honesty, the league doesn't really have a solid case to suspend him at all, given that he ended up missing 15 games last year for a 'crime' he was ultimately not found guilty of.

Personally, if the NFLPA is taking up the legal fees for this fight, I definitely think that Hardy will do it. He stands to gain over $1 million in salary and in my opinion has little to lose. And, given the recent 'collusion' accusations, I think the NFLPA is looking for any fight against the league they can get.

Conduct detrimental to the League is very similar to what is called the "Catch All" Article in the Marine Corps. In a nutshell, it's anything that hasn't already been spelled out in the UCMJ, or in this case, the CBA. It gives them the freedom to do just about anything they want if they deem something wrong but don't have the verbiage to accommodate it. It's also used to assign penalties that have no prior precedent. Very fuzzy math tactic that gives the ruling body more options.

 

[Rogah]

Especially considering per this press release:


"The DA’s Office allowed the severely limited use of these photographs because the NFL agreed to keep the photographs confidential and demonstrated its need for the photos in a disciplinary hearing based on the same conduct that was the basis of the criminal charges that involved alleged domestic violence."

The DAs office never relinquished the photos. Just allowed the NFL to view them.

Yes, but part of the agreement was the league would be allowed to discuss the content of those pictures, and Goodell did so quite clearly in his letter suspended Hardy for 10 games.

So, like I said: we know the pictures exist and we also have a description of what they contain. Sure, Goodell could have been exaggerating, but I bet Hardy knows exactly how bad the pictures are and how bad it would be if they got out.

 

[burmafrd]

Yes, but part of the agreement was the league would be allowed to discuss the content of those pictures, and Goodell did so quite clearly in his letter suspended Hardy for 10 games.

So, like I said: we know the pictures exist and we also have a description of what they contain. Sure, Goodell could have been exaggerating, but I bet Hardy knows exactly how bad the pictures are and how bad it would be if they got out.

and he might also know that the league really exaggerated what they claimed was in there. Frankly I seriously doubt the pictures showed much of anything- because if they did then the DA would not have dropped the case.
REMEMBER: A picture is worth more than a thousand words from a coke head.

 

[Rogah]

and he might also know that the league really exaggerated what they claimed was in there. Frankly I seriously doubt the pictures showed much of anything- because if they did then the DA would not have dropped the case.

What makes you say that? The DA in the Ray Rice case dropped charges and he had a freakin' video of the actual assault.

A video of the actual assault trumps pictures of the aftermath and those charges were dropped after the "diversion".

REMEMBER: A picture is worth more than a thousand words from a coke head.

Absolutely, so the pictures must have been pretty bad to get a conviction. Hardy was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in the one trial he actually had that went to completion. Those pictures must have gone a long way to get the judge to set aside the contradictory statements.

 

[AmericasTeam81]

So all the alleged domestic violence offenders that work for McDonald's should worry about their income.

 

[Nightman]

Ray Rice didn't have a conviction.

Ray Rice took part in a Pre Trial Diversion program that is usually reserved for first time offenders. He agreed to several stipulations including counseling and keeping his nose clean. That is a lot more than a 'not convicted' result. He also admitted his crimes to Goodell, just like Roethisberger did when he was suspended.

 

[Stash]

Conduct detrimental to the League is very similar to what is called the "Catch All" Article in the Marine Corps. In a nutshell, it's anything that hasn't already been spelled out in the UCMJ, or in this case, the CBA. It gives them the freedom to do just about anything they want if they deem something wrong but don't have the verbiage to accommodate it. It's also used to assign penalties that have no prior precedent. Very fuzzy math tactic that gives the ruling body more options.

And I think one that gives any challenges to that ruling a great case against it. Especially here. They had a policy for domestic violence - which by all accounts was being claimed - and now are trying to label that incident as something else in an effort to apply a more harsh penalty.

So, basically, the league is refusing to follow its own established rules.

 

[Fredd]

Hardy isn't just losing game checks, there is a lot of incentives in his contract, correct? he is not likely going to maximize his payouts on sack totals if he misses 4 games...I thought this was all on the NFLPA to fight this...

 

[Plumfool]

and he might also know that the league really exaggerated what they claimed was in there. Frankly I seriously doubt the pictures showed much of anything- because if they did then the DA would not have dropped the case.
REMEMBER: A picture is worth more than a thousand words from a coke head.

I think there's something to this.