Greg Hardy Suspended 10 Games

[NFLfan]

I don't think that he's not guilty of some wrongdoing, but I also don't think there's any concrete evidence either. And I'm not the type who usually defends players in cases like this. I don't think this is some Ray Rice case. The alleged victim was high on coke and Hardy was the one who called the cops.

I thought that the NFL had access to documents from the court which substantiated the allegations. No? I will have to do more reading on this. Can you share a link to where you read that the victim was on drugs?

[Dustin]

I thought that the NFL had access to documents from the court which substantiated the allegations. No? I will have to do more reading on this. Can you share a link to where you read that the victim was on drugs?

 

Holder admits she was using cocaine on the night in question.

— Joe Person (@josephperson)

July 15, 2014

 

@josephperson

Holder admits she was using cocaine on the night in question.

[radiogirl]

People should actually read the policy. 

 

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2014/12/10/0ap3000000441637.pdf

I read it.  Just don't understand why the reductions unless they are finding new evidence that lessens the charges.  The whole thing is gross.  She was being pushed onto a pile of weapons high on cocaine?  What are these people thinking?

[ColtRider]

What gets me is the $13.1 million he was paid for not playing as ColtsBlueFL points out. This was a North Carolina bench trial. It comes with an automatic appeal. 10 games? Take the punishment and shut up. Move on. He's playing with fire. Why is it that people cannot recognize or admit fault when there's overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I believe in innocent until proven guilty. But it's cases like this one that really grinds my gears. He's damn lucky if you ask me.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I don't think that he's not guilty of some wrongdoing, but I also don't think there's any concrete evidence either. And I'm not the type who usually defends players in cases like this. I don't think this is some Ray Rice case. The alleged victim was high on coke and Hardy was the one who called the cops.

 

Yes, Hardy called the cops, but someone else called 911 first and reported he was beating the {bleep} out of some girl and get the cops there now. That she saw it, and she hears it. And it was ongoing during her 911 call.  Full audio below-

 

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=11513357

 

And the NFL did petition the courts for evidence and photos.  The NFL was allowed to got to NC and see the evidence and photos, but not have any of it as it would remain in state of NC hands.  Hardy was convicted by a judge, who had to be convinced beyond all reasonable doubt he did it, not just more likely then not.  He got 60 days suspended sentence and 18 months probation. He appealed for jury trial. That's' when the rich people play judicial hi-jinx' scenario began.

 

I'm interested to see if arbitration has any reasonable cause to reduce the suspension the NFL levied.  I hope not, and many thing the NFL finally got it right this time.

 

http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentary/article/12745022/how-nfl-roger-goodell-got-right-greg-hardy-suspension

[Superman]

I read it.  Just don't understand why the reductions unless they are finding new evidence that lessens the charges.  The whole thing is gross.  She was being pushed onto a pile of weapons high on cocaine?  What are these people thinking?

 

 

Seriously, though, I was responding to the idea that the NFL isn't sticking with the parameters of their new policy, when actually they are.

 

As far as suspensions being reduced, that happens upon appeal, which is when things get silly. The league messes some stuff up, and the way they handle appeals has long been ridiculous (it's supposed to be better now, but we'll see), but sometimes the result of appeals makes no sense.

 

Bountygate, for instance, Tagliabue found that everything the league said happened actually happened, and he said that it was against the rules and deserving of penalty. Yet, the vacated all the player suspensions. He said he didn't think the punishments were fitting, and that the appeals process didn't authorize him to adjust the penalties, just uphold them or toss them out altogether. So he tossed them out. Makes zero sense.

[radiogirl]

 

Seriously, though, I was responding to the idea that the NFL isn't sticking with the parameters of their new policy, when actually they are.

 

As far as suspensions being reduced, that happens upon appeal, which is when things get silly. The league messes some stuff up, and the way they handle appeals has long been ridiculous (it's supposed to be better now, but we'll see), but sometimes the result of appeals makes no sense.

