Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Matt Waldman

Josh Gordon Everything Thread

Recommended Posts

If you read what Albert Breer is saying, DeSmith is making it a point to put any suspension issued in 2014 aside. Not hard to understand, and this coming from a non Gordon supporter.

I cant believe the NFL level is lower then the military. That is poppyseed low.

And so it seems, some sanity will be restored , to both the league, and this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of Bree's tweets:

"Worth mentioning that Josh Gordon's failed drug test reportedly came in the 2013 league year. So he wouldn't necessarily be off the hook."

:lmao:

Wouldn't that be the final kick in the balls? Policy is CHANGED, ruling is RETROACTIVELY applied...but Gordon failed a test a month too early to get the get out of jail free card.

didn't all reports say he failed in 2014? January. So yes... 2013 season, potentially... but the year 2014.

Would be interesting

I think he's going by the NFL year, not the calendar year. I think it starts in March.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, all that smugness from a few pages back seems to have evaporated.

Does it?

It just switched sides - at least for the moment.

Lol.

I'm just annoyed at being called stupid for hoping a lottery ticket pays out.

That, and I think the current pot testing policies are draconian.

Thats the issue, doesn't change that Gordon broke the rules.

That being said, if the rules are changed he should not be suspended. If they are not, then he deserves his suspension.

Its not really about whether he broke the rules though - if he is reinstated, it will be purely based on part of a collectively bargained negotiation - not based on some morality decision about whether the rules were fair or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, all that smugness from a few pages back seems to have evaporated.

Does it?

It just switched sides - at least for the moment.

Lol.

I'm just annoyed at being called stupid for hoping a lottery ticket pays out.

That, and I think the current pot testing policies are draconian.

Thats the issue, doesn't change that Gordon broke the rules.

That being said, if the rules are changed he should not be suspended. If they are not, then he deserves his suspension.

With testing at the levels they have them at, it is entirely possible to fail based upon being in the same room as someone smoking pot. If thats the INTENT of that rule, its ridiculous. I don't think that is the intent though. The rule is don't smoke pot, and I'm not sure he broke that rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he plays this year I'll be overjoyed. If he doesn't I'll move on. To the people who don't own him and are in this thread just to piss all over people - you're embarrassing yourself. You're purposely being an ### just so maybe you can say 'told you so!' on the internet. On the internet. Where nobody but you will care because we'll all have dropped Josh and moved on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm listening to The Dan Patrick Show and Dan said his sources are telling him Gordon will play this year

I hope it starts next week....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't manage to draft him in my big $ league...

He was dropped 2 days ago onto waivers, and the claim went thru today, and he is MINE.

Oh, please... let this happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, all that smugness from a few pages back seems to have evaporated.

Does it?

It just switched sides - at least for the moment.

Lol.

I'm just annoyed at being called stupid for hoping a lottery ticket pays out.

That, and I think the current pot testing policies are draconian.

Thats the issue, doesn't change that Gordon broke the rules.

That being said, if the rules are changed he should not be suspended. If they are not, then he deserves his suspension.

With testing at the levels they have them at, it is entirely possible to fail based upon being in the same room as someone smoking pot. If thats the INTENT of that rule, its ridiculous. I don't think that is the intent though. The rule is don't smoke pot, and I'm not sure he broke that rule.

Oh, I am pretty sure he broke that rule. But I think the NFL wants him back in the league. I think they are simply using this as a carrot to get the players to agree to the HGH testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still have him in 3 of 4 leagues. However, in 1 league I cut him yesterday morning for Cody Parkey. Oops! That one is blind bidding w/ $150 budget for waivers. Assuming he is re-instated, the correct bid is $150, yes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, all that smugness from a few pages back seems to have evaporated.

Does it?

It just switched sides - at least for the moment.

Lol.

I'm just annoyed at being called stupid for hoping a lottery ticket pays out.

That, and I think the current pot testing policies are draconian.

Thats the issue, doesn't change that Gordon broke the rules.

That being said, if the rules are changed he should not be suspended. If they are not, then he deserves his suspension.

With testing at the levels they have them at, it is entirely possible to fail based upon being in the same room as someone smoking pot. If thats the INTENT of that rule, its ridiculous. I don't think that is the intent though. The rule is don't smoke pot, and I'm not sure he broke that rule.

