Peterson and Rice cases give Hardy hope

[StarBoyz83]

Its hard to imagine him getting less than 6 games after the appeal.

 

[jazzcat22]

It was one incidence. But in the NFL Law, they can do what they want. So they for see more than one, so they can justify their screw job.
The court didn't break it down to 4 charges did they? Which should not matter anyway.

As we know and said, the NFL has gone too far yet again. Thinking conventional rules and common sense does not apply to them. Over use of their power once again.
We know it will get dragged out, but we all want it done and over.

So I try not to think about it. I just envision how fresh Hardy may be, to knock around RG3, twice, knock around Rogers in December too. And knock around Cam Newton on T-Day, knocking off his crappy grin and cocky attitude he seems to have at times.

 

[jazzcat22]

The more I look at this, the more I can't fathom this being more than two games according to the rules at the time.

The key is how the appellate judge rules the number of incidents. That's the foggy part of this.

My gut is four games in the end.

Which is what the dictator wanted anyway. 4 to 6 ...using the 10 as a high number, to negotiate it down. Then all feel good. Goodell seems like he is going to be tough on DV, and players a nd teams are happy to get it reduced. As no one will stand up and say this is total BS.

2 or 4 games would make people happy, except Mara and Kraft...and Eli and Tom, and Chip.

 

[Galian Beast]

Its hard to imagine him getting less than 6 games after the appeal.

Based on what exactly?

 

[Galian Beast]

It was one incidence. But in the NFL Law, they can do what they want. So they for see more than one, so they can justify their screw job.
The court didn't break it down to 4 charges did they? Which should not matter anyway.

As we know and said, the NFL has gone too far yet again. Thinking conventional rules and common sense does not apply to them. Over use of their power once again.
We know it will get dragged out, but we all want it done and over.

So I try not to think about it. I just envision how fresh Hardy may be, to knock around RG3, twice, knock around Rogers in December too. And knock around Cam Newton on T-Day, knocking off his crappy grin and cocky attitude he seems to have at times.

Actually the NFL can't do what it wants. It has a legal collective bargaining agreement with the players union.

The NFL has exceeded its reach and time after time these suspensions are overturned by judges or arbitrators.

 

[Galian Beast]

Which is what the dictator wanted anyway. 4 to 6 ...using the 10 as a high number, to negotiate it down. Then all feel good. Goodell seems like he is going to be tough on DV, and players a nd teams are happy to get it reduced. As no one will stand up and say this is total BS.

2 or 4 games would make people happy, except Mara and Kraft...and Eli and Tom, and Chip.

Again, this isn't about finding middle ground.

 

[StarBoyz83]

Based on what exactly?

Just they way they are trying to make this case 4 seperate Incidents. Also the the crimes against women will be a lot less tolerated now.

 

[Galian Beast]

Just they way they are trying to make this case 4 seperate Incidents. Also the the crimes against women will be a lot less tolerated now.

Again, please read what people write, it'll help you out in the future.

1. You can't use any new rules to punish players, this has been established already.
2. They made a mistake by trying to suggest it was 4 separate incidents to push for more severity under old rules. There is too much precedence working against the NFL here.

 

[Deep_South]

The NFL Player's association says the average NFL career is 3.3 years, which means a 10 game suspension would be on average roughly 20% of a player's career. That is just ridiculous, IMO.

 

[JoeKing]

Peterson confessed to the actions he was accused of and Rice's wrong doing was captured on video... they had no legit defense. Hardy on the other hand had a defense but won that defense. Hardy is no worse and no better then anyone else in the eyes of the law. But for some reason, the commissioner of the NFL seems to think he is a higher authority than the American legal system. The commish has the audacity to ignore the legal system's judgment and substitute his own. Now we have a man that has been cleared of any wrong doing after a bench trail and appeal, suspended 10 games. Peterson and Rice were guilty, in that respect they have nothing in common with Greg Hardy. Suspending Hardy one millisecond is wrong, 10 games is a travesty of justice that no one should be satisfied with. Pleading it down to any thing other than full exoneration is just as unacceptable. The commish is not a higher authority than the American legal system. No matter how you feel about Hardy, it is not the commish's job to second guess the American legal system's findings by imposing his own will after the fact.

 

[MeTed]

Hardy was not convicted of 1 charge (let alone 4). Under the old policy, I do not see how the NFL can justify suspending Hardy.

In all instances where players are put on the exempt list then that time should be considered. The players are being paid until the legal process concludes but it is also true that they are prohibited from team participation which could be considered punitive by the court(s). IMHO, the NFL should consider the time served on the exempt list and then fine the player the appropriate number of game checks once the legal process concludes.

 

[Fletch]

I'm starting to think that the worst case scenario is a 2 game suspension.

That would be ideal as far as suspensions go. Back in time to get his feet wet at home against the Falcons.

 

[MRV52]

2 to 4 games is what I believe he will get.

 

[AzorAhai]

What's being unstated in every report I've seen is the way the NFL didn't even follow it's new policy. They set the suspension up as if there were 4 separate instances. In the new policy a 2nd offense is punished by banishment from the league with the ability to reapply after a year. The suspension does not fit in with a single one of the policies and is a direct attempt to circumvent previous rulings. Is it under the old policy? It should have been dismissed with no conviction. Was it the new policy and one incident? Then it should have been 6 games. Was it new policy and multiple separate incidents? Then it should have been banishment from the league. The punishment doesn't fit any of the leagues policies either new or old.

If the league doesn't get its act together the courts will be stepping in and they won't be looking at the players.

 

[burmafrd]

the four separate incidences is really pathetic. It all happened in the period of an hour or so all at the same time. NO ONE will buy the four separate BS.

 

[Galian Beast]

"An abuse of discretion may be found in those circumstances where the Board's decision provides no rational explanation, inexplicably departs from established policies, is devoid of any reasoning, or contains only summary or conclusory statements; that is to say, where the Board has acted in an arbitrary or capricious manner."

That's exactly what we have here.

If you look at the entire history of these suspensions you see a pattern of precedence and the NFL is going to have to explain why the suspension for Hary is worse than the suspensions doled out to other players under the previous policies.

There are only a few cases that appear to help the NFL's case

1. Adam Jones
2. Ben Roethlisberger*

Adam Jones actually was suspended for multiple incidents and Ben Roethlisberger didn't appeal, but had his suspension reduced to 4 games, which sets an even worse precedence.

Overall you can see extremely arbitrary and erratic delivery of discipline from this commissioner.

 

[Nightman]

the four separate incidences is really pathetic. It all happened in the period of an hour or so all at the same time. NO ONE will buy the four separate BS.

This would be like 'failing' 4 drug tests because you took 4 hits off one joint.

 

[Bullet22]

It only took Peterson three months to win his appeal. I believe with that precedent, Hardy's should be even faster. On top of that nothing goes into effect until the regular season, so we actually have a lot of time.

My guess is he doesn't miss any games at all.

He has already missed 15 games...

 

[Galian Beast]

It only took Peterson three months to win his appeal. I believe with that precedent, Hardy's should be even faster. On top of that nothing goes into effect until the regular season, so we actually have a lot of time.

My guess is he doesn't miss any games at all.

Actually the original appeal was filed on November 20th, the arbitrator was selected the next day, the hearing was on December 3rd, and a decision was made December 12th. So the appeals process should actually be pretty quick. Hopefully it can end at that, if not they will go to a judge and that may take a few months after that, either way there is plenty of time before the season starts.

 

[Galian Beast]

He has already missed 15 games...

I'm talking about moving forward.