MHS831

I think Bersin should have made the pro bowl since no other punt goalie made it.

That punt return average (19.1) is higher than some Kick return averages. Double take.

I thought Bersin was better than Lafell last year during camp. Glad to see it. How many SC small college players do we have?.

I agree-we are talking about 3 undrafted players competing for the starting spots. Frankly, if all three were cut, I am not sure any would be picked up. Chandler is my favorite.

At T, we are going to be better than everyone thinks. I like our depth on the OL, so maybe a competition will produce some overachievers.

I hate that too, because Hardy is entertaining. One of the points I made when supporting the fact that Gettlemen has not given him a big contract yet was the unpredictable nature of his personality. I think he is on the fast track, and giving him millions may not be anything more than pouring gas on a hot grill. This year, we shall see. But you are right--Greg H. put himself in a position. If the girl was drunk and on cocaine as GH suggested, then why is he with a girl who is drunk and on the powder? If charges are dropped because he is totally innocent, then there will always be that lingering doubt that he paid his way to innocence.

My brother in law lives in Columbus and is an OSU alum. He says that Philly is a hard worker. He said that he assumed a leadership role this season. Philly was not their primary return man. "He is no Hester" He said that he had "pretty good" hands. Nice addition.

Perhaps you should have the person who reads posts to you explain what it is I am saying. Nobody screamed for anyone's head. That is how you twist facts and run with them. Responding to anything you post is a usually a waste of time.

It sounds as if you are looking for slanted, circumstantial reasons to support a person who might have just beaten a woman. There is reason to question some things at the appropriate time, but these questions need to come from objective thinkers. We all hope he is innocent, but I am not going to support him until I know for a fact what happened. You are presenting one-sided, inferential, insignificant, fragmented details and seem convinced that you have turned the tables. The police? You have not questioned their handling of the situation. Why question her actions during and in the aftermath of the alleged assault when she was high and traumatized? If the police offered her medical attention and she refused, why would they then determine her injuries to be insignificant in terms of assault evidence? The injuries do not have to require medical attention to evidence abuse-according to NC law, that is only required as evidence in child abuse cases. Hardy claims to have been hit with a heel that drew blood. Was he offered medical assistance? Finally, maybe she went to a friend/relative's house and they advised her what to do to protect herself? There is no statute of limitations that invalidates an assault charge a few hours after it occurs. Much will come out. I am not blaming Hardy, the police, or the girl. I am simply not going to build a case for a man just because he plays for my favorite football team. I hope this gets worked out, but for now, I am glad we are not into him for $39-50 million guaranteed.

The judge (according to local newscasts) called the injuries disturbing and expressed concern for her safety. If Hardy called 911 and complained that she used her heel against him etc, why was she not also required to spend 24 hours in jail? The biggest question I have, and this goes along with what WOW was saying, is "Why was the home not checked out by police?" Surely the broken glass and the guns would have been red flags that would have necessitated an arrest. However, many of you who are defending Hardy fail to take into consideration the female voice on the other 911 call, that claimed that she "seen" Hardy hitting her. An eyewitness, bruises, etc. could look bad for him. I am not convicting Hardy, but I am not going to defend a person accused of hitting a woman until I am sure he didn't do it. Maybe some here don't find that to be upsetting, but if she were your sister or mother, I am sure you would feel a bit differently about it.

We know that the judge, a female judge, determined the bruises to be disturbing and put Hardy in jail. I am not trying to convict our top DE, but that means little to me if he was hitting a female. There is evidence that suggests Hardy was not as innocent as he appears on the 911 call.

Based on the 911 call, Hardy seemed a bit slurry in speech, but aware. Funny how people assume that she is guilty because she was drunk/high but give GH, a known lunatic, credit for being sensible and proactive. They are basing that on Hardy's statement to the 911 dispatcher. I do not buy it. However, that is not enough to convict him on either. If Snake is right, if it was just restraint, lets see where those bruises were. I understand bruises above the elbow on the arms. Maybe at the wrists. But if they were around the throat, he has a unique way of dealing with angry women.

