Has Voth changed his opinion of Hardy's future?

[Woodie]

I think most of us know what Zod is saying, we just don't agree.

It isn't just us, there are some in the media saying it is extremely unlikely and others that it is inevitable.

There are a lot of factors at play here that do not have a precedent.

I have said that the Peterson case that is in the court system will tell a lot, and even then I think if Hardy gets suspended his appeal will end up in a court room as well.

There are a lot of factors that have not been challenged yet, and they will be.

Plus the NFL has to find a reason to suspend him. If it was truly as simple as saying "conduct policy" they would have done it already and wouldn't need 1st trial evidence.

You may think he wasn't suspended already because he was paid. A judge might disagree (could happen)

I worry about the precedent of players being blackmailed or accused of things by girlfriends trying to punish them by ruining their careers.

Having an allegation come out against you that is a misdemeanor charge shouldn't cost someone 22 games. That is absurd. Even if he was paid.

We will see

 

I don't think the Peterson case will have much, if any, bearing on Hardy's situation.  They are two completely different issues with very little in common except the fact both players were on the commissioners list and are facing possible suspension.  But the cases are really apples to oranges.

 

And the NFL already has reason to suspend him.  Hardy's associates and their activities, along with the context of the situation gives them enough reason to suspend if they really want to.  And that doesn't even take into account the fact that he was not cleared of anything, he only had the charges dropped (two completely different things).  I think many are focusing too much on the legal standards for this, but the NFL does not have to follow the legal standards.  They do not have to show proof of guilt in order to suspend him.  Nor do they have to have any sort of conviction.  All they need is something that tarnishes the image of the league in their eyes, and they already have that.

 

Also, a judge won't rule that his time on the commissioners list was a suspension.  And it's not just that he was paid, but that he chose to go on the commissioners list.  Nobody forced him to do it.  Sure, he was stuck between a rock and a hard place, but he still had a choice...with a suspension, there is no choice.  Regardless, the only thing he lost was the ability to play, he didn't lose any of his livelihood.  The courts aren't interested in whether or not he wanted to play, their concern is with whether or not his ability to make a living was hampered, and it wasn't.  And anything afterward is speculative. 

 

Also, the NFL always said it would wait until his court case was resolved before making any kind of decision.  And now that it is, they are gathering as much information as possible before making a decision on a suspension.  There is no reason for them to rush into it before they get all the facts.  And for the record, I don't think it is decided that he will be suspended.  I think the NFL is truly trying to see what happened before deciding. 

 

The one thing I guarantee is that it will be a political decision.  If they find that he really didn't do anything overly wrong, I don't think they will suspend him.  But if they don't, they are going to want to have enough info to justify to the media why he wasn't suspended.  But if there's any question, I think they will suspend him (or sacrifice him might be a better way to put it).  But the length would depend on how guilty they think he is.  If they think it was overblown, but there is some smoke there, he might get a game or two, just so they won't look weak.  However, if they think he is truly guilty, then I could see a more lengthy suspension.

I do agree that there are a lot of factors involved, and that this is pretty unprecedented.  But the way the NFL has botched this whole issue could work against Hardy.  I could easily see them scapegoating him to show the world that they really are tough on DV.

 

For the record, although I said the NFL already has reason to suspend him, I do not think they will be the reasons he is suspended.  I believe those cards would only be played if they feel they have to suspend him to save face, but may not have enough on the merits of the case itself.  In that case, I could see them using them as leverage to help justify a suspension.

[rmoneyg35]

If Hardy wants to sign for a vet min like deal we would be stupid to turn it down. Even if he is suspended 6 games, 10 games of Hardy is worth more than a few million so we would still be getting a good deal.

[teeray]

I don't think the Peterson case will have much, if any, bearing on Hardy's situation. They are two completely different issues with very little in common except the fact both players were on the commissioners list and are facing possible suspension. But the cases are really apples to oranges.

And the NFL already has reason to suspend him. Hardy's associates and their activities, along with the context of the situation gives them enough reason to suspend if they really want to. And that doesn't even take into account the fact that he was not cleared of anything, he only had the charges dropped (two completely different things). I think many are focusing too much on the legal standards for this, but the NFL does not have to follow the legal standards. They do not have to show proof of guilt in order to suspend him. Nor do they have to have any sort of conviction. All they need is something that tarnishes the image of the league in their eyes, and they already have that.

