What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

WR Josh Gordon, KC (2 Viewers)

If it was 16 games it would have been announced already. Clearly Gordon's lawyers made such a strong case that the NFL is trying to negotiating a lower # of games with Gordon's lawyers, who aren't biting.
No, it wouldn't if he's going to be suspended for the entire 2014 season, what practical difference does it make whether he is suspended this coming week or 3 weeks ago? The impact is the same. Then he starts over again as soon as this year is over - if he manages to stay clean.

 
im changing my tune, no way hes sitting out all 16 after taking this long. The NFL is scared
They aren't scared. They want Gordon in there as much as the Browns do. They want Manziel-Gordon. They just can't figure out how to do it without opening a huge can of worms.

 
im changing my tune, no way hes sitting out all 16 after taking this long. The NFL is scared
welcome to the dark side

Why would I disappear? Said a million times he could get 16 games
You've also said you're going to laugh at everyone when he ends up playing all 16.And you've said 4-8 games. Lolol. Talk about a troll coveting all the bases.
even my most steadfast enemy has "admitted", in my defense, a few pages back that Ive always been steadfast in my 4-6 game prediction.

Ive said over and over this was my prediction. Ive said 8 was a possibility, as was zero, as was 16. So what? Everything is a possibility....

But my prediction is and will remain 4-6 games

 
Almost got him at pick 124 last night in 12T PPR... went right before me at pick 123. Got greedy and missed out. In another 12T PPR draft I got him at pick 112 a few hours later. Just an update on where he seems to be going.

I'd still recommend starting to look at him in the pick 100ish range if you want him.

 
so let's discuss the event that he gets 8 games. are we really that confident that he'll be as productive as last year when he comes back? some things working against him IMO:

lack of effort shown so far, he may be 'out of it' when he gets back. no way of knowing whether this guy can stay focused during an 8 game vacation and come back and jump right into things. yes, i know he did it last year after 2 games... 8 games is a bit different though.

the browns were pretty bad last year and passed a lot in garbage time... what if they're better this year and they're in a lot of games?

Hoyer hasn't looked good.. Manziel is a rookie. yes I know he put up some ridiculous stats last year with some baaaad QBs. that's just one year though, which brings me to my last point

last year was only one year. what if it was a fluke? I'm not saying the dude is an average talent, he's a beast for sure. but if he's more of a 1200 yd 6 td guy and he regresses back to the mean, is it really worth the risk at this point?

 
Almost got him at pick 124 last night in 12T PPR... went right before me at pick 123. Got greedy and missed out. In another 12T PPR draft I got him at pick 112 a few hours later. Just an update on where he seems to be going.

I'd still recommend starting to look at him in the pick 100ish range if you want him.
Much as I think he's doomed, even I would not argue spending a pick on him that late.

 
So I get suspended for telling you all that Gordon will not be suspended..... It sure looks like he will get off since it has taken so long for the NFL to announce anything. In a forum like this you really should be able to discuss and speak freely about what you think as long as you aren't threatening people. The op needs to lighten up. They sure don't mind taking their 30 dollars from you and 5 for a fake app that doesn't even work right and rendered completely useless.. I

 
So interested if you could give us some of your knowledge.

Do you know anything about what happens to samples over time? I found a document that mentioned alcohol tests needed to be done in 3 days of the sample collection, but that samples for drug tests lasted longer and should be tested within 3 weeks.

We don't know exact timeline, but the policy would have the A sample collected and sent to the lab and tested. The NFL notified by the lab. Gordon notified. Gordon requesting within 2 days that the B sample be tested. Then somewhere within 10 working days the B sample gets tested. So the intervening time between the test of the A and B samples could be anywhere from a couple of days to over 2 weeks.

Would you expect changes in the test result to occur as the sample ages? That's one of the questions that I think would have to be addressed in Gordon appealing that his B sample test is below the threshold of the test the A sample was put through, though the cutoff for the B sample test done later was different per the NFL's policy. Understanding if the concentration varies as the sample gets older might explain things like why the players agreed to a drug policy that had the looser cutoff on the B sample test, rather than requiring both samples pass the 15 ng/mL cutoff.
Alcohol evaporates fairly rapidly. We actually won't test for it more than 24 hours after collection. If a cap is left off of an alcohol sample for more than 30 minutes, you will start seeing a decrease in the result. We actually did a study with them stored at different temperatures, capped and uncapped, close to a light source, close to a window, ect, and it was pretty remarkable how important proper collection and storage is with them. If stored properly, the loss will be pretty negligible for the 3 day period they allow, but you will get a decreased value. The time frame for drugs depends on storage. We will run them for up to 24 hours if left at room temp if we have to, but cooling the sample directly after collection and keeping it cool is ideal. If refrigerated, we run them for up to a week, but honestly the sample would probably be good for longer. If frozen at -80C we will will test samples indefinitely, with presumably no loss. We haven't done a study, but these are our manufacturer's guidelines, and it's pretty standard in most labs.

