Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

DE Greg Hardy: 'I want to play'


SgtJoo

Recommended Posts

With pay, without pay. All he has to prove is the unfair banishment harmed his image and affected his ability to earn and he has a case.

 

edit: and by ability to earn, I mean his next contract.  If it's less than a comparable player at his position, it impacted his ability to earn.

 

 

Actually, I think he would have to prove the NFL violated its on rules, or the law, and in doing so harmed his image/future earnings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be defended by BAD men with guts. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Adison? You, Ealy? You, Horton? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Panthers, and you curse the NFL. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Panther’s defense, while sucking, probably cost us wins. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, gives us wins. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that line, you need me on that line.

Lol!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know a couple of people who had similar misdemeanors. Hardy's initial punishment was similar to what they got. Most people take the verdict the judge renders and deal with it, Hardy decided to go for the jury trial for understandable reasons. It was stated a month or so ago that most of these cases get delayed once or twice, so in that regard, he is not getting treatment much different than others.

He may be getting more scrutiny, but so far, there is no evidence he is getting singled out, or getting preferential treatment by the courts.

But if Hardy felt he was innocent what was he suppose to do plead guilty? I know sometimes it seems easier to take that route but it could damage his reputation for life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I think he would have to prove the NFL violated its on rules, or the law, and in doing so harmed his image/future earnings. 

 

I don't think that would necessarily be true. They may not have broken any of their rules by the letter, but the NFL had no problem with letting Hardy play and DID let him play until that Ray Rice video came out which had absolutely f'ing zero to do with Greg Hardy. Then they go and suspend him with pay on the basis of a completely unrelated case. Not to mention Goodell's new rules he supposedly implemented right before the season started said first-time offenders got a 6-game suspension. A lawyer the caliber of which Greg Hardy could afford could definitely argue they deserve damages over that. The NFL has good lawyers too so it would be interesting to see how it would play out IF it played out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically the NFL didn't do anything to Hardy. Everyone keeps blaming Goddell for this but it wasn't him who deactivated Hardy it was JR. The panthers could and should have played this like the 49ers and their owner did with McDonald but JR didn't have the balls to take the scrutiny that came with Hardy playing. All the NFL did was give us an extra roster spot so the team could make Hardy go away while paying him so as to avoid any union or civil lawsuits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to watch the Panthers taking a beating each week. It's worse that Hardy (imo) won't be back until next season, and will probably be playing for the Falcons, or some other rival. Thanks Goodell. I'm never going to forget this disaster.

Would you say they're getting beat like Ray Rice's girlfriend or Hardy's girlfriend?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if Hardy felt he was innocent what was he suppose to do plead guilty? I know sometimes it seems easier to take that route but it could damage his reputation for life.

 

I wasn't saying that he should or should not have requested the Jury trial.  That is certainly up to him, and if he feels he didn't get a fair shake, then I don't blame him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that would necessarily be true. They may not have broken any of their rules by the letter, but the NFL had no problem with letting Hardy play and DID let him play until that Ray Rice video came out which had absolutely f'ing zero to do with Greg Hardy. Then they go and suspend him with pay on the basis of a completely unrelated case. Not to mention Goodell's new rules he supposedly implemented right before the season started said first-time offenders got a 6-game suspension. A lawyer the caliber of which Greg Hardy could afford could definitely argue they deserve damages over that. The NFL has good lawyers too so it would be interesting to see how it would play out IF it played out.

 

I am no lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn express last night.  :)

 

Seriously, I think it would depend on several things.  The state he is allowed to file in, the specifics of the players contracts, the state and federal laws that are applicable etc...  For example, NC has slightly stricter laws regarding burden of proof in civil trial than some states do.  I was a jury member on a civil trial once, and its quite a interesting experience as they explain to us what the specifics of the law are. 

 

Fwiw, he might have a case, but its going to be hard to prove it cost him, if he signs a 10+ million per year contract with us or some other team next season.  And there is a pretty good chance that happens, although I imagine any team he signs with is going to have some fairly strict safeguards in the contract, if they can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And just for the record, I'd like to cheer for a football team that didn't have players making themselves unavailable by pulling dumbass stunts or associating with the wrong people.

Guess me, Hardy, Frank Alexander and a bunch of other people are just s--t out of luck, huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It’s simple. Win and everyone in here will say the culture is good. Dear lord the amount of time spent on these posts is hysterical. We’ve seen the end of season swoons where you can tell the team had given up with many of the same leaders that took us to playoff seasons. When your OL is decimated by injuries, it’s amazing how fast culture turns. When you get on a tear like 2015, everyone’s having fun. You need the right people regardless, but they have to win.
    • The difference is about how much player input is allowed and encouraged in the decision making process. Top down teams tend to dictate to players how everything is handled. Disagreements are handled by the coach and players are expected to do what they are told regardless of what they think or feel.  Players are perceived as commodities to be used until we find better. In player led teams player input is encouraged and valued. Players and especially leaders are expected to settle their own disagreements and be accountable to the team but mostly to each other. Players are family to be appreciated and supported in their growth. Is the reality of football the same in both? Yeah there are limited positions, football is a business and winning is the bottom line. Coaches get final say and run the program because that is their job. But in player led teams they feel valued, appreciated, part of a larger whole. Most people who have worked at multiple jobs know exactly what I am talking about. When players try to run the show and don't value  coach input that isn't a player led team, that is a circus which we surely are familiar with in our past.  
    • For our pics and trades tonight and tmrw.  Remember, Aho was a 2nd rounder and Slavin was a 4th rounder. 
×
×
  • Create New...