 

Bountygate, for instance, Tagliabue found that everything the league said happened actually happened, and he said that it was against the rules and deserving of penalty. Yet, the vacated all the player suspensions. He said he didn't think the punishments were fitting, and that the appeals process didn't authorize him to adjust the penalties, just uphold them or toss them out altogether. So he tossed them out. Makes zero sense.

I agree.  Zero sense.  Love the picture.....

[amfootball]

The union exists to protect and defend its members. That's what a union is for. They have no obligation to make statements against its members

Who is talking about making statements? How about not trying to defend them when they mess up ... badly.

[Dustin]

Yes, Hardy called the cops, but someone else called 911 first and reported he was beating the {bleep} out of some girl and get the cops there now. That she saw it, and she hears it. And it was ongoing during her 911 call.  Full audio below-

 

Just to be clear, nobody *saw* anything. So let's not spread false info. shed testified to hearing "banging and screaming". 

 

And the NFL did petition the courts for evidence and photos.  The NFL was allowed to got to NC and see the evidence and photos, but not have any of it as it would remain in state of NC hands.  Hardy was convicted by a judge, who had to be convinced beyond all reasonable doubt he did it, not just more likely then not.  He got 60 days suspended sentence and 18 months probation. He appealed for jury trial. That's' when the rich people play judicial hi-jinx' scenario began.

 

 

I'm not sure if you know this, but the in North Carolina (current resident),being found guilty in the bench trial is the equivalent to being charged with the crime in most other states. This is because North Carolina doesn't like to grant fair trails to poor people who commit misdemeanors so the state doesn't have to pay for an attorney and what-not.

 

Also, the judge (known for harsh stances against DV and in an election year) specifically requested this case, which brings into question a bias. 

 

Like I said, I'm sure he's guilty of being overly aggressive, so he should definitely be reprimanded, but it's not like she burnt the lasagna and he just beat the * out of her. This guy is 6'5" and 290 lbs. If he actually "beat the * out of her" like you suggest, there would be a lot more than light bruising around the shoulder and neck area. 

[Dustin]

Who is talking about making statements? How about not trying to defend them when they mess up ... badly.

 

A union shouldn't try to defend it's members? wth are you talking about? 

[radiogirl]

A union shouldn't try to defend it's members? wth are you talking about? 

I don't think that's what AM is talking about.  I THINK she's referring to the NFL not defending people who act like bone heads.

[amfootball]

A union shouldn't try to defend it's members? wth are you talking about? 

Oh please. The PA is an absolute joke. Always has been, always will be.

[radiogirl]

Oh please. The PA is an absolute joke. Always has been, always will be.

Okay.  I stand corrected.

[jvan1973]

Who is talking about making statements? How about not trying to defend them when they mess up ... badly.

who from the union has defended Hardy?

[Dustin]

Oh please. The PA is an absolute joke. Always has been, always will be.

 

so you're not going to answer my question? 

 

Are you seriously saying a union shouldn't defend it's members? You understand that that is the entire point of a union correct? 

[jvan1973]

Oh please. The PA is an absolute joke. Always has been, always will be.

Examples?

[amfootball]

so you're not going to answer my question? 

 

Are you seriously saying a union shouldn't defend it's members? You understand that that is the entire point of a union correct? 

Goodness gracious. You are smarter than this. Read this, http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/2014/12/16/adrian-peterson-nflpa-labor-deal/20492295/

[Superman]

Examples?

 

Oh there are examples. I don't have a problem with a union doing what they exist to do (it's the grandstanding and hypocrisy that irritate me), but there are plenty of examples of the NFLPA making butts out of themselves. 

[Dustin]

Goodness gracious. You are smarter than this. Read this, http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/2014/12/16/adrian-peterson-nflpa-labor-deal/20492295/

 

I read it. Your answer to my question wasn't in it. 

[amfootball]

I read it. Your answer to my question wasn't in it. 

Your question was not relevant to my statement about the PA being a joke. They willingly gave way their ability to defend their guys when they put their rubber stamp on the 10 year CBA agreement in 2011 giving Roger all the power. And then of course came secret tapings ... again a complete joke.

