Around the League: Week 2

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I wonder if the Vikings were making that decision or the NFL? I think the Vikings made their decision 24 hours before with reinstatement, what changed since to go back? Anheuser Busch change things maybe? I think this was the NFL saying, nope he doesnt play.

I still think it was Ziggy Wilf that reversed the decision. He had already lost his Raddison sponsor and then when Anheiser/Busch comes out and makes a statement, well it doesn't take long to understand these guys respond to bottom lines and nothing else.

Notice the Panthers did the same thing. I have respect for Jerry Richardson though, you can tell this has really bothered him because he actually got on the podium. (and broke down) I think the Panthers just wanted to give Hardy the due process he's deserved, and that's understandable when you don't have the tangible evidence like we saw with the Rice case.

[Ruhskins]

Kurt Warner, Junior Seau among 15 first-year candidates nominated for Pro Football Hall of Fame - ESPN

HOF Candidates for this year.

Quick side note, am I the only one who feels that Marvin Harrison just disappeared from the public eye and no one talks about how he was involved in a two shootings and civil suit?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by punch it in

I think the Vikes just had their hands forced sooner. They both would have handled it equally as horrible for equally as long if given the opportunity.

Yet the Vikings are the ones being slammed in the media and by sponsors, while the Ravens are just an afterthought in the Rice case.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

^They both will be an afterthought in about 3 weeks.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Yet the Vikings are the ones being slammed in the media and by sponsors, while the Ravens are just an afterthought in the Rice case.

Yeah, but its sort of unfolding still. I hear you. Quake is rite anyway in another month nobody will give a hoot. Than again the world goes on. Just hope justice is served somehow at the end of the day.

[Dirtbag59]

I'm glad amphetamines have been reclassified as substance abuse drugs under the new policy. Honestly it's been kind of a bad joke for a while now having them classifying as PEDs. The PED label needs to be reserved for steroids and HGH. Up until now it's basically been the equivalent of calling an 18 year old caught with their 17 year old boyfriend or girlfriend a sex offender.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Kurt Warner, Junior Seau among 15 first-year candidates nominated for Pro Football Hall of Fame - ESPN

HOF Candidates for this year.

Quick side note, am I the only one who feels that Marvin Harrison just disappeared from the public eye and no one talks about how he was involved in a two shootings and civil suit?

I think that's part of the reason he's not in the Hall right now.

Really rooting for Tim Brown to get in.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I still think it was Ziggy Wilf that reversed the decision. He had already lost his Raddison sponsor and then when Anheiser/Busch comes out and makes a statement, well it doesn't take long to understand these guys respond to bottom lines and nothing else.

Notice the Panthers did the same thing. I have respect for Jerry Richardson though, you can tell this has really bothered him because he actually got on the podium. (and broke down) I think the Panthers just wanted to give Hardy the due process he's deserved, and that's understandable when you don't have the tangible evidence like we saw with the Rice case.

Wasn't Hardy already convicted? That seems like enough

[donofriose]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Wasn't Hardy already convicted? That seems like enough

He was convicted in June. He is in the process of appealing that decision.

If there is enough evidence for AP to be deactivated there was more than enough for Hardy.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by donofriose

He was convicted in June. He is in the process of appealing that decision.

If there is enough evidence for AP to be deactivated there was more than enough for Hardy.

If there were a Greg Hardy video, would Greg Hardy be playing Sunday? - NFL - SI.com

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Wasn't Hardy already convicted? That seems like enough

It was a bench trial, not a trial by peers. The thing about judges making these types of judgements, none of them want to be known as the guy who let's off some woman beater in case he goes and kills her after he's let go. I've sit in court and watched a judge let go a woman in a assault with another woman (and this woman had serious proof of an assault), and turn around and drop the guilty verdict on the next case where there really was no evidence. The difference is, one involved a man, the other a woman. I'm not saying that's the case here because I don't know the details, it's just saying I don't fully trust judgements made in these cases.

We've had situations in NC where judges were lenient on some DV cases and the man goes back and kills the wife. The judge took heat as well as the district attorney. Now, the DA won't even drop a DV case without charging the woman for filing a false report. Truthfully, Hardy should have asked for a trial by peers from the get go.


I agree though. He should be deactivated until his name is(or if) cleared in a trial by jury, since he's been found guilty in the first round.

[donofriose]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

It was a bench trial, not a trial by peers. The thing about judges making these types of judgements, none of them want to be known as the guy who let's off some woman beater in case he goes and kills her after he's let go. I've sit in court and watched a judge let go a woman in a assault with another woman (and this woman had serious proof of an assault), and turn around and drop the guilty verdict on the next case where there really was no evidence. The difference is, one involved a man, the other a woman. I'm not saying that's the case here because I don't know the details, it's just saying I don't fully trust judgements made in these cases.

We've had situations in NC where judges were lenient on some DV cases and the man goes back and kills the wife. The judge took heat as well as the district attorney. Now, the DA won't even drop a DV case without charging the woman for filing a false report. Truthfully, Hardy should have asked for a trial by peers from the get go.


I agree though. He should be deactivated until his name is(or if) cleared in a trial by jury, since he's been found guilty in the first round.

I agree with your point, but that should be irrelevant with what the NFL does.

The NFL shouldn't be in the business of choosing which convictions to uphold. That is up to the Judicial System. So I agree with you about deactivating him until he receives a new trail.

[mooby]

I think the NFL's lack of a stringent policy on suspending players involved in criminal matters is hurting them on this one. In the past Goodell hasn't even waited for a guilty verdict to suspend a player. I think he just picks and chooses which ones to wait on and which ones to act on. In a case like Hardy's it's definitely making him look bad, he's already gone through trial and the NFL hasn't done anything yet. Since when does the NFL wait for an appeal to be over before they act on a player?

[donofriose]

Originally Posted by mooby

I think the NFL's lack of a stringent policy on suspending players involved in criminal matters is hurting them on this one. In the past Goodell hasn't even waited for a guilty verdict to suspend a player. I think he just picks and chooses which ones to wait on and which ones to act on. In a case like Hardy's it's definitely making him look bad, he's already gone through trial and the NFL hasn't done anything yet. Since when does the NFL wait for an appeal to be over before they act on a player?

Since Jerry Richardson probably asked for a favor. They all like their money, until it costs the NFL something to address domestic violence and have a consistent policy.. doubt anything changes.

Report: Jerry Richardson seeks signatures for Roger Goodell support | NFL | Sporting News

Bad timing for Richardson in my opinion.

[JoeRedskin]

Vikings: We are going too wait for the legal process to resolve itself.

Sponsors: Okay, so will we. If he's cleared, you can have our money. Until were convinced he's cleared, you can't have our money.

Vikings: Oh, well, when we said we were going to wait, we meant what you said. Please continue to give us money.