There is also another 911 call that has a female voice saying that she saw him beating her. I want to give Hardy the benefit of the doubt, but nobody knows what happened. Sure, Hardy may have restrained her at one point, but he could have thrown her around at another point. Question: Was he retraining her around her neck? If you are saying that she was drunk and high, then I would have to ask, "Where are you getting that information?" Was Hardy drunk and/or high and what does that prove anyway? I hope you are right, Snake. I really do. However, if you are not, I want the truth to be told and the real victim cleared and protected.

I didnt read all 200 posts, but I read some of you sounding relieved, as if the girl was the problem. While that could turn out to be true, Just because Hardy called 911 and told his side of the story to the dispatcher, do not think that is evidence of innocence. It sounds convincing and is good news from that perspective, but the judge saw the bruises and marks on her body. The judge felt that the female was the victim. The legal expert who felt that the girl had been assaulted will not be a petty detail that can easily be overlooked.

We knew.

Good points. Cody Davis is interesting. I had not heard of him. 4.41 is flying for a FS, much like Mitchell. I too have liked the TE from Iowa. Britt is 25 or so, so he is mature. He was pretty solid in college. Coleman may not be a 5th rounder, but in this draft, some talent will fall. That is the reason I think we grab 2 . There is a name I have not seen discussed that I was hoping Zod would mention: Dri Archer--RB/WR/KR, Kent State. (discuss). Solid day 3.

I am interested in James and Hurst. Hurst got hurt in the bowl game (broken leg) and I think he is flying under the radar.

I got on his bandwagon at the combine--where his stock rose. He is a good fit for our system and he is mature (someone said that Gettlemen does not like to draft underclassmen).

Do not underestimate Thomas Davis' role in Klein's (and Kuechly's) development. The guy is a pro.

Just gotta make sure that we do not draft Davis' eventual replacement by selecting a white guy whose last name starts with a "K." That would throw us back 100 50 several years.

Maybe, but many are kids--23-24 years old. IT can wear on you to a point where you start believing it. Heck, during the games, they get pumped when the crowd cheers and bummed when they boo. Human nature. I played in college, and when you win you want to go to class and out to eat,etc. WHen you lose, you order in.

The point I make is aligned with yours--the fans and the media will remember those comments and the player will be reminded of these expectations through twitter, interviews. etc. I understand what he means, but he needs to understand the potential consequences of his illustrations. He called AJ Klein "Luke Kuechly 2.0" or something. This team needs focus--not pressure and distractions.

I got that, but any time you mention another active player's name, you are inviting unfair comparisons.

No, not breaking anything to me, but there are a lot of variables he is in control over that contribute to "luck." And he does what a lot of coaches would do and gets crucified when he fails. However, the Buffalo game should have been a no-brainer simply because if you make it you probably win, if you don't you probably tie (they would played for the safe FG instead of having a rookie QB throwing into the endzone). If Rivera and Bill Billichek or Jim Harbaugh or Tom Coughlin or Mike Sherman or Bill Parcells etc. sat down to play a game of chess, how often would you bet on Rivera? Crazy analogy on the surface, but I want a smart person who takes calculated risks. A person who has seen other strategies before. A person who can adjust. A person who thinks 2 moves ahead. None of those are Ron Rivera, it would seem. I hope he wins 10 games this year and people throw this post in my face. I could live with that.

The thing about Rivera that bothers me is the thing I liked most about him in the beginning--his press conferences. Just this year, he compared AJ Klein to Luke Keuchly. Last week, he likened (indirectly) Sproles to Barner. I hate that he spews statistics such as the team's mathematical method for grading players and does not play the odds during games. If you have an 80% chance to win a game on 4th down, especially if not getting the first down means the other team is likely to play for a tie--you take that chance. Don't sit there and tell me that Hardy had a good game because he was a factor in 1/3.44 plays per game and the norm for DE's is 7.3. If you understand numbers, then play the odds and do the math.