Oh, I am pretty sure he broke that rule. But I think the NFL wants him back in the league. I think they are simply using this as a carrot to get the players to agree to the HGH testing.

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. Being tested weekly like he was, if he actually took a few hits like 10 minutes after his prior test, it'd be tough to get it back down to those levels in 1 week imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't manage to draft him in my big $ league...

He was dropped 2 days ago onto waivers, and the claim went thru today, and he is MINE.

Oh, please... let this happen.

I dropped him in one of mine, it was a redraft, going to try and get'em back when waivers open up. I did trade for him in 2 of my dynasty leagues recently, so I am invested, not that anyone cares. I won't invest anything into Justin Blackmon though, alcohol is his crutch and I don't think he is going to shake it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how they can change an existing suspension which was incurred under the rules that existed at the time. If you break the law as it exists at the time you performed the act, then you broke the law even if it changes after the fact to make your act legal. There is also precedence just this year in the Ray Rice situation. They changed the rule to be an automatic six(?) week suspension for a first time offense, yet Ray Rice is still only on a two game suspension.

I would be surprised if Gordon played this year.

Full disclosure: Non-Gordan owner, but J. Cameron owner in several leagues so maybe the above is just wishful thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picked him up in 3/4 leagues. Not banking on him coming back, but only uses up a roster spot that would be a week 1 bench spot anyway, since no bye weeks. Assuming we find out by Sunday, I can throw him back on waivers if the suspension is not reduced from 16 games. Freeroll.

Edited by Gustavo Fring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could you NOT pick pick off waivers if he's available?

Either stubbornness or stupidity.

Sure, the odds are stacked against him, but if the NFLPA pulls this off, you won your league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still have him in 3 of 4 leagues. However, in 1 league I cut him yesterday morning for Cody Parkey. Oops! That one is blind bidding w/ $150 budget for waivers. Assuming he is re-instated, the correct bid is $150, yes?

Yes, provided you have the ability to make further moves in the future for $0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he plays this year I'll be overjoyed. If he doesn't I'll move on. To the people who don't own him and are in this thread just to piss all over people - you're embarrassing yourself. You're purposely being an ### just so maybe you can say 'told you so!' on the internet. On the internet. Where nobody but you will care because we'll all have dropped Josh and moved on.

And you're lecturing them. On the internet. Where none of them care about your lecture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Figures, the only time this situation gets intriguing in anyway and we have our worst page in months, which is saying something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, it would be nice to end this thread and start a new Josh Gordon thread. The OP who started this thread never stops by and this thread should actually be moved over the FFA now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty ####### awesome guys. Some of us were in on Gordon months ago. I called him playing all 16 in early August. Some guys jumped all over me. That's cool. People don't realize all the #### that can happen. It's a crazy life man. Chaos. You gotta be ready to profit from that chaos. Read some Taleb, guys . Black swans and ####. Now people are in on Gordon, some of us were here months ago, and you guys were hating. Some of you are still hating, which is fine. Some of us are about to win some fantasy football leagues though.

Edited by Peyton Marino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this little pothead gets reinstated, I will laugh, shake my head, and tip my cap to Soulfly, wherever he is.

Rooting for you, my man.

What does a renegotiated CBA on a drug level, have to do with Soulfly?

Soulfly has shown he knows absolutely nothing about this topic from being wrong in every instance, people who agreed with him and support him are in that same ballpark. A backdoor adjustment to a CBA after the fact does not make him right in any sense about the process that led to Gordons suspension, I also would expect nothing less from a troll like you though.

You can end up with the right results even if your process is wrong... Doesn't mean I'd give him credit per say but he'd still be right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty surprised the NFLPA is willing to give in to HGH testing just for the few players who are getting popped on recreational drug use. The difference in the number who will be affected is enormous. Have we actually seen quotes from NFLPA leadership that they are looking to get this deal done? I very possibly could have missed them. But it makes me think that the NFL is floating this to try to tell the public what they want to hear, that they're willing to "decriminalize" MJ when they really know the vast majority of the players have no interest in being subject to HGH testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty surprised the NFLPA is willing to give in to HGH testing just for the few players who are getting popped on recreational drug use. The difference in the number who will be affected is enormous. Have we actually seen quotes from NFLPA leadership that they are looking to get this deal done? I very possibly could have missed them. But it makes me think that the NFL is floating this to try to tell the public what they want to hear, that they're willing to "decriminalize" MJ when they really know the vast majority of the players have no interest in being subject to HGH testing.

