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 (7 Viewers)

It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.

https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf

Read page 4 of that.
Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html

http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm

But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?

Also, your contention that all Gordon has to do is file a lawsuit to play in 2014 is flawed. If his lawsuit has no merit (or if he can't sue, because the CBA says NFL players can't sue the NFL except for under certain circumstances), then the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.
The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.
Can you please describe the judge shopping process and how that works with these lawsuits?

I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)

But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon
I agree. I think if they had no plans to fight any suspension in court, we wouldn't be hearing reports of the lack of settlement talks, as Gordon's legal team would be trying to reduce the suspension any way possible.
Shocking interpretation of the lack of settlement talks.
You don't think the best legal team money can buy knows (or can find out) which judges would go for something like this and which would easily dismiss it? All judges have reputations. All lawyers know them.

 
It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.

https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf

Read page 4 of that.
Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html

http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm

But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?

Also, your contention that all Gordon has to do is file a lawsuit to play in 2014 is flawed. If his lawsuit has no merit (or if he can't sue, because the CBA says NFL players can't sue the NFL except for under certain circumstances), then the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.
The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.
Can you please describe the judge shopping process and how that works with these lawsuits?

I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)

But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon
I agree. I think if they had no plans to fight any suspension in court, we wouldn't be hearing reports of the lack of settlement talks, as Gordon's legal team would be trying to reduce the suspension any way possible.
Shocking interpretation of the lack of settlement talks.
You don't think the best legal team money can buy knows (or can find out) which judges would go for something like this and which would easily dismiss it? All judges have reputations. All lawyers know them.
I think the entire lawsuit angle is pie-in-the-sky based on a bunch of Gordon owners who are deluding themselves.

Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?

 
I think the entire lawsuit angle is pie-in-the-sky based on a bunch of Gordon owners who are deluding themselves.

Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?
I think it is much less likely than many are saying as well, but there seem to be details in this case (the second test not being above the limit, the state law in Ohio) that make it more likely than Blackmon or anyone else who didn't sue

 
I think the entire lawsuit angle is pie-in-the-sky based on a bunch of Gordon owners who are deluding themselves.Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?
I think it is much less likely than many are saying as well, but there seem to be details in this case (the second test not being above the limit, the state law in Ohio) that make it more likely than Blackmon or anyone else who didn't sue
Again, that standard was not Ohio state law. It was the guidelines of a drug free workplace program that employers in Ohio have the OPTION of enrolling in in exchange for certain insurance rebate benefits.

 
I think the entire lawsuit angle is pie-in-the-sky based on a bunch of Gordon owners who are deluding themselves.Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?
I think it is much less likely than many are saying as well, but there seem to be details in this case (the second test not being above the limit, the state law in Ohio) that make it more likely than Blackmon or anyone else who didn't sue
Again, that standard was not Ohio state law. It was the guidelines of a drug free workplace program that employers in Ohio have the OPTION of enrolling in in exchange for certain insurance rebate benefits.
ok, well mark that one off then. the second test being negative still seems to be a reasonable point to appeal over

 
Regardless, it doesn't matter if Gordon wins the case or not. If he files a suit against the NFL, which I believe he will, he plays this year.
:no: Gordon would have to win a TRO -- not an easy accomplishment. He basically has to show a good chance of winning the case. Then, to play the whole season, he'll need to clear other similar hurdles.

 
I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)

But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon
Maybe it's the NFL that has no interest in negotiating a settlement.

 
Round and round we go, Gaylord.

PLEASE let the announcement happen today. I can't wait to see this place!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.
Wait, so you ignore the evidence (including from the links YOU provided) that shows Gordon doesn't have grounds for a lawsuit, and are focusing on the Gordon lawyers being able to judge shop? You seem to be hanging your hat on this lawsuit idea, despite any information that suggests it isn't a viable alternative.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I love the college kids who think they know more than Gordon's lawyers. Trust me kid, they know what they're doing. The fact we haven't heard anything yet proves that.

