One year deal...the better he plays & stays out of trouble, the better the contract next year. Dallas needed him....not to mention picking at 27, no pressure finding that stud DE. Now they can draft BPA.

Yea I get that...but this contract is basically a 1 year 11+ million with 0 guaranteed...dunno if it's really incentive filled contract.

---

Yea I get that...but this contract is basically a 1 year 11+ million with 0 guaranteed...dunno if it's really incentive filled contract.

All he has to do is be on the roster each week and he brings in 9 million. He gets another 1.3 mill just for showing up to team workouts and training camp. The only real incentive is the sack incentive which is just over 1 mill. Not to mention he also finagled a no tag clause as well so he's set to become a free agent again next year. Pretty sweet deal if you ask me.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

Thing is, if he's suspended then none of those "being on the roster" items gets punched, isn't that right? Yeah, all he has to do is be in the building, but the League isn't quite done with the man just yet if I'm understanding the situation correctly.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

Thing is, if he's suspended then none of those "being on the roster" items gets punched, isn't that right? Yeah, all he has to do is be in the building, but the League isn't quite done with the man just yet if I'm understanding the situation correctly.

I have a feeling the league could be facing hell from the NFLPA if they suspend him. Even if he got off on a technicality he's innocent in the eyes of the law and therefore shouldn't face any punishment from the NFL.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

I have a feeling the league could be facing hell from the NFLPA if they suspend him. Even if he got off on a technicality he's innocent in the eyes of the law and therefore shouldn't face any punishment from the NFL.

It's established precedent that the NFL will suspend players based on allegations alone (see Ben Roethlisberger). What's never been tested, and surely will be in this case, is whether the NFL can impose an actual suspension without pay after a guy spends time doing a de facto suspension with pay on the commissioner-exempt list.

 

My sense is that the NFLPA won't fight an actual suspension too hard--the worst-case endgame for them is that the NFL is barred from suspensions after time on the exempt list, so the league turns around and just hands out suspensions without pay as soon as a guy is arrested. That would be very tough to spin to the players as a win. I think the more likely scenario is that the NFL and NFLPA negotiate a maximum length that the actual suspension can be for a guy coming off the exempt list.

---

I have a feeling the league could be facing hell from the NFLPA if they suspend him. Even if he got off on a technicality he's innocent in the eyes of the law and therefore shouldn't face any punishment from the NFL.

 

The NFLPA has no say so. The CBA leaves the discipline issues up to Goodell. 

 

He's not innocent in the eyes of the law. He was convicted. Because of the weirdness of North Carolina's system he gets to appeal via a jury trial. Lo and behold the prosecutor can't find the victim. Imagine that. I'm sure she's enjoying some of Hardy's money in a warm locale. Thus they have to drop the charges. Hardly innocent.

 

In the Rice and Peterson appeals the judges found fault with the NFL for relying on the final result of the judicial process. Thus Goodell will have to make his own decision. Thus it will be a few games or more - which is why the Cowboys wrote the contract the way they did, i.e. about $2.6 million to Hardy and then per game payments based on how many he gets to play.

 

Seems as if both the player and the team get something out of the way this contract was written. 

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

It's established precedent that the NFL will suspend players based on allegations alone (see Ben Roethlisberger). What's never been tested, and surely will be in this case, is whether the NFL can impose an actual suspension without pay after a guy spends time doing a de facto suspension with pay on the commissioner-exempt list.

 

My sense is that the NFLPA won't fight an actual suspension too hard--the worst-case endgame for them is that the NFL is barred from suspensions after time on the exempt list, so the league turns around and just hands out suspensions without pay as soon as a guy is arrested. That would be very tough to spin to the players as a win. I think the more likely scenario is that the NFL and NFLPA negotiate a maximum length that the actual suspension can be for a guy coming off the exempt list.

 

The NFLPA won't fight the suspension re the Exempt List because they can't - it was mutually agreed to by both sides. It's separate and apart from what the discipline will be for Hardy. It was used as kind of a holding place pending final adjudication. He was paid so he has no real argument.