Admittedly, I have not kept up with the story - but didn't the players already agree to HGH testing in the last round of the CBA? I thought it has been bogged down in the details since then. If so, they really are not giving in much here, and quite frankly getting a pretty big benefit as it relates to pot and amphetamines - any retroactive reduction in penalties is just a bonus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, Nate Zegura was just on Sirius fantasy radio (he covers the Browns) and said he's confident Gordon will play this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty ####### awesome guys. Some of us were in on Gordon months ago. I called him playing all 16 in early August. Some guys jumped all over me. That's cool. People don't realize all the #### that can happen. It's a crazy life man. Chaos. You gotta be ready to profit from that chaos. Read some Taleb, guys . Black swans and ####. Now people are in on Gordon, some of us were here months ago, and you guys were hating. Some of you are still hating, which is fine. Some of us are about to win some fantasy football leagues though.

:lmao:

Yeah, you're a real genius. I can't believe you called this. You are totally right to talk ####.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still have him in 3 of 4 leagues. However, in 1 league I cut him yesterday morning for Cody Parkey. Oops! That one is blind bidding w/ $150 budget for waivers. Assuming he is re-instated, the correct bid is $150, yes?

Yes, provided you have the ability to make further moves in the future for $0.

Yup, just after the folks with $ get first shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, Nate Zegura was just on Sirius fantasy radio (he covers the Browns) and said he's confident Gordon will play this year.

Well, since I just pick him up in a re-draft league, I am looking for "this year" to be a little more defined...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty ####### awesome guys. Some of us were in on Gordon months ago. I called him playing all 16 in early August. Some guys jumped all over me. That's cool. People don't realize all the #### that can happen. It's a crazy life man. Chaos. You gotta be ready to profit from that chaos. Read some Taleb, guys . Black swans and ####. Now people are in on Gordon, some of us were here months ago, and you guys were hating. Some of you are still hating, which is fine. Some of us are about to win some fantasy football leagues though.

There is still no way in hell I see Gordon playing 16 games this year. I think it's still an incredible long shot that he plays at all this season.

But I hope you're right. Just picked him up in my 14 team league where I'm super weak at WR. This would more than make up for last year when I had Blackmon and the year I had Travis Henry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still have him in 3 of 4 leagues. However, in 1 league I cut him yesterday morning for Cody Parkey. Oops! That one is blind bidding w/ $150 budget for waivers. Assuming he is re-instated, the correct bid is $150, yes?

Yes, provided you have the ability to make further moves in the future for $0.

If re-instated immediately, I agree. The Washington Post report indicated that the suspension could be modified, so the bid should probably be reduced depending on how many games he actually gets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both of those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the negotiations between the league and the NFL Players Association remained at a sensitive stage, said the agreement likely would have to be completed before Sunday’s league-wide slate of games is played for modifications to the Gordon and Welker suspensions to be considered.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2014/09/04/josh-gordon-wes-welker-suspensions-possibly-could-be-modified-if-nfl-union-reach-deal-on-drug-policies/

Edited by cstu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty surprised the NFLPA is willing to give in to HGH testing just for the few players who are getting popped on recreational drug use. The difference in the number who will be affected is enormous. Have we actually seen quotes from NFLPA leadership that they are looking to get this deal done? I very possibly could have missed them. But it makes me think that the NFL is floating this to try to tell the public what they want to hear, that they're willing to "decriminalize" MJ when they really know the vast majority of the players have no interest in being subject to HGH testing.

I'll believe this last minute deal on HGH testing when I see it.

George Atallah, the union’s assistant executive director of external affairs, said Thursday night: “We have been eager to get a fair and comprehensive deal on new drug policies done for three years. The manufactured hype does not bring us any closer.”

Edited by cstu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This is similar to me, although not to the same extent. If the NFLPA negotiates a new drug test threshold and gets the NFL to apply to new test limits to existing players under suspension, then Gordon would get off completely. Why would he get suspended for 4, 6 or 8 games? The new rules would apply, and apply to his previous test. There's no reason for him to be suspended at all.

Just to be clear, that's IF they negotiate new limits, and IF the NFL signs off on applying it retroactively, and IF Gordon failed the test during the right timer period.