 
It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.

https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf

Read page 4 of that.
Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html

http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm

But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?

Also, your contention that all Gordon has to do is file a lawsuit to play in 2014 is flawed. If his lawsuit has no merit (or if he can't sue, because the CBA says NFL players can't sue the NFL except for under certain circumstances), then the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.
The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.
Can you please describe the judge shopping process and how that works with these lawsuits?

I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)

But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon
I agree. I think if they had no plans to fight any suspension in court, we wouldn't be hearing reports of the lack of settlement talks, as Gordon's legal team would be trying to reduce the suspension any way possible.
Shocking interpretation of the lack of settlement talks.
You don't think the best legal team money can buy knows (or can find out) which judges would go for something like this and which would easily dismiss it? All judges have reputations. All lawyers know them.
I think the entire lawsuit angle is pie-in-the-sky based on a bunch of Gordon owners who are deluding themselves.

Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?
What you're not understanding is the Justin Blackmon is 10 times the screw up that Josh Gordon is. Not saying Gordon is the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he escalated in the drug program by taking cough syrup for a cold, and then failed his drug test partially because he was in a car with someone smoking pot. And yes, the test results make that story likely true. The guy is getting railroaded by a ridiculous policy. Marijuana is rapidly becoming decriminalized and legalized across the country, and is NOT performance enhancing. He's a talented player I want to see out there playing. Not sitting at home because he didn't have the good sense to tell his buddy to wait to toke up until after he was out of the car.

 
I'm not as optimistic as some of you guys are, but I'm crossing my fingers he gets to play the majority of the season.

 
It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.

https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf

Read page 4 of that.
Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html

http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm

But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?

Also, your contention that all Gordon has to do is file a lawsuit to play in 2014 is flawed. If his lawsuit has no merit (or if he can't sue, because the CBA says NFL players can't sue the NFL except for under certain circumstances), then the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.
The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.
Can you please describe the judge shopping process and how that works with these lawsuits?

I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)

But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon
I agree. I think if they had no plans to fight any suspension in court, we wouldn't be hearing reports of the lack of settlement talks, as Gordon's legal team would be trying to reduce the suspension any way possible.
Shocking interpretation of the lack of settlement talks.
You don't think the best legal team money can buy knows (or can find out) which judges would go for something like this and which would easily dismiss it? All judges have reputations. All lawyers know them.
I think the entire lawsuit angle is pie-in-the-sky based on a bunch of Gordon owners who are deluding themselves.

Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?
What you're not understanding is the Justin Blackmon is 10 times the screw up that Josh Gordon is. Not saying Gordon is the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he escalated in the drug program by taking cough syrup for a cold, and then failed his drug test partially because he was in a car with someone smoking pot. And yes, the test results make that story likely true. The guy is getting railroaded by a ridiculous policy. Marijuana is rapidly becoming decriminalized and legalized across the country, and is NOT performance enhancing. He's a talented player I want to see out there playing. Not sitting at home because he didn't have the good sense to tell his buddy to wait to toke up until after he was out of the car.
Your buying the cough syrup excuse? Your buying the second hand smoke excuse? I agree with you that I would like to see him on the field however I don't think he is innocent in either matter and the rules are stated so everyone is aware of them. If my office had a rule that I could not wear yellow shirts to work I would probably just follow that rule.

 
I love the college kids who think they know more than Gordon's lawyers. Trust me kid, they know what they're doing. The fact we haven't heard anything yet proves that.
I don't claim to have any insight into the legal proceedings, if that's even the right phrase for what's going on right now. But my intuition says the fact that we haven't heard anything doesn't PROVE anything one way or the other. I don't even think it implies anything substantial.