[Superman]

Your question was not relevant to my statement about the PA being a joke. They willingly gave way their ability to defend their guys when they put their rubber stamp on the 10 year CBA agreement in 2011 giving Roger all the power. And then of course came secret tapings ... again a complete joke.

 

That's weak, and as the crux of the argument presented in that article, it's devoid of context. 

[jvan1973]

Your question was not relevant to my statement about the PA being a joke. They willingly gave way their ability to defend their guys when they put their rubber stamp on the 10 year CBA agreement in 2011 giving Roger all the power. And then of course came secret tapings ... again a complete joke.

that's you're example of the PA being a joke from its infancy to where it is now?

You also did say that the union shouldn't defend its members. That's what Dustin is getting at

[amfootball]

That's weak, and as the crux of the argument presented in that article, it's devoid of context. 

The PA hamstrung itself when it signed the CBA in an effort to gain a bigger salary cap and better work place rules. Too bad for them. As they really needed to hone in on disciplinary issues clearly given the new policies the commish has concocted and his authority to exercise discipline as he sees fit.

[Superman]

The PA hamstrung itself when it signed the CBA in an effort to gain a bigger salary cap and better work place rules. Too bad for them. As they really needed to hone in on disciplinary issues clearly given the new policies the commish has concocted and his authority to exercise discipline as he sees fit.

 

Yeah, those are really trivial issues...

 

The new CBA promoted bigger salaries for veterans by a) instituting a rookie wage scale, b) getting drafted players to free agency, and c) significantly reducing restricted free agency. Among other things, of course... And you already mentioned the work place rules. All this, without missing games. 

 

They backed off on total revenue sharing and disciplinary issues in order to end the work stoppage and get those other terms. And all of that has made the game better, and improved the players' standing overall.

 

But let you (or USA Today) tell it, and the players 'willingly gave up all control to Roger Goodell to do whatever he wants regarding player discipline.' It entirely ignores the fundamentals of negotiation. 

[radiogirl]

Yeah, those are really trivial issues...

 

The new CBA promoted bigger salaries for veterans by a) instituting a rookie wage scale, b) getting drafted players to free agency, and c) significantly reducing restricted free agency. Among other things, of course... And you already mentioned the work place rules. All this, without missing games. 

 

They backed off on total revenue sharing and disciplinary issues in order to end the work stoppage and get those other terms. And all of that has made the game better, and improved the players' standing overall.

 

But let you (or USA Today) tell it, and the players 'willingly gave up all control to Roger Goodell to do whatever he wants regarding player discipline.' It entirely ignores the fundamentals of negotiation. 

Exactly.  And, their job is to defend.  If they start taking stands for players in regards to bad decisions and living like thugs, that would be bad news.  The NFL organization as a whole has taken a stand against domestic violence with their No More campaign. If they have an internal organization  like the PA representing players and jumping on stuff like this, it would be like spending money and making a stand to break down their umbrella organization.  

[amfootball]

Yeah, those are really trivial issues...

 

The new CBA promoted bigger salaries for veterans by a) instituting a rookie wage scale, b) getting drafted players to free agency, and c) significantly reducing restricted free agency. Among other things, of course... And you already mentioned the work place rules. All this, without missing games. 

 

They backed off on total revenue sharing and disciplinary issues in order to end the work stoppage and get those other terms. And all of that has made the game better, and improved the players' standing overall.

 

But let you (or USA Today) tell it, and the players 'willingly gave up all control to Roger Goodell to do whatever he wants regarding player discipline.' It entirely ignores the fundamentals of negotiation. 

Sure. Money is paramount. Always is in the negotiations. They also worked on the retirement stuff too. BUT when a good percentage of your league is compromised of players with poor economic backgrounds, no fathers, etc, then the disciplinary piece becomes just a tad bit more important. Fact is the PA dropped the ball big time on giving Roger that type of power and they have been crying ever since.