But as long as we're going to live in that hypothetical space, we might as well apply the circumstances to it. Like before, I don't see how Gordon serves anything other than a 0 or 16 game sentence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty surprised the NFLPA is willing to give in to HGH testing just for the few players who are getting popped on recreational drug use. The difference in the number who will be affected is enormous. Have we actually seen quotes from NFLPA leadership that they are looking to get this deal done? I very possibly could have missed them. But it makes me think that the NFL is floating this to try to tell the public what they want to hear, that they're willing to "decriminalize" MJ when they really know the vast majority of the players have no interest in being subject to HGH testing.

I'll believe this last minute deal on HGH testing when I see it.

George Atallah, the union’s assistant executive director of external affairs, said Thursday night: “We have been eager to get a fair and comprehensive deal on new drug policies done for three years. The manufactured hype does not bring us any closer.”

I agree that it's still a tall order. I'm just not going to laugh at people for dropping their kicker or Malcom Floyd to hold on to Gordon for a few days, as some other are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still have him in 3 of 4 leagues. However, in 1 league I cut him yesterday morning for Cody Parkey. Oops! That one is blind bidding w/ $150 budget for waivers. Assuming he is re-instated, the correct bid is $150, yes?

Yes, provided you have the ability to make further moves in the future for $0.

If re-instated immediately, I agree. The Washington Post report indicated that the suspension could be modified, so the bid should probably be reduced depending on how many games he actually gets.

I have the max bid in now... I'll wait until Monday and see what happens and adjust as necessary. Or forget it about it and blow my wad for no reason, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This is similar to me, although not to the same extent. If the NFLPA negotiates a new drug test threshold and gets the NFL to apply to new test limits to existing players under suspension, then Gordon would get off completely. Why would he get suspended for 4, 6 or 8 games? The new rules would apply, and apply to his previous test. There's no reason for him to be suspended at all.

Just to be clear, that's IF they negotiate new limits, and IF the NFL signs off on applying it retroactively, and IF Gordon failed the test during the right timer period.

But as long as we're going to live in that hypothetical space, we might as well apply the circumstances to it. Like before, I don't see how Gordon serves anything other than a 0 or 16 game sentence.

Well, it COULD be a game or two until this thing is in effect. In which case, it would be a game or two suspension. But yeah, I agree with everything else here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This part I still don't get. He failed the codeine test last year and appealed, but that wasn't 0 or 4 games, it was reduced to 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still have him in 3 of 4 leagues. However, in 1 league I cut him yesterday morning for Cody Parkey. Oops! That one is blind bidding w/ $150 budget for waivers. Assuming he is re-instated, the correct bid is $150, yes?

Yes, provided you have the ability to make further moves in the future for $0.

If re-instated immediately, I agree. The Washington Post report indicated that the suspension could be modified, so the bid should probably be reduced depending on how many games he actually gets.

I have the max bid in now... I'll wait until Monday and see what happens and adjust as necessary. Or forget it about it and blow my wad for no reason, lol.

Yeah, I'm debating something similar as 4 other teams and I have our full budget left and apparently the earliest bid gets it if there are tying bids. I'm afraid that I will forget it or somehow screw something up that won't let me change it . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This is similar to me, although not to the same extent. If the NFLPA negotiates a new drug test threshold and gets the NFL to apply to new test limits to existing players under suspension, then Gordon would get off completely. Why would he get suspended for 4, 6 or 8 games? The new rules would apply, and apply to his previous test. There's no reason for him to be suspended at all.

Just to be clear, that's IF they negotiate new limits, and IF the NFL signs off on applying it retroactively, and IF Gordon failed the test during the right timer period.

But as long as we're going to live in that hypothetical space, we might as well apply the circumstances to it. Like before, I don't see how Gordon serves anything other than a 0 or 16 game sentence.

Well, it COULD be a game or two until this thing is in effect. In which case, it would be a game or two suspension. But yeah, I agree with everything else here.

I'm hearing Gordon won't play this Sunday even if the suspension is lifted, but 15 games played is still a pretty healthy fix for my team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This part I still don't get. He failed the codeine test last year and appealed, but that wasn't 0 or 4 games, it was reduced to 2.

Goodell cut him a break. That wasn't a ruling by an arbitrator.

Gordon's appeal this year was around arguing that he didn't/shouldn't have failed the test. The question before the arbitrator was that - did he or did he not fail?