If the legal team has an ace in their pocket, there is no guarantee "we" would hear about it. If they don't have one, we wouldn't hear about it either. ;)

 
What you're not understanding is the Justin Blackmon is 10 times the screw up that Josh Gordon is. Not saying Gordon is the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he escalated in the drug program by taking cough syrup for a cold, and then failed his drug test partially because he was in a car with someone smoking pot. And yes, the test results make that story likely true. The guy is getting railroaded by a ridiculous policy. Marijuana is rapidly becoming decriminalized and legalized across the country, and is NOT performance enhancing. He's a talented player I want to see out there playing. Not sitting at home because he didn't have the good sense to tell his buddy to wait to toke up until after he was out of the car.
Your buying the cough syrup excuse? Your buying the second hand smoke excuse? I agree with you that I would like to see him on the field however I don't think he is innocent in either matter and the rules are stated so everyone is aware of them. If my office had a rule that I could not wear yellow shirts to work I would probably just follow that rule.
The cough syrup isn't an excuse... it is what he tested positive for.

The 2nd hand smoke is indeed an excuse. But I do buy it. He tested ridiculously low... meaning 1 of 2 things is true. A fair amount of time had elapsed since he toked up himself, or he was indeed exposed to 2nd hand smoke. I see no reason for him to not get the benefit of the doubt. The guy passed like 70 drug tests in a row.

 
I'm curious to know how much time elapsed between his last test prior to the test he failed and the failed test was. Given his frequency of being tested, I'm guessing not much time, maybe a week? If so, to test as low as he did, it'd pretty much have to be 2nd hand smoke. Wish I knew the facts on this one, but I don't. Bet his lawyers do though.

 
What you're not understanding is the Justin Blackmon is 10 times the screw up that Josh Gordon is. Not saying Gordon is the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he escalated in the drug program by taking cough syrup for a cold, and then failed his drug test partially because he was in a car with someone smoking pot. And yes, the test results make that story likely true. The guy is getting railroaded by a ridiculous policy. Marijuana is rapidly becoming decriminalized and legalized across the country, and is NOT performance enhancing. He's a talented player I want to see out there playing. Not sitting at home because he didn't have the good sense to tell his buddy to wait to toke up until after he was out of the car.
Your buying the cough syrup excuse? Your buying the second hand smoke excuse? I agree with you that I would like to see him on the field however I don't think he is innocent in either matter and the rules are stated so everyone is aware of them. If my office had a rule that I could not wear yellow shirts to work I would probably just follow that rule.
There's really nothing to 'buy' with the cough syrup excuse... that's confirmed at this point as he had the RX for the cough medicine. Whether he has a doctor that he paid off for the RX is neither here nor there, he took some cough medicine, the cough medicine had codeine in it, there is no debate there.

The second hand smoke excuse? Yeah, I'll buy that at least somewhat for a few reasons.

1. I forget where but I believe I read that he had passed 70 prior drug tests before this one came up positive. Which to me means he's probably being tested what... every week or every other week?

2. If he was in fact tested every week, which would make sense than we're talking about it being nearly impossible for him to pass a drug test if he smoked. If he smoked within a week or two of this test his levels would've been significantly higher. The only way they'd stay this low is if he maybe started to take a hit and stopped halfway through and thought "Ehh... nah, I shouldn't do this".

3. A lot of people have posted studies in here that prove it's possible for second hand smoke to produce the levels he did.

All in all, yeah... it's next to impossible unless about a month of time passed between his last test and this one for him to have actually smoked. His levels would've been significantly higher than they were.

 
don't these guys utilize techniques to lower their test results?

i thought the low thresholds were taking this into account.

i also always assumed positive tests came from sloppiness or laziness on the players part.