Also, a judge won't rule that his time on the commissioners list was a suspension. And it's not just that he was paid, but that he chose to go on the commissioners list. Nobody forced him to do it. Sure, he was stuck between a rock and a hard place, but he still had a choice...with a suspension, there is no choice. Regardless, the only thing he lost was the ability to play, he didn't lose any of his livelihood. The courts aren't interested in whether or not he wanted to play, their concern is with whether or not his ability to make a living was hampered, and it wasn't. And anything afterward is speculative.

Also, the NFL always said it would wait until his court case was resolved before making any kind of decision. And now that it is, they are gathering as much information as possible before making a decision on a suspension. There is no reason for them to rush into it before they get all the facts. And for the record, I don't think it is decided that he will be suspended. I think the NFL is truly trying to see what happened before deciding.

The one thing I guarantee is that it will be a political decision. If they find that he really didn't do anything overly wrong, I don't think they will suspend him. But if they don't, they are going to want to have enough info to justify to the media why he wasn't suspended. But if there's any question, I think they will suspend him (or sacrifice him might be a better way to put it). But the length would depend on how guilty they think he is. If they think it was overblown, but there is some smoke there, he might get a game or two, just so they won't look weak. However, if they think he is truly guilty, then I could see a more lengthy suspension.

I do agree that there are a lot of factors involved, and that this is pretty unprecedented. But the way the NFL has botched this whole issue could work against Hardy. I could easily see them scapegoating him to show the world that they really are tough on DV.

For the record, although I said the NFL already has reason to suspend him, I do not think they will be the reasons he is suspended. I believe those cards would only be played if they feel they have to suspend him to save face, but may not have enough on the merits of the case itself. In that case, I could see them using them as leverage to help justify a suspension.

You can really claim that any case is apples and oranges. But the important thing is punishment precedent that is established

The part of the case that will have a lot to do with Hardy is the issue of them changing policies after the incident.

When the Hardy trial went down the normal punishment would be 2 games for a first time offender of domestic violence

Now that number is 6, but that was enacted retroactively to Hardy incident. Peterson case will help clear that up.

Rice and Peterson also admitted guilt. Hardy could argue he is being suspended for a crime he didn't commit, and ultimately had charges dropped against him.

Peterson also argued that the exempt list is a "pre-discipline discipline"

The way that all plays out would have much bearing on the Hardy case, and Peterson and Hardy will both cite the Rice decision which his suspension was overturned by a court, partly because in that ruling the judge said that Goodell didn't have the authority to impose harsher penalty than called for by policy in place at the time of the incident.

There is A LOT that the Peterson case can clear up for Hardy

[CRA]

Name the guys that didnt...

Once again CRA is talking out of his ass. What a surprise.

LOL...I'm not the one jumping on buying "unnamed" Panthers doing X and running with it. Claiming I know who they are and how much it means...

Voth's article is just an offseason click piece to get the Hardy believers talking. Voth knows Hardy is done here but that is a short article that only needs to be written once.

[Snake]

LOL...I'm not the one jumping on buying "unnamed" Panthers doing X and running with it. Claiming I know who they are and how much it means...

Voth's article is just an offseason click piece to get the Hardy believers talking. Voth knows Hardy is done here but that is a short article that only needs to be written once.

My statement still stands because you can't back up your bullshit.

[CRA]

My statement still stands because you can't back up your bullshit.

And exactly what bullshit are you referring to? All I am doing is not buying nothing as something? You know...pretty much not buying into the bullshit.

For example, you claim the majority of the team is lobbying for him to come back. Voth's piece doesn't claim that. It doesn't even name one person. It suggest at least one team leader may have said something....but even that could be hearsay Voth is running with for what if fun piece.

Hardy is done. That ain't bullshit

[Happy Panther]

Voth's article is just an offseason click piece to get the Hardy believers talking. Voth knows Hardy is done here but that is a short article that only needs to be written once.

Hilarious. I recently got piled on for suggesting the Panthers and Hardy were negotating this summer (as reported by both sides). Unfortunately this contradicted some opinion piece of Voth.

[FootballMaestro]

Team leaders/guys who have Richardson's ear are guys like CJ/TD/Olsen/Kalil... especially CJ from what I understand.  Those guys are true leaders and class acts.  Also, Rivera is pushing for his return.  It would be hard for Richardson not to at least consider their opinions.  

 

That's easy for them to say, their not paying him, and threw away $13 mil last season.

 

That kinda loss stings like a MotherFuga when you're an owner.

 

I don't see much chance, unless he plays significantly below market value, and/or has a clause in his contract where they can stop paying him (asking him to return money sounds fruitless) if/when he fugs up again.

 

Otherwise, I'm holding out. But it doesn't look good.

[WOW!!]