I wouldn't expect changes in a test to be from the timeline, if it was stored properly. However, there are a few variables with the handling of the specimen, and with the analyzer itself that could cause the B sample to be decreased. If the sample wasn't sealed correctly, the proteins would start to break down fairly quickly. Also, if both specimens weren't handled in the same manor, I could see the results varying slightly. Assuming everything was stored and handled correctly, the most logical explanation is with the instrument itself. We run QC every 8 hours, and it will often trend one way or the other all the time. When this happens, we calibrate to bring the analyzer back into range. Any sample run during this time will be slightly elevated or decreased also. Pure speculation, but the explanation could easily be something that simple. There's really so many variables that could cause a slight difference in results over 10 days that it's hard to speculate.

The guy that I work with that collected for the NFL and MLB said that his second hand smoke explanation was most likely BS. He said they've actually done second hand smoke tests. From the tests, Gordon would have to have been around an insane amount of second hand smoke and then had his urine test within a few hours. The guy I work with knows his stuff too. He shot holes in Ryan Braun's story immediately.

 
So I get suspended for telling you all that Gordon will not be suspended..... It sure looks like he will get off since it has taken so long for the NFL to announce anything. In a forum like this you really should be able to discuss and speak freely about what you think as long as you aren't threatening people. The op needs to lighten up. They sure don't mind taking their 30 dollars from you and 5 for a fake app that doesn't even work right and rendered completely useless.. I
This should definitely help your case. :banned:

 
It sure looks like he will get off since it has taken so long for the NFL to announce anything.
It's amazing that EVERY SINGLE Gordonite says this, but I've yet to see a single, rational explanation as to why it is so.
No one has any idea why it's taking so long.

Gordon's defense was legally complex and requires a lot of research to interpret? They threw everything they could find including the kitchen sink into it and writing the opinion is a lengthy process as a result? The arbitrator is looking outside the NFL to find useful precedents? The NFL is working to make sure the document is airtight for an expected appeal? There's disagreement among the arbitration staff about what to do? They're waiting on the results of scientific tests to come back before they rule?

We have no clue. But there are plenty of reasons a delay might not be favorable to Gordon.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gordon currently owned by 87% in redraft leagues, so not everybody is buying that he ain't playing.
I think all the signs are that he's not playing, but at some point between rounds 12-14 I'd happily roll the dice.Everything is risk/reward.
exactly. i drafted him last night fully expecting it to be a wasted pick, but the risk/reward was enticing at a certain point.

also we should know soon (how many times have we said that?) so if he's suspended you drop him and use that slot for the first hot waiver wire prospect.

if he plays i'll likely try to trade him for someone more stable who was selected several rounds higher than i took Gordon.

 
It sure looks like he will get off since it has taken so long for the NFL to announce anything.
It's amazing that EVERY SINGLE Gordonite says this, but I've yet to see a single, rational explanation as to why it is so.
No one has any idea why it's taking so long.

Gordon's defense was legally complex and requires a lot of research to interpret? They threw everything they could find including the kitchen sink into it and writing the opinion is a lengthy process as a result? The arbitrator is looking outside the NFL to find useful precedents? The NFL is working to make sure the document is airtight for an expected appeal? There's disagreement among the arbitration staff about what to do? They're waiting on the results of scientific tests to come back before they rule?

We have no clue. But there are plenty of reasons a delay might not be favorable to Gordon.
Agreed. Couldn't tell by reading this thread, lol.

 
I'm just going to wait until this thread hits 150 pages. At that point, I can assume the decision has been made in case I am not watching breaking news.

 
so let's discuss the event that he gets 8 games. are we really that confident that he'll be as productive as last year when he comes back? some things working against him IMO:

lack of effort shown so far, he may be 'out of it' when he gets back. no way of knowing whether this guy can stay focused during an 8 game vacation and come back and jump right into things. yes, i know he did it last year after 2 games... 8 games is a bit different though.

the browns were pretty bad last year and passed a lot in garbage time... what if they're better this year and they're in a lot of games?