 
I'm curious to know how much time elapsed between his last test prior to the test he failed and the failed test was. Given his frequency of being tested, I'm guessing not much time, maybe a week? If so, to test as low as he did, it'd pretty much have to be 2nd hand smoke. Wish I knew the facts on this one, but I don't. Bet his lawyers do though.
Yeah... well once a week makes sense to me. There's been about 70 weeks from his codeine bust till this incident. At once a week it's impossible that he tested this low.

 
don't these guys utilize techniques to lower their test results?

i thought the low thresholds were taking this into account.

i also always assumed positive tests came from sloppiness or laziness on the players part.
Most of the ways to get past a test if you've smoked recently are pure myth. The only way most people pass is by using clean urine and faking the test. All the pot detox solutions don't really work.

 
so what are they going to do suspend on kickoff night?
At this point, I'm expecting NFL Officials to suspend him in the middle of the first game. While he's lining up for the next play they'll just pause the game and walk out and go "Sorry son, you're suspended... lets go"

 
guess Im going to have to draft him this weekend just in case, highly doubtful anything comes out today.
Round 15?

ETA: The news is going to hit tonight. If they wait 'til next Friday they put a team at a disadvantage by telling them less then a week before the first NFL game when the appeal was heard weeks ago.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
don't these guys utilize techniques to lower their test results?

i thought the low thresholds were taking this into account.

i also always assumed positive tests came from sloppiness or laziness on the players part.
Most of the ways to get past a test if you've smoked recently are pure myth. The only way most people pass is by using clean urine and faking the test. All the pot detox solutions don't really work.
thanks, i am obviously ignorant on the subject of passing drug tests other than not doing drugs.
 
At this point I'd be quite surprised if he got 16 games.
There are about 130+ pages in here where an 'all or nothing' verdict has been discussed regarding appeals. Also, Florio and others have reported that no settlement talks have occurred. It's either 0 or 16. If nothing is announced today, I bet the NFL is hoping Gordon's camp caves and looks for a settlement.

 
It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.

https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf

Read page 4 of that.
Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html

http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm

But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?

Also, your contention that all Gordon has to do is file a lawsuit to play in 2014 is flawed. If his lawsuit has no merit (or if he can't sue, because the CBA says NFL players can't sue the NFL except for under certain circumstances), then the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.
The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.
Can you please describe the judge shopping process and how that works with these lawsuits?

I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)

But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon
I agree. I think if they had no plans to fight any suspension in court, we wouldn't be hearing reports of the lack of settlement talks, as Gordon's legal team would be trying to reduce the suspension any way possible.
Shocking interpretation of the lack of settlement talks.
You don't think the best legal team money can buy knows (or can find out) which judges would go for something like this and which would easily dismiss it? All judges have reputations. All lawyers know them.
I think the entire lawsuit angle is pie-in-the-sky based on a bunch of Gordon owners who are deluding themselves.

Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?
What you're not understanding is the Justin Blackmon is 10 times the screw up that Josh Gordon is. Not saying Gordon is the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he escalated in the drug program by taking cough syrup for a cold, and then failed his drug test partially because he was in a car with someone smoking pot. And yes, the test results make that story likely true. The guy is getting railroaded by a ridiculous policy. Marijuana is rapidly becoming decriminalized and legalized across the country, and is NOT performance enhancing. He's a talented player I want to see out there playing. Not sitting at home because he didn't have the good sense to tell his buddy to wait to toke up until after he was out of the car.
Cool, I'm sure the "I'm not as big a screwup as Justin Blackmon" defense will get that injunction in place.

 
I can't wait for the thread with a league in turmoil because the news about Gordon not being suspended broke in the 19th round and someone scooped him up while everyone else was drafting their kickers, lol.

 
I've read it somewhere that this twatter thing is pretty popular and errbody uses the pound sign to be cool... Also apparently it's a good cross section of people and if you get a trending topic or pound sign then surely people must know who you're talking about... I'm gonna try my hand in this space maybe on this historic day

#FreeGordon

#BFG (as in you Better Free Gordon)

#HashBrowns (some of you get that)