And exactly what bullshit are you referring to? All I am doing is not buying nothing as something? You know...pretty much not buying into the bullshit.

For example, you claim the majority of the team is lobbying for him to come back. Voth's piece doesn't claim that. It doesn't even name one person. It suggest at least one team leader may have said something....but even that could be hearsay Voth is running with for what if fun piece.

Hardy is done. That ain't bullshit

You are so full of it on this subject. . You had no problem agreeing and running with Voth when it fit your opinion. . Now that the person who was the 1st on the "Hardy not being back bandwagon" is admitting that a change in that mindset is possible. . You call him a fluff writer... This isn't Panthers .com... Voth doesn't work for the team.. He wouldn't make a fluff piece contradicting his strongly posted opinion. ..He has had since the beginning of the season. .. Unless he is getting a different info than he was getting before. .

And really all he is saying now is that Hardy maybe trying to get back on the team and he has a swell of support from members and staff of the team who Jerry might listen to... He still believes it won't happen... He's only admitting now that it isn't as much of a sure thing as it was before. .

[Mr. Scot]

LOL...I'm not the one jumping on buying "unnamed" Panthers doing X and running with it. Claiming I know who they are and how much it means...

Voth's article is just an offseason click piece to get the Hardy believers talking. Voth knows Hardy is done here but that is a short article that only needs to be written once.

Disagree on the article. I think it's a legitimate story, worth paying attention to.

The disconnect is people making too much of how big a 'chance' there really is.

Voth states in the story that the probability of this making a difference is pretty slim and he still ultimately believes Hardy won't be a Panther.

But people latch onto his 'saying there's a chance' like a lovestruck Jim Carrey, so...

[WOW!!]

Disagree on the article. I think it's a legitimate story, worth paying attention to.

The disconnect is people making too much of how big a 'chance' there really is.

Voth states in the story that the probability of this making a difference is pretty slim and he still ultimately believes Hardy won't be a Panther.

But people latch onto his 'saying there's a chance' like a lovestruck Jim Carrey, so...

I think you're over exaggerating what most of the pro Hardy people are saying. .Most of us are only saying it's not a sure thing he won't be on this team.. If Greg is willing to except the parameters that were set out by Voth's article than there's a chance he will be back... I don't think Greg will because money talks... but if he is willing like Voth's says he might be.. I don't see why the Panthers wouldn't bring him back..

[csx]

And exactly what bullshit are you referring to? All I am doing is not buying nothing as something? You know...pretty much not buying into the bullshit.

For example, you claim the majority of the team is lobbying for him to come back. Voth's piece doesn't claim that. It doesn't even name one person. It suggest at least one team leader may have said something....but even that could be hearsay Voth is running with for what if fun piece.

Hardy is done. That ain't bullshit

You should reread the article. It not only says many teammates but names one. It also says team leaders with an 's'.

"Hardy is getting some help from the locker room. Many of his teammates want him back, and some are starting to lean on Jerry Richardson. That support is coming from more players than just cornerback Josh Norman, who’s made it clear he wants Hardy back. We’re talking team leaders, guys who have Richardson’s ear. The Panthers owner has been ready to cut bait with Hardy for months, but he’s also a man willing to listen. That doesn’t mean he’ll change his mind, but he will listen."

[WOW!!]

You should reread the article. It not only says many teammates but names one. It also says team leaders with an 's'.

"Hardy is getting some help from the locker room. Many of his teammates want him back, and some are starting to lean on Jerry Richardson. That support is coming from more players than just cornerback Josh Norman, who’s made it clear he wants Hardy back. We’re talking team leaders, guys who have Richardson’s ear. The Panthers owner has been ready to cut bait with Hardy for months, but he’s also a man willing to listen. That doesn’t mean he’ll change his mind, but he will listen."

That's my point... If Bill Voth is getting different messages than before... it's because Greg is willing to be loyal to the team and Jerry will (for the right Price) make a business decision.. Getting a top 5 pass rushers way below his market value who is showing you he is contrite to the situation he put his team in... is a good business move...especially if the team and coaching staff are on board with bringing hom back... it's a win win situation. ..

[Mr. Scot]

I think you're over exaggerating what most of the pro Hardy people are saying. .Most of us are only saying it's not a sure thing he won't be on this team.. If Greg is willing to except the parameters that were set out by Voth's article than there's a chance he will be back... I don't think Greg will because money talks... but if he is willing like Voth's says he might be.. I don't see why the Panthers wouldn't bring him back..

Lack of trust by "Richardson and others in the building" (probably Gettleman) would be the reason.