I'm sure this has been addressed before so forgive me. But if releasing Hardy is imminent and a foregone conclusion (as ALL local/nat'l pundits have communicated) I don't understand why they've kept him around until now. If they wanted to make a statement about the organization's stance on DV, why not release him (and continue to pay him his guaranteed $) after week 3?
If the concern was the player's union's potential reaction to releasing him while he's on the commish's list, well, the season's over.That doesn't apply anymore.
I guess I see a pretty glaring disconnect between the local media's take on the situation and the team's apparent stance on Hardy. Am I missing something?