 

The only argument left will be re Goodell's discipline for a prior offense (i.e., before this new personal conduct policy) exceeding what was the norm under the old policy, which I believe was usually two games.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

 

 

He's not innocent in the eyes of the law. He was convicted. Because of the weirdness of North Carolina's system he gets to appeal via a jury trial. Lo and behold the prosecutor can't find the victim. Imagine that. I'm sure she's enjoying some of Hardy's money in a warm locale. Thus they have to drop the charges. Hardly innocent.

 

 

 

This has already been discussed…

 

Eyes of the law = Innocent

 

Court of Public Opinion//Public Knowledge = Hardly Innocent

---

This has already been discussed…

 

Eyes of the law = Innocent

 

Court of Public Opinion//Public Knowledge = Hardly Innocent

 

This can be debated until Doomsday. In the eyes of the law: could be charged at a future date, but probably won't be - because money doesn't talk, it swears.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

This has already been discussed…

 

Eyes of the law = Innocent

 

Court of Public Opinion//Public Knowledge = Hardly Innocent

Does the judge's guilty sentence (before Hardy appealed for a jury trial prior to which the witness got paid off) not count? He was officially in the eyes of the law declared guilty there to me.

---

Does the judge's guilty sentence (before Hardy appealed for a jury trial prior to which the witness got paid off) not count? He was officially in the eyes of the law declared guilty there to me.

 

Very true.

 

The same woman he assaulted, intimidated, and paid rent for failed to show up in court.

 

Coincidence?

 

smh... that's the power, ...of power.  Physical, emotional, and monetary.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Does the judge's guilty sentence (before Hardy appealed for a jury trial prior to which the witness got paid off) not count? He was officially in the eyes of the law declared guilty there to me.

Yes it does...

 

Upon appeal charges were dropped meaning he gets his innocence.

 

I mean obviously the dude is guilty but as far as the Eyes of the Law he is innocent…don't know why this is so hard to comprehend.

 

People get away with murder/rape/assault everyday because charges have to be dropped or not enough evidence to prosecute…to the layman they are guilty because common sense eludes to such guilt but the Court of Law doesn't work that way...

 

People are also wrongfully convicted daily…that is why there is an appeal process.  So a person who was wrongfully convicted of rape ala that USC player that tried to come back…should he continue to be called guilty…cause a judge/jury found him that way…I mean screw the appeal right?

---

Yup.  OJ is completely innocent as well.  All should be forgotten and forgiven.  Innocent is innocent, after all.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Yes it does...

 

Upon appeal charges were dropped meaning he gets his innocence.

 

You probably believe Ryan Braun was innocent because he got off on that absurd chain of command loophole. 

---

You probably believe Ryan Braun was innocent because he got off on that absurd chain of command loophole. 

 

jaggy... PM me

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Yes it does...

 

Upon appeal charges were dropped meaning he gets his innocence.

 

I mean obviously the dude is guilty but as far as the Eyes of the Law he is innocent…don't know why this is so hard to comprehend.

 

People get away with murder/rape/assault everyday because charges have to be dropped or not enough evidence to prosecute…to the layman they are guilty because common sense eludes to such guilt but the Court of Law doesn't work that way...

 

People are also wrongfully convicted daily…that is why there is an appeal process.  So a person who was wrongfully convicted of rape ala that USC player that tried to come back…should he continue to be called guilty…cause a judge/jury found him that way…I mean screw the appeal right?

Again, not guilty, or dropped charges, doesn't mean he was ruled to be innocent in the eyes of the law. But i'm not going into that again... :yucky:

---

You probably believe Ryan Braun was innocent because he got off on that absurd chain of command loophole.

Once again I'm not arguing with what I believe//public believes.


And yes according to the Court of Laws OJ was innocent and all was forgotten and forgiven in the Court of Laws eyes.


Not mine...

---

He's obviously not a good human being, whether the court tells him that or not. With that being said, he is a pro-bowl caliber player so there will always be a team that will take a chance. I'm glad I'm not a GM that has to make that call...

---