#GordonsHashBrowns

#FlashHash

#GottaGoToWhiteCastle

#WinningWithWeed

#GordonGonnaMarijuana

#JoshBeFree

 
What you're not understanding is the Justin Blackmon is 10 times the screw up that Josh Gordon is. Not saying Gordon is the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he escalated in the drug program by taking cough syrup for a cold, and then failed his drug test partially because he was in a car with someone smoking pot. And yes, the test results make that story likely true. The guy is getting railroaded by a ridiculous policy. Marijuana is rapidly becoming decriminalized and legalized across the country, and is NOT performance enhancing. He's a talented player I want to see out there playing. Not sitting at home because he didn't have the good sense to tell his buddy to wait to toke up until after he was out of the car.
Your buying the cough syrup excuse? Your buying the second hand smoke excuse? I agree with you that I would like to see him on the field however I don't think he is innocent in either matter and the rules are stated so everyone is aware of them. If my office had a rule that I could not wear yellow shirts to work I would probably just follow that rule.
There's really nothing to 'buy' with the cough syrup excuse... that's confirmed at this point as he had the RX for the cough medicine. Whether he has a doctor that he paid off for the RX is neither here nor there, he took some cough medicine, the cough medicine had codeine in it, there is no debate there.

The second hand smoke excuse? Yeah, I'll buy that at least somewhat for a few reasons.

1. I forget where but I believe I read that he had passed 70 prior drug tests before this one came up positive. Which to me means he's probably being tested what... every week or every other week?

2. If he was in fact tested every week, which would make sense than we're talking about it being nearly impossible for him to pass a drug test if he smoked. If he smoked within a week or two of this test his levels would've been significantly higher. The only way they'd stay this low is if he maybe started to take a hit and stopped halfway through and thought "Ehh... nah, I shouldn't do this".

3. A lot of people have posted studies in here that prove it's possible for second hand smoke to produce the levels he did.

All in all, yeah... it's next to impossible unless about a month of time passed between his last test and this one for him to have actually smoked. His levels would've been significantly higher than they were.
I don't smoke however I assume that there are things you can take or do to pass a drug test these days.

 
At this point I'd be quite surprised if he got 16 games.
There are about 130+ pages in here where an 'all or nothing' verdict has been discussed regarding appeals. Also, Florio and others have reported that no settlement talks have occurred. It's either 0 or 16. If nothing is announced today, I bet the NFL is hoping Gordon's camp caves and looks for a settlement.
I know
 
8 game prediction in jeopardy. Manzier blows and may not see the field for quite a while. When he does he will initially totally suck. League offices plan of Manzier-Gordon fading. They just may tell Gordon to take a year off.

 
With all the turmoil in Ferguson, the nation can use this decision. Given what has been stated in here about Josh Gordon's immense popularity throughout this great country....If Goodell were to find it in his heart to give Gordon a pass and not suspend him, I think you would see the healing process begin. Gordon is the key!

 
With all the turmoil in Ferguson, the nation can use this decision. Given what has been stated in here about Josh Gordon's immense popularity throughout this great country....If Goodell were to find it in his heart to give Gordon a pass and not suspend him, I think you would see the healing process begin. Gordon is the key!
Preach, my brotha!!!

 
guess Im going to have to draft him this weekend just in case, highly doubtful anything comes out today.
Round 15?

ETA: The news is going to hit tonight. If they wait 'til next Friday they put a team at a disadvantage by telling them less then a week before the first NFL game when the appeal was heard weeks ago.
FWIW, so far in 3 different drafts I've seen Gordon come off the board around 90-100 overall.

 
don't these guys utilize techniques to lower their test results?

i thought the low thresholds were taking this into account.

i also always assumed positive tests came from sloppiness or laziness on the players part.
Most of the ways to get past a test if you've smoked recently are pure myth. The only way most people pass is by using clean urine and faking the test. All the pot detox solutions don't really work.
thanks, i am obviously ignorant on the subject of passing drug tests other than not doing drugs.
Not as ignorant as the person you are quoting. There are many, many solutions to pass a piss test. Walk into any GNC, tell the guy you have a test, and you'll get handed a 'cleanser'.