Hoyer hasn't looked good.. Manziel is a rookie. yes I know he put up some ridiculous stats last year with some baaaad QBs. that's just one year though, which brings me to my last point

last year was only one year. what if it was a fluke? I'm not saying the dude is an average talent, he's a beast for sure. but if he's more of a 1200 yd 6 td guy and he regresses back to the mean, is it really worth the risk at this point?
FWIW I got burned last year with this type of (over?)analysis. Traded him for A.J. Green right before our trade deadline when Cleveland was losing and playing QB roulettte. Gordon instantly went off for his epic twin 200-yd games. Point is you can overthink things at some point. The dude is a beast.

 
So I get suspended for telling you all that Gordon will not be suspended..... It sure looks like he will get off since it has taken so long for the NFL to announce anything. In a forum like this you really should be able to discuss and speak freely about what you think as long as you aren't threatening people. The op needs to lighten up. They sure don't mind taking their 30 dollars from you and 5 for a fake app that doesn't even work right and rendered completely useless.. I
No idea why you were suspended. It boggles the mind.

 
Insein said:
T with T said:
So I get suspended for telling you all that Gordon will not be suspended..... It sure looks like he will get off since it has taken so long for the NFL to announce anything. In a forum like this you really should be able to discuss and speak freely about what you think as long as you aren't threatening people. The op needs to lighten up. They sure don't mind taking their 30 dollars from you and 5 for a fake app that doesn't even work right and rendered completely useless.. I
No idea why you were suspended. It boggles the mind.
I Been gonna awhile, but this is greatness :tebow:

 
DaveGrumbles said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
DaveGrumbles said:
Ohio law defers to federal dept of health and human services for cut off levels.
I think that's true true for state employees. I don't see where the statute says it's true for private-sector employees.

"The initial drug testing protocol for state employees and applicants for state employment shall use an assay technique which meets federal department of health and human services requirements. Drug classes and cutoff levels be those established by the federal department of health and human services." (123:1-76-04)

Whatever minor discipline they face by not adhering to the law (losing insurance discounts, etc) is meaningless since the real ramification would be that it opens the NFL to legitimate legal claims by Gordon. By voluntarily participating in the drug-free workplace program the Browns are bound to follow the legal requirements of the program, correct?
I don't see where employees are given a private right of action against employers under the Drug-Free Workplace Act. Again, I could be wrong, but based on what I've read so far, it seems that the penalty for an employer's failure to comply is forfeiting the discounted workers' comp premiums.
Appreciate the input. Either way it's gonna be interesting once the arguments from both sides are known.
This Ohio law stuff was hashed out several pages ago, but it's easy for it to get lost in the shuffle.

 
Insein said:
T with T said:
So I get suspended for telling you all that Gordon will not be suspended..... It sure looks like he will get off since it has taken so long for the NFL to announce anything. In a forum like this you really should be able to discuss and speak freely about what you think as long as you aren't threatening people. The op needs to lighten up. They sure don't mind taking their 30 dollars from you and 5 for a fake app that doesn't even work right and rendered completely useless.. I
No idea why you were suspended. It boggles the mind.
:lmao:

 
For anyone thinking the fact that the arbitrator's decision taking so long is a good thing, NFL Network just reported that the NFL has no control whatsoever over the timeline of independents arbitrator's decision. They are not even allowed to "nudge" him into moving the process along. They are simply waiting to hear just like everyone else.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.
Did you read the story in the link?

They ADMITTED buying and using.

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
The players and NFL agreed on the drug policy. What does it say should happen?

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
The players and NFL agreed on the drug policy. What does it say should happen?
First offense of banned substance = 4 games

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.
Did you read the story in the link?

They ADMITTED buying and using.
So?

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
The players and NFL agreed on the drug policy. What does it say should happen?
First offense of banned substance = 4 games
not true

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
DaveGrumbles said:
Appreciate the input. Either way it's gonna be interesting once the arguments from both sides are known.
Yes, I really wish the arbitration briefs by both sides had been leaked somewhere.
I personally hope no one's briefs get leaked.
Leaking briefs are bad, but when they're leaking on both sides, that's the absolute worst.
I'm dying here lolol

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.
Did you read the story in the link?

They ADMITTED buying and using.
So?
Yeah, I thought that was a great defense argument too, no need for Suh on this one.

