What Cowboys Are Saying About Hardy

[erod]

There's no football problem here. This is a dominant player.

But there's a reason a first-round talent was drafted in the fifth round when teams knew how good he'd be.

For this season, I have no doubt he'll be a perfect soldier.

 

[BigStar]

While you shouldn't expect to hear bad things, they likely aren't going out of their way to shower him with the kinds of praise he's receiving. It's been pretty unanimous how high his work ethic and motor are, particularly from the defensive players and coaching staff. He's an intense guy and we can only hope his practice habits wear off on the rest of the defense.

I agree. Look at the comment made by Jake Long after Ray McDonald was cut from the Bears after his recent arrest. I believe he tweeted "good riddance" but don't sense the underlying tension from these comments made by our players. Long tolerated him but wouldn't sing his praises obviously if asked directly before McDonald's release. Just part of team culture in general.

 

[THEHEREAFTER]

It's truly unfortunate we won't get to see him until well into the season. Does he get to play pre-season?

 

[jobberone]

Hardy for President. Nah, Hardy for player/Commissioner.

 

[erod]

It's truly unfortunate we won't get to see him until well into the season. Does he get to play pre-season?

Yes, he can play the preseason, and you'll see him again by Week 5. That's my prediction.

Henderson will uphold, then he'll appeal to the federal court, where it will get significantly reduced.

 

[xwalker]

Yes, he can play the preseason, and you'll see him again by Week 5. That's my prediction.

Henderson will uphold, then he'll appeal to the federal court, where it will get significantly reduced.

This.

 

[tyke1doe]

Was hoping this was something they were saying about his appeal

When I first read you post, I read your use of the word "appeal" as "attraction." It didn't make sense to me at first until I read a follow-up thread that made it clearer to me.

Doh! My bad.

 

[tyke1doe]

Yes, he can play the preseason, and you'll see him again by Week 5. That's my prediction.

Henderson will uphold, then he'll appeal to the federal court, where it will get significantly reduced.

Here's a question I have:

Let's assume Hardy goes to federal court. Could he actually ask for no suspension on the basis of his case being dismissed? If the court rules there's no basis to punish him because the latest legal ruling exonerated him, could the federal judge basically demand that the NFL not punish him?

Again, this is a little bit different from the Adrian Peterson case because there was no dispute that AP beat his child. But in this case, there is a question of whether Hardy beat/touched/abused his former girlfriend?

Of course, this begs the question what did the NFL see of the photos/evidence/testimony to award him 10 games.

But ... if Hardy claims he did nothing wrong, could the federal judge rule he should be punished? Or will his ruling take into account only the NFL's policy?

 

[EPL0c0]

While you shouldn't expect to hear bad things, they likely aren't going out of their way to shower him with the kinds of praise he's receiving. It's been pretty unanimous how high his work ethic and motor are, particularly from the defensive players and coaching staff. He's an intense guy and we can only hope his practice habits wear off on the rest of the defense.

It's the kind of things that I recall reading/hearing about Rolando McClain last year.

I thought he brought a noticable attitude to the LB corp and I think he made guys like Durant and Carter even better and more aggressive. I hope Hardy has that kind fo effect on the Dline, especially the young pass rushers.

 

[Nation]

Here's a question I have:

Let's assume Hardy goes to federal court. Could he actually ask for no suspension on the basis of his case being dismissed? If the court rules there's no basis to punish him because the latest legal ruling exonerated him, could the federal judge basically demand that the NFL not punish him?

Again, this is a little bit different from the Adrian Peterson case because there was no dispute that AP beat his child. But in this case, there is a question of whether Hardy beat/touched/abused his former girlfriend?

Of course, this begs the question what did the NFL see of the photos/evidence/testimony to award him 10 games.

But ... if Hardy claims he did nothing wrong, could the federal judge rule he should be punished? Or will his ruling take into account only the NFL's policy?

I believe the NFL has set a precedence with Rice that despite no conviction that a 2 game suspension could still happen

 

[AzorAhai]

Here's a question I have:

Let's assume Hardy goes to federal court. Could he actually ask for no suspension on the basis of his case being dismissed? If the court rules there's no basis to punish him because the latest legal ruling exonerated him, could the federal judge basically demand that the NFL not punish him?

Again, this is a little bit different from the Adrian Peterson case because there was no dispute that AP beat his child. But in this case, there is a question of whether Hardy beat/touched/abused his former girlfriend?

Of course, this begs the question what did the NFL see of the photos/evidence/testimony to award him 10 games.

But ... if Hardy claims he did nothing wrong, could the federal judge rule he should be punished? Or will his ruling take into account only the NFL's policy?

Its really hard to say what the courts will rule. On one hand, they never actually overturned the suspension of Peterson. They simply ruled it back to arbitration and for the league to repeat the process using the old rules. On the other hand, the NFL completely ignored that ruling and just reinstated Peterson, thus the contempt charge the NFLPA is seeking. Part of me wonders if the judge will take more extreme measures and rule differently.

