Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Anthony Hargrove suspended 8 games
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 445876" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p><span style="color: #000000"> <span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">If that's true, here's the portion of what Florio wrote (that you quoted in your post) that led me astray: </span> </span><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">My point is that Hargrove's knowledge of the program and his being told to lie were clearly inferred by his statement (as you've agreed), otherwise from Hargrove's point of view the statement would have no meaning. (It would make no sense to complain about being told to tell the truth and the entire statement makes no sense unless all three men in the room knew the bounty program existed.) IOW what I've quoted from Florio is meaningless both with regard to what was really going on in that meeting as told by Hargrove and regarding the league's disciplinary process - at least IMO. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">As to the rest of your post, of course this was meant to mitigate Hargrove's punishment; I said so in my post. As to the league overstating the evidence from this statement, as I said above they have better evidence anyway so I don't view that as that important. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">Of course I'm a Packers fan so I'd like to see Hargrove's suspension lessened. Not only that but I don't believe a single player's suspension should be longer than any coaches or GMs. Those with greater authority should pay a higher price IMO. But the reason for the length of Hargrove's suspension is not only that he participated but when investigators asked him directly about the program, he lied. Has that acusation been levied against any player who got a shorter suspension? Even with mitigation, Hargrove knew he was lying and if he and another player's participation was the same but only one lied, I have no problem with the liar's suspension being longer. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">As far as the disciplinary process to some degree IMO all punishments are arbitrary. For example, no two late hits are created equal. But here's the point I think some are missing. As part of the collective bargaining process all the players, as represented by the NFLPA, agreed to the current process. And frankly what I find most objectionable is not that punishments are determined behind closed doors. It is that the appeal available to the players is to the league itself. But that too was agreed upon by the players. It was reported on Mike & Mike this morning that only one team, the Steelers, objected to the appeal process. All others, ironically including the Saints, agreed. And it was something the league was standing firm on. IMO it would be much fairer to have the league determine punishment and allowing appeals to an independent arbitrator. </span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 445876, member: 4300"] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Georgia] [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma]If that's true, here's the portion of what Florio wrote (that you quoted in your post) that led me astray: [/FONT][FONT=Georgia] [/FONT][/COLOR][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]My point is that Hargrove's knowledge of the program and his being told to lie were clearly inferred by his statement (as you've agreed), otherwise from Hargrove's point of view the statement would have no meaning. (It would make no sense to complain about being told to tell the truth and the entire statement makes no sense unless all three men in the room knew the bounty program existed.) IOW what I've quoted from Florio is meaningless both with regard to what was really going on in that meeting as told by Hargrove and regarding the league's disciplinary process - at least IMO. [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]As to the rest of your post, of course this was meant to mitigate Hargrove's punishment; I said so in my post. As to the league overstating the evidence from this statement, as I said above they have better evidence anyway so I don't view that as that important. [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]Of course I'm a Packers fan so I'd like to see Hargrove's suspension lessened. Not only that but I don't believe a single player's suspension should be longer than any coaches or GMs. Those with greater authority should pay a higher price IMO. But the reason for the length of Hargrove's suspension is not only that he participated but when investigators asked him directly about the program, he lied. Has that acusation been levied against any player who got a shorter suspension? Even with mitigation, Hargrove knew he was lying and if he and another player's participation was the same but only one lied, I have no problem with the liar's suspension being longer. [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]As far as the disciplinary process to some degree IMO all punishments are arbitrary. For example, no two late hits are created equal. But here's the point I think some are missing. As part of the collective bargaining process all the players, as represented by the NFLPA, agreed to the current process. And frankly what I find most objectionable is not that punishments are determined behind closed doors. It is that the appeal available to the players is to the league itself. But that too was agreed upon by the players. It was reported on Mike & Mike this morning that only one team, the Steelers, objected to the appeal process. All others, ironically including the Saints, agreed. And it was something the league was standing firm on. IMO it would be much fairer to have the league determine punishment and allowing appeals to an independent arbitrator. [/COLOR][/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
rmontro
Firethorn1001
Latest posts
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: OldSchool101
15 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: tynimiller
30 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 3:04 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Movies and TV shows Thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 2:00 PM
Movies and Entertainment
M
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: Magooch
Today at 11:43 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Anthony Hargrove suspended 8 games
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