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
1-The CBA says they need to fail a test, not admit to using a banned substance.

2-The penalty for a first violation of the substance abuse policy is not a 4 game suspension; that's why we don't hear about most first violations.

3-Unless a player is already in the system/program, they are not (as far as I know) subject to random tests. They are tested once, at the preseason. Assuming Bell and Blount have no previous failed tests, and they CAN NOT be randomly tested, even if the league has very good reason to believe that they would fail.

4-I doubt that Bell's blood work could be used as a "failed test;" it would have to meet the specifications and requirements of the CBA, and even then, it would be subject to a legal defense (he'd probably hire Suh).

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
1-The CBA says they need to fail a test, not admit to using a banned substance.2-The penalty for a first violation of the substance abuse policy is not a 4 game suspension; that's why we don't hear about most first violations.

3-Unless a player is already in the system/program, they are not (as far as I know) subject to random tests. They are tested once, at the preseason. Assuming Bell and Blount have no previous failed tests, and they CAN NOT be randomly tested, even if the league has very good reason to believe that they would fail.

4-I doubt that Bell's blood work could be used as a "failed test;" it would have to meet the specifications and requirements of the CBA, and even then, it would be subject to a legal defense (he'd probably hire Suh).
iirc, the NFL can test at any time with probable cause, regardless of what stage a player is in.
 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.
Did you read the story in the link?

They ADMITTED buying and using.
My link

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
1-The CBA says they need to fail a test, not admit to using a banned substance.2-The penalty for a first violation of the substance abuse policy is not a 4 game suspension; that's why we don't hear about most first violations.

3-Unless a player is already in the system/program, they are not (as far as I know) subject to random tests. They are tested once, at the preseason. Assuming Bell and Blount have no previous failed tests, and they CAN NOT be randomly tested, even if the league has very good reason to believe that they would fail.

4-I doubt that Bell's blood work could be used as a "failed test;" it would have to meet the specifications and requirements of the CBA, and even then, it would be subject to a legal defense (he'd probably hire Suh).
iirc, the NFL can test at any time with probable cause, regardless of what stage a player is in.
This is not true, at least not with regards to the substance abuse policy. Unless more frequent tests are written into a player's individual contract, he can only be tested once in the pre-season (I believe this usually happens at the beginning of TC), unless he has already had a failed test, in which case he can be tested, randomly, anytime.

The steroids policy allows the NFL to randomly test 10 players each week, along with (at most) 6 random tests in the offseason.

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.
Did you read the story in the link?

They ADMITTED buying and using.
So?
Yeah, I thought that was a great defense argument too, no need for Suh on this one.
My initial response is more than your fishing trip even deserved. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you can see the difference between what Gordon is currently facing and what will happen with the Steeler duo, since earlier your position was that Gordon will not face a suspension for his DUI until the legal process plays out.

 
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.
Did you read the story in the link?

They ADMITTED buying and using.
So?
Yeah, I thought that was a great defense argument too, no need for Suh on this one.
My initial response is more than your fishing trip even deserved. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you can see the difference between what Gordon is currently facing and what will happen with the Steeler duo, since earlier your position was that Gordon will not face a suspension for his DUI until the legal process plays out.
Seriously curious here.

Gordon's whole deal has gotten many of us more informed on the CBA , many here have been adamant that Gordon should be gone.

I'm curious what those same folks think of these two and how this whole scene kind of opens the league up to criticism that their anti weed program is really kind of a sham. One test per year, everyone knows when it is. Just don't reenact the Cheech and Chong scene and you can basically smoke all you want to and the league is basically looking the other way.

Gordon's DWI was alcohol, and there is precedent to such things, like being able to plead that down to a lesser charge. And that won't be acted upon until it goes thru the courts, as has happened with similar cases in the past.

Here we have the players admitting buying and using substances that get you entered into the drug program.

Not sure there is any precedent to being able to plead down something you already admitted to, but you never know.

I just don't recall any player saying the things Bell said.

After a quick,scan of the CBA, it would seem they both bought tickets into stage one based on the "behavior" clause and pending their evaluation, can be immediately placed into stage two, where they can be tested anytime.

It wouldn't seem that the league wouldn't need to wait for anything to play out in the courts on this one.

My guess is they don't get suspended over this but are both placed into stage one, and maybe stage two.

It certainly matters what your standing is with the league that will determine how much weed you can partake in and when, and that's the sham part to me.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top