Hardy probably will bring up the fact that he doesn't have a conviction on his record as a basis for his argument and the old policy would likely have warranted no suspension. I'm not sure how exactly the courts are going to handle this case though. Judges generally don't like being made a mockery of and I could easily see Hardy asking for the courts to block a suspension due to unfair handling by the NFL. Whether it is granted or not, only time will tell.

 

[tyke1doe]

I believe the NFL has set a precedence with Rice that despite no conviction that a 2 game suspension could still happen

But there was no disputing that Ray Rice hit his wife. Even if the court was lenient on him, the NFL could still implement punishment based on an actual issue occurring.

However, Hardy seems to be saying he didn't abuse his ex-girlfriend. And the court dismissed the case.
So how can he be punished for an offense he didn't commit?

That's the essence of my question. (I'm not arguing whether Hardy did or didn't abuse his ex girlfriend, so I don't want to go there.) I'm asking if Hardy goes before a federal court to get his sentence reduced, why can't Hardy asked for no punishment on the grounds that he didn't do anything?

Or is that not for the federal judge to decide?

 

[tyke1doe]

Its really hard to say what the courts will rule. On one hand, they never actually overturned the suspension of Peterson. They simply ruled it back to arbitration and for the league to repeat the process using the old rules. On the other hand, the NFL completely ignored that ruling and just reinstated Peterson, thus the contempt charge the NFLPA is seeking. Part of me wonders if the judge will take more extreme measures and rule differently.

Hardy probably will bring up the fact that he doesn't have a conviction on his record as a basis for his argument and the old policy would likely have warranted no suspension. I'm not sure how exactly the courts are going to handle this case though. Judges generally don't like being made a mockery of and I could easily see Hardy asking for the courts to block a suspension due to unfair handling by the NFL. Whether it is granted or not, only time will tell.

This is the essence of my question.

Let me see if I can explain it better:

Hardy is before Henderson. He says he shouldn't be suspended at all because he didn't abuse this young lady. He cites the fact that the case was thrown out of court. Since there is no violation of the NFL's policy, there should be no suspension.

Henderson comes back and says, "You're being suspended for 8 games."

Hardy doesn't like the fact that he's not only getting eight games, but that he shouldn't be suspended at all because he didn't violate the league's policy.

He goes before a federal judge. He basically argues that based on the NFL's policy, if he had committed a domestic violence offense, he should be suspended two games. But because he didn't do anything, he shouldn't be suspended at all.

Can the judge rule on this matter? If the judge can rule that the NFL isn't following its policy in suspending Hardy for 10 games when he should get 2, can the federal judge also rule that he shouldn't get any suspension because he didn't violate the league's policy at all?

I see both as the same question. Or am I wrong?

 

[AzorAhai]

I think the judge CAN rule that way, but based on how they handled Peterson, I don't know that they will. The way the NFL dismissed the Judges last order to repeat arbitration, could lead to a more direct judgement of actually blocking a suspension or ruling on the length. I'm pretty sure Hardy will ask for zero games though and whether the NFL handles it or the judge, the old policy would have warranted no suspension.

 

[Nation]

But there was no disputing that Ray Rice hit his wife. Even if the court was lenient on him, the NFL could still implement punishment based on an actual issue occurring.

However, Hardy seems to be saying he didn't abuse his ex-girlfriend. And the court dismissed the case.
So how can he be punished for an offense he didn't commit?

That's the essence of my question. (I'm not arguing whether Hardy did or didn't abuse his ex girlfriend, so I don't want to go there.) I'm asking if Hardy goes before a federal court to get his sentence reduced, why can't Hardy asked for no punishment on the grounds that he didn't do anything?

Or is that not for the federal judge to decide?

I believe the federal judge is there to determine if the suspension is upheld under the grounds of the agreement that was collectively bargained between the owners and the NFLPA, not to actually re-try the case.

 

[tyke1doe]

I believe the federal judge is there to determine if the suspension is upheld under the grounds of the agreement that was collectively bargained between the owners and the NFLPA, not to actually re-try the case.

Thanks.

 

[erod]

The fact this is taking so long leads me to believe it's going to get reduced now, perhaps even by negotiation.

Getting overturned yet again would make the league look even weaker. Perhaps they want to avoid another appeal.

 

[burmafrd]

The fact this is taking so long leads me to believe it's going to get reduced now, perhaps even by negotiation.

Getting overturned yet again would make the league look even weaker. Perhaps they want to avoid another appeal.

The league is looking at this from a purely PR point of view. They want to appear to be tough on DV and understand that the vast majority of NFL fans have the attention span of a gnat on a bad day and will not care if the NFL ruling is overturned by a court.

 

[erod]

The league is looking at this from a purely PR point of view. They want to appear to be tough on DV and understand that the vast majority of NFL fans have the attention span of a gnat on a bad day and will not care if the NFL ruling is overturned by a court.

Then why are we at five days and counting? Usually Henderson rules almost immediately.

Something is complicating this.

 

[Manster68]

Yes, he can play the preseason, and you'll see him again by Week 5. That's my prediction.

Henderson will uphold, then he'll appeal to the federal court, where it will get significantly reduced.

I think if Hardy's suspension gets reduce to four games, there will be a huge backlash by all of the women's groups.

Reducing it to 8 games would be fine by me.