ghostguy123
Footballguy
I will tell you once you answer the question I have asked 4 times now. WHO thinks the NFL looks bad when a player gets popped and suspended for using a banned substance?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Josh Gordon - August 1, 2016 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Soulfly3
- Start date
ghostguy123
Footballguy
The NFL is the only pro league that has this kind of crap in the news all year long every year. If the NFL looks stupid for any of this it is because they make themselves look stupid.
On top of it they don't even know how to enforce anything.
But ultimately when a player gets caught and suspended, the player looks bad. Not the league. The league looks bad then they fumble around and can't meet their own self imposed deadline for making a decision.
What in God's name are they even looking at?? Who Gordon hangs out with?? Who gives a damn? The guy is doing the same things that most every other player in the league is doing right now, except he is not using alcohol or drugs because he would test positive. So he is actually acting more responsibly (assuming he is not using any substances, which is a good assumption otherwise he would be suspended again) than the majority of the other players in the league, yet for some reason it isn't good enough.
The NFL makes themselves looks #### stupid. Simple.
On top of it they don't even know how to enforce anything.
But ultimately when a player gets caught and suspended, the player looks bad. Not the league. The league looks bad then they fumble around and can't meet their own self imposed deadline for making a decision.
What in God's name are they even looking at?? Who Gordon hangs out with?? Who gives a damn? The guy is doing the same things that most every other player in the league is doing right now, except he is not using alcohol or drugs because he would test positive. So he is actually acting more responsibly (assuming he is not using any substances, which is a good assumption otherwise he would be suspended again) than the majority of the other players in the league, yet for some reason it isn't good enough.
The NFL makes themselves looks #### stupid. Simple.
Last edited by a moderator:
DallasDMac
Footballguy
Should rename the thread the "Josh Gordon 360 thread" since it just keeps going in circles and getting nowhere.
I've answered it, multiple times.
The NFL looks bad to anyone who wants to view, criticize, attack, throw stones, however you want to word it; i.e.-the general public.
The same people who thinks the NFL looks bad when players get busted for domestic violence.
The same people who thinks the NFL looks bad when concussions are up.
The same people who thinks the NFL looks bad when any NFL player gets arrested.
So, what policy are you referring to to which the NFL has failed to adhere?
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So, WHO are these people? "same people", "same people", "anyone"................who the hell are these people?
I'll go WAYYY out on a limb and say their inept handling of situations like this makes them look bad to more fans than when a player gets caught with a banned substance and suspended.
Do YOU think the NFL looks bad when a player screws up with a banned substance and gets suspended? I sure hope not because there is no logic behind that, at all.
If you want one example, Ray Rice. They suspended him, then went back and re-suspended him for a much longer period of time due to public outcry, not because of a policy. They didn't even know what policies they were supposed to adhere to. They looked like colossal idiots for that. They made up a policy after the fact, after they already gave a punishment.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Do you somehow think it is a GOOD thing for the NFL when fans have no idea what is going on with players and their suspensions?
If a player is suspended for a year, when that year is up you would think you would hear more than "we will make a decision in 60 days", and then 60 days later you hear "we are gathering information".
Did he piss dirty?? No?? Ok, reinstated.
If he did, suspension. Real, real simple. REAL simple.
Oh ####, he was in a picture with Manziel, and guy never suspended by us.....................................lets wait another 60 days.
If a player is suspended for a year, when that year is up you would think you would hear more than "we will make a decision in 60 days", and then 60 days later you hear "we are gathering information".
Did he piss dirty?? No?? Ok, reinstated.
If he did, suspension. Real, real simple. REAL simple.
Oh ####, he was in a picture with Manziel, and guy never suspended by us.....................................lets wait another 60 days.
Oh, I get it now; you don't know what you're talking about.
Gordon wasn't suspended for a year; he received an indefinite suspension that was "for a minimum period of one (1) calendar year."
And the NFL never said "we will make a decision in 60 days;" that was reported by different sources, but refuted by the NFL.
So, the policy, that is relevant to this discussion, that you think the NFL is failing to adhere to, doesn't exist.
No, reading comprehension is your friend.
I (and most people) think that if a player gets suspended again, and again, and again, AND the NFL continues to allow him to come back and play, the NFL looks bad.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So then I guess that means they have no actual policy, which is about as dumb as it gets.
Our policy is "we do what we want all willy nilly". Great. Oh geeze, picture with Manziel, 60 more days before a decision. We need to interview 50 people.
In 60 days we will tell you that it will be 60 more days.
NFL looking great here.
Our policy is "we do what we want all willy nilly". Great. Oh geeze, picture with Manziel, 60 more days before a decision. We need to interview 50 people.
In 60 days we will tell you that it will be 60 more days.
NFL looking great here.
No, it means that a player suspended indefinitely must be out for AT LEAST 1 year. (adhered to that)
A player may apply for reinstatement after a year, but he is still suspended until the NFL decides to reinstate him; there is no 60 day "deadline." (adhered to that).
Just because you don't understand what the policy is doesn't mean the NFL has no actual policy. They have a policy and have followed it exactly.
Maybe try reading up and figuring out exactly what the policy is, that way you don't come off sounding so uninformed?
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So just looking at the latest rotoworld posting " A league source tells the Cleveland Plain Dealer it’s possible suspended WR Josh Gordon "hasn't shown the NFL enough of a commitment to sobriety." "
So, uh, what??? Did he fail a test? Is there video of him drinking? I wasn't aware that you can't be somewhere that has alcohol. That pretty much means he wouldn't be able to go ANYWHERE for a year.....................or should I say at LEAST a year.
Another..................." though it’s still anyone's guess if he’s passed the league’s guidelines. "
So what are these guidelines? Where do we find out what these guidelines are? Cmon Bayhawks, you should be all over this. The NFL is following their policies to the T right?
So, uh, what??? Did he fail a test? Is there video of him drinking? I wasn't aware that you can't be somewhere that has alcohol. That pretty much means he wouldn't be able to go ANYWHERE for a year.....................or should I say at LEAST a year.
Another..................." though it’s still anyone's guess if he’s passed the league’s guidelines. "
So what are these guidelines? Where do we find out what these guidelines are? Cmon Bayhawks, you should be all over this. The NFL is following their policies to the T right?
ghostguy123
Footballguy
And weed, something that will be legal nationally in a few years. Something that will be encouraged as a painkiller by the NFL at some point rather than addictive and harmful painkillers.
Yeah, he screwed up. He should be punished. But damn.
DallasDMac
Footballguy
You seem slightly irrationally emotionally attached here dude. Might be time to take a step back.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Well, when the league can't give you any indication of when your supposed #1 WR will be available for you, with the draft right around the corner, it's not hard to get a little pissed.
2 more months? 2 more years? 2024? Does he get another 3 months for each tweet that doesn't praise GODell?
2 more months? 2 more years? 2024? Does he get another 3 months for each tweet that doesn't praise GODell?
All of those things would be "at least a year."
And yes, if they think a player continued to use the substance he was suspended for, it is within their rights to continue his INDEFINITE suspension longer.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Wow. I mean, wow. They could, ya know, TEST him..........................that could be a way to take the guessing game out of it.
That pretty much means they just do whatever they want regardless of any factual info. NFL looking like shiny diamonds here.
You are making it abundantly clear that there is a lot you aren't aware of.
He is suspended INDEFINITELY, not