 

And remember this. Owners are millionaires if not billionaires. It is their ball they with. At any point the owners can take their ball and tell everyone to go home and still be filthy rich. It was so nice and cheery when Jeff Saturday hugged Kraft BUT the owners always have the power and they exercised that big time in the 11th hour 4 years ago.

[radiogirl]

Sure. Money is paramount. Always is in the negotiations. They also worked on the retirement stuff too. BUT when a good percentage of your league is compromised of players with poor economic backgrounds, no fathers, etc, then the disciplinary piece becomes just a tad bit more important. Fact is the PA dropped the ball big time on giving Roger that type of power and they have been crying ever since.

 

And remember this. Owners are millionaires if not billionaires. It is their ball they with. At any point the owners can take their ball and tell everyone to go home and still be filthy rich. It was so nice and cheery when Jeff Saturday hugged Kraft BUT the owners always have the power and they exercised that big time in the 11th hour 4 years ago.

You're talking about a whole bigger social, economic issue here.  I have worked with kids in youth homes for over 20 years.  My son, who is now 34, came from the worst background imaginable and not once has he hit a woman, beat someone up, experimented with drugs or caused harm to another human.  The NFL should take a sharp stance against this sort of behavior.  These are players who are paid huge amounts of money and are idolized by kids.  If they want to be in the NFL, they need to clean their act up.  Or get out.....IM very humble O.

[amfootball]

You're talking about a whole bigger social, economic issue here.  I have worked with kids in youth homes for over 20 years.  My son, who is now 34, came from the worst background imaginable and not once has he hit a woman, beat someone up, experimented with drugs or caused harm to another human.  The NFL should take a sharp stance against this sort of behavior.  These are players who are paid huge amounts of money and are idolized by kids.  If they want to be in the NFL, they need to clean their act up.  Or get out.....IM very humble O.

Yes. It is very broad and complex. I have been saying for years that the NFL needs to get to its players earlier with support/intervention. Perhaps high school and certainly by college. I use Dungy/Vick as an example a lot but having Dungy mentor him while he was in prison and out of prison was instrumental in Vick turning his life around. I think the NFL needs to expand its rookie classes to be more comprehensive and get to their recruits before they hit the NFL. I think this is something the NFL and PA should work on together as it benefits both.

[radiogirl]

Yes. It is very broad and complex. I have been saying for years that the NFL needs to get to its players earlier with support/intervention. Perhaps high school and certainly by college. I use Dungy/Vick as an example a lot but having Dungy mentor him while he was in prison and out of prison was instrumental in Vick turning his life around. I think the NFL needs to expand its rookie classes to be more comprehensive and get to their recruits before they hit the NFL. I think this is something the NFL and PA should work on together as it benefits both.

I don't disagree.  But, that would be very hard to work together when they are on two sides of the fence at times.  I don't think it's the NFL's responsibility to turn troubled guys around once they are in the NFL.  And, the teams, IMO, should stay away from guys that can't get it together and keep offending.  Send the message that you do drugs, hit women, and overall act like a thug....you don't play.

[Superman]

Sure. Money is paramount. Always is in the negotiations. They also worked on the retirement stuff too. BUT when a good percentage of your league is compromised of players with poor economic backgrounds, no fathers, etc, then the disciplinary piece becomes just a tad bit more important. Fact is the PA dropped the ball big time on giving Roger that type of power and they have been crying ever since.

 

And remember this. Owners are millionaires if not billionaires. It is their ball they with. At any point the owners can take their ball and tell everyone to go home and still be filthy rich. It was so nice and cheery when Jeff Saturday hugged Kraft BUT the owners always have the power and they exercised that big time in the 11th hour 4 years ago.

 

Goodness, I don't even want to touch that bolded part. I'll just say that that was not and should not have been a major consideration from the NFLPA's standpoint. If anything, it would have made the disciplinary issue more of a sticking point for the league. You're basically saying 'the demographics of your union make it more likely that your members will have legal issues, so you should make sure the league can't discipline them for it.' That's not fixing the problem, is it?