If yes - 16 games

If no - 0 games

The only way it was going to be any other number was if NFL/Gordon negotiated another number, thereby avoiding the appeal's outcome, but that wasn't going to happen as it had been months since he failed the test and there were no talks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just dropped Kelvin Benjamin for him... Benjamin will be on waivers till sunday or tuesday and i have priority 3 and im deep at WR.. so hoping for good news

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty surprised the NFLPA is willing to give in to HGH testing just for the few players who are getting popped on recreational drug use. The difference in the number who will be affected is enormous. Have we actually seen quotes from NFLPA leadership that they are looking to get this deal done? I very possibly could have missed them. But it makes me think that the NFL is floating this to try to tell the public what they want to hear, that they're willing to "decriminalize" MJ when they really know the vast majority of the players have no interest in being subject to HGH testing.

I'll believe this last minute deal on HGH testing when I see it.

George Atallah, the union’s assistant executive director of external affairs, said Thursday night: “We have been eager to get a fair and comprehensive deal on new drug policies done for three years. The manufactured hype does not bring us any closer.”

I agree that it's still a tall order. I'm just not going to laugh at people for dropping their kicker or Malcom Floyd to hold on to Gordon for a few days, as some other are.

My opinion all along has been that Gordon should absolutely be rostered at least until the season starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just bought for $57 in blind bid waivers this am... Out of $100

Just for price check purposes

nice man

I snagged him for $2 out of $100 this morning. Fairly sharky league, too. Not much confidence apparently.

Really hoping to get the last laugh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This is similar to me, although not to the same extent. If the NFLPA negotiates a new drug test threshold and gets the NFL to apply to new test limits to existing players under suspension, then Gordon would get off completely. Why would he get suspended for 4, 6 or 8 games? The new rules would apply, and apply to his previous test. There's no reason for him to be suspended at all.

Just to be clear, that's IF they negotiate new limits, and IF the NFL signs off on applying it retroactively, and IF Gordon failed the test during the right timer period.

But as long as we're going to live in that hypothetical space, we might as well apply the circumstances to it. Like before, I don't see how Gordon serves anything other than a 0 or 16 game sentence.

This I agree with.

I feel there's a much better chance of him being able to play due to this rule being retroactively applied than I did about him beating a clear cut failed test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This is similar to me, although not to the same extent. If the NFLPA negotiates a new drug test threshold and gets the NFL to apply to new test limits to existing players under suspension, then Gordon would get off completely. Why would he get suspended for 4, 6 or 8 games? The new rules would apply, and apply to his previous test. There's no reason for him to be suspended at all.

Just to be clear, that's IF they negotiate new limits, and IF the NFL signs off on applying it retroactively, and IF Gordon failed the test during the right timer period.

But as long as we're going to live in that hypothetical space, we might as well apply the circumstances to it. Like before, I don't see how Gordon serves anything other than a 0 or 16 game sentence.

This I agree with.

I feel there's a much better chance of him being able to play due to this rule being retroactively applied than I did about him beating a clear cut failed test.

Yep... Feels a little more plausible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Gordon's appeal was going on and people were in here chirping about how his suspensions was going to get reduced to 6-8 games, I really had no idea how anyone could draw that conclusion. You had to be ignorant of what the appeal was about. The appeal was always going to be 0 or 16 games, with 16 being the heavy favorite. He either failed the test, or he didn't.

This is similar to me, although not to the same extent. If the NFLPA negotiates a new drug test threshold and gets the NFL to apply to new test limits to existing players under suspension, then Gordon would get off completely. Why would he get suspended for 4, 6 or 8 games? The new rules would apply, and apply to his previous test. There's no reason for him to be suspended at all.

Just to be clear, that's IF they negotiate new limits, and IF the NFL signs off on applying it retroactively, and IF Gordon failed the test during the right timer period.

But as long as we're going to live in that hypothetical space, we might as well apply the circumstances to it. Like before, I don't see how Gordon serves anything other than a 0 or 16 game sentence.

This I agree with.

I feel there's a much better chance of him being able to play due to this rule being retroactively applied than I did about him beating a clear cut failed test.

Agreed, as well. Based on the FACTS as we knew them, Gordon was getting either 0 or 16 pending his appeal, and 16 was, by far, the more likely.

Based on the POSSIBILITIES of a new policy, retroactively applied, & Gordon's failure being in the right time period, 0 games missed is possibly (assuming a decision is made on time for him to play Sunday).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.