The fact that they are all a myth will come as quite a surprise to everyone who has ever taken one and passed the test. Myself included.

 
don't these guys utilize techniques to lower their test results?

i thought the low thresholds were taking this into account.

i also always assumed positive tests came from sloppiness or laziness on the players part.
Most of the ways to get past a test if you've smoked recently are pure myth. The only way most people pass is by using clean urine and faking the test. All the pot detox solutions don't really work.
thanks, i am obviously ignorant on the subject of passing drug tests other than not doing drugs.
Not as ignorant as the person you are quoting. There are many, many solutions to pass a piss test. Walk into any GNC, tell the guy you have a test, and you'll get handed a 'cleanser'.

The fact that they are all a myth will come as quite a surprise to everyone who has ever taken one and passed the test. Myself included.
well, for discussion's sake, if you are a believer in the effectiveness of 'cleansers' and say the NFL is as well, that would put quite a damper on the second hand smoke AND the threshold is too low arguments, wouldn't it?
 
guess Im going to have to draft him this weekend just in case, highly doubtful anything comes out today.
Round 15?

ETA: The news is going to hit tonight. If they wait 'til next Friday they put a team at a disadvantage by telling them less then a week before the first NFL game when the appeal was heard weeks ago.
FWIW, so far in 3 different drafts I've seen Gordon come off the board around 90-100 overall.
FWIW I got him at 12.05 (115th overall) in a fairly savvy 10T PPR league.

Got him behind D Thomas / B Marshall / C Patterson / M Floyd / T Williams (start 3-4).

IF he only gets 8 weeks or so, I may have a trade auction for him to enhance elsewhere, or if someone is hurt/underperforming he'll make an excellent plug-in. IF they announce no-go, he's an easy drop and fill. :shrug:

I think 100ish pick is a fair area to start buying that lottery ticket. He's the type of guy that could be like hitting a NO2 boost on your team for the playoff stretch.

 
I've read it somewhere that this twatter thing is pretty popular and errbody uses the pound sign to be cool... Also apparently it's a good cross section of people and if you get a trending topic or pound sign then surely people must know who you're talking about... I'm gonna try my hand in this space maybe on this historic day

#FreeGordon

#BFG (as in you Better Free Gordon)

#HashBrowns (some of you get that)

#GordonsHashBrowns

#FlashHash

#GottaGoToWhiteCastle

#WinningWithWeed

#GordonGonnaMarijuana

#JoshBeFree
#Free#Gordon

 
PatsWillWin:

Could Justin Blackmon not afford a good legal team? Daryl Washington? Can you explain to me the substantive legal differences between their situation and Gordon's? Or are only players who finished as top 5 WR's eligible to file lawsuits in your world?

Lets examine the evidence, shall we?!

Blackmon

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/19646963/justin-blackmon-pleads-guilty-to-aggravated-dui-charge

Aggravated DUI, Blew a .24 the first time, blew a .26 the second time, which , by the way, is 3 times the limit and 3 times what Gordon blew. He was blind and stupid drunk, the amount of alcohol that could have killed a smaller person.

This was also Blackmons second DUI, he had another when he was 20.

It's safe to say Blackmon is in a whole nother arena of bad that no lawyer of Suh's caliber would touch with a ten foot pole.

----------------------

Washington

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2080699-daryl-washington-reportedly-will-be-suspended-for-entire-2014-season

I don't know, call me crazy, but reading this, I get the sense his test results looked a lot more damning than Gordon's and he made no bones about the fact it was weed and he smoked.

Of course there's also the tiny little "aggravated assault charge" with an ex girlfriend who is also the mother of his child, he pleaded guilty btw and was sentenced to a years supervised probation.

Again, I don't think Suh would have taken his case and Washington is a star, making more money than Gordon, way more.

Simply, their cases were not winnable, they were both guilty as sin and both got what they deserved, banished from the league.

Gordon's case is way different, passing piss tests at a clip of about twice a week, his case is "compelling", as I'm sure the arbitrator Hutchison will attest to real soon after he gets done deciphering all of it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top