...Great points from longtimefan and Jack.
I'm unclear how Goodell could fix the situation for Hargrove after recognizing that he was cut in retaliation for telling the truth about the Saints bounty program. The employment contract is between Hargrove and the Rams, not the NFL.
Player dissatisfaction with the league's disciplinary process is fairly widespread. Doesn't seem like the NFLPA did a good job negotiating this in the new collective bargaining agreement. As I recall, they were more concerned about obtaining a larger share of gross revenues for the players and the league would never concede something, such as a better discipline system, without receiving concessions in return.
Again, given the totality of his circumstances, I think Hargrove found himself in a very difficult position when questioned about this in 2010. The year before, he served a one-year suspension for violating the league's substance abuse policy. Upon returning, there were few teams willing to offer a contract. If the Rams cut him, he would probably find it difficult to latch on elsewhere. How was the NFL going to protect his professional future? Where would his next contract come from if it were widely known that he had turned on his former teammates and the coaching staff in New Orleans? Getting "blacklisted" is a very real and legitimate concern amongst professional athletes...
Call me a biased homer (Go Pack!) or a bleeding heart (which I probably am) but I think many of the "he simply should've told the truth" crowd conveniently gloss over the real problems this presented for Hargrove's professional future. The guy was involved in the bounty program and he deserves punishment but, in light of the considerations above, eight games for stonewalling the league seems harsh.