 

And in the same breath, you'll undermine Goodell and the league for trying to crack down on disciplinary issues. Talk about playing both sides...

 

The union didn't drop the ball by not insisting on those disciplinary issues. They simply moved on to bigger things, like compensation and working conditions. Again, that's how negotiations work.

[radiogirl]

Goodness, I don't even want to touch that bolded part. I'll just say that that was not and should not have been a major consideration from the NFLPA's standpoint. If anything, it would have made the disciplinary issue more of a sticking point for the league. You're basically saying 'the demographics of your union make it more likely that your members will have legal issues, so you should make sure the league can't discipline them for it.' That's not fixing the problem, is it?

 

And in the same breath, you'll undermine Goodell and the league for trying to crack down on disciplinary issues. Talk about playing both sides...

 

The union didn't drop the ball by not insisting on those disciplinary issues. They simply moved on to bigger things, like compensation and working conditions. Again, that's how negotiations work.

EXACTLY!!!!!!  You can't play both sides being in the position the union and the NFL are in.  IT WON'T WORK!  

[amfootball]

Goodness, I don't even want to touch that bolded part. I'll just say that that was not and should not have been a major consideration from the NFLPA's standpoint. If anything, it would have made the disciplinary issue more of a sticking point for the league. You're basically saying 'the demographics of your union make it more likely that your members will have legal issues, so you should make sure the league can't discipline them for it.' That's not fixing the problem, is it?

 

And in the same breath, you'll undermine Goodell and the league for trying to crack down on disciplinary issues. Talk about playing both sides...

 

The union didn't drop the ball by not insisting on those disciplinary issues. They simply moved on to bigger things, like compensation and working conditions. Again, that's how negotiations work.

I don't think it is ever a good idea to give full control to one person over disciplinary issues especially to one that represent the owners. But as you say, they were willing to let that go in favor of more money. But that is the bed they made so now they have to lie it.

 

I have never had an issue with the league wanting to impose discipline but the inconsistency in how it has exercised that power has really hurt them and also why Roger keeps getting his suspensions over turned. As I have stated numerous times, he was on a slippery slope once he decided he would punish offenses separate from the legal system. He was very arbitrary in his discipline and then rightfully called out for being inconsistent as well as incompetent. I do think his DV policy is the step in the right direction and would hope he would continue to expand his moral policy so he can rule consistently and have his discipline upheld instead of turned over.

[oldunclemark]

The NFLPA has to unilaterally discipline players within the union,...

Real unions do that..

You cannot have repeat offenders in your group as it reflects on everyone.

..and the NFLPA doe snot have to fight every suspension and fine for murder (Hernandez) for wife beating, rape, child molestation etc..

They have conditioned the public t think that's their role and its not.

Its a totally immoral positon and no one, no media, no women's groups, no child advocates..no NFLPA members call them on it

[ColtsBlueFL]

Just to be clear, nobody *saw* anything. So let's not spread false info. shed testified to hearing "banging and screaming". 

 

 

This may be true, or not.  I'm only reporting what I saw and heard. Untill a copy of the testimony shows otherwise, I don't know except for what I've seen and heard too.

 

 

And I could care less what the judicial system in NC is.  It seems a full jury trial is easy to request.  The first pat looked like it was just a filter for a full blown jury trial anyway.  And last I knew the first bench trial transcripts were sealed.  The NFL Filed to see evidence and unseal the transcript last February-

 

http://www.wcnc.com/story/sports/nfl/panthers/2015/02/13/nfl-requests-that-court-unseals-hardy-trial-transcripts/23368189/

 

So if you have the transcript or URL, that would help resolve that issue.

[Dustin]

And I could care less what the judicial system in NC is.  It seems a full jury trial is easy to request.

 

It is for a felony charge, but there's really no point in not getting one seeing as how you can get both anyway, so you're correct.

 

But the assistant district attorney prosecuting the case pointed out several discrepancies in Hardy’s 911 call to police. She was also helped by a key corroborating witness named Christina Lawrence, who was in Hardy’s apartment during the confrontation but barely knew either Hardy or Holden. Tin said that Lawrence was the only witness with “nothing to gain” on either side by testifying, and Lawrence had heard (but not seen) much of the argument between Hardy and Holder that night.

 

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/scott-fowler/article9140969.html

[jvan1973]

The NFLPA has to unilaterally discipline players within the union,...

Real unions do that..

You cannot have repeat offenders in your group as it reflects on everyone.

..and the NFLPA doe snot have to fight every suspension and fine for murder (Hernandez) for wife beating, rape, child molestation etc..

They have conditioned the public t think that's their role and its not.

Its a totally immoral positon and no one, no media, no women's groups, no child advocates..no NFLPA members call them on it

unions don't impose discipline. No union does

[ColtsBlueFL]

It is for a felony charge, but there's really no point in not getting one seeing as how you can get both anyway, so you're correct.

 

 

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/scott-fowler/article9140969.html

 

So she did half lie on her 911 call.  But I fail to understand how one can be in an apartment, hear such fighting going on and not investigate?  Maybe scared and ran out?

 

And I wonder if Outside the Lines has ever made a notation on the story that the 911 call they highlight was 100% factual?

[Derakynn]

Oh please, just stop it!  He got paid 13.1 million for exempt list while and investigation was held.  And no one can watch this and say it was a footnote to Rice-

 

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:11513357

 

Here's Mike Golic on the matter-

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=612Car3jSJM

 

Right on Mr. Golic!

 

It's worthy to note Bill Parcells called in to the show, and they asked him his thoughts.  He also sided with Mike Golic 100%

I'm allowed to have any opinion I want. Fact is he already had like a 16 game suspension whether he was paid or not. Really wouldn't be hard to just give him a 10 game pay ban but let him play if he really wants to risk it. And yes, I can say it was a footnote to Rice. There were at least 3x as many articles being shoved down my throat about Rice than there was about Hardy. The whole thing was generally held low-key. Grabbing one media portion that occurred over several months while ignoring everything else doesn't give any factual basis to an opinion. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

I'm allowed to have any opinion I want. Fact is he already had like a 16 game suspension whether he was paid or not. Really wouldn't be hard to just give him a 10 game pay ban but let him play if he really wants to risk it. And yes, I can say it was a footnote to Rice. There were at least 3x as many articles being shoved down my throat about Rice than there was about Hardy. The whole thing was generally held low-key. Grabbing one media portion that occurred over several months while ignoring everything else doesn't give any factual basis to an opinion. 

 

You can have any opinion you want. Fact is, the NFL DV policy doesn't allow such a penalty.  It calls for 6 games suspension without pay.  Clauses allow extra time for other circumstances like choking a victim- which they feel happened here.

 

Rice case released video.  Hardy's case sealed the photos from public consumption.  If the photos were released there would have been a media storm on Hardy as well.  Instead it was people mad at the NFL for making him sit while they investigated,   Even though he was paid in full. Especially when the it was settled out of court and charges subsequently dismissed. Now he has to sit for 10 (instead of 6 ) games without pay.  Now they're mad once more because the NFL is administering punishment via policy.

 

Since it will be almost 2 years without playing a meaningful down in the NFL, I surmise his effectiveness when he returns will be compromised severely, as this article making comparison to Aldon Smith suggests. And Hardy's next DV violation earns a lifetime ban.  This is the type of result that deters others from crossing the line, and weeding out the 'knuckleheads' that could care less.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/23/aldon-smiths-struggles-a-bad-sign-for-cowboys-and-greg-hardy/

[oldunclemark]

unions don't impose discipline. No union does

Wrong. Steel unions and pipefitters can throw you out of the union..That's discipline. But those are real unions

Felons in your union reflect on other members..

...You cant talk about what's right on the job when your members seek cover and aid from you (and get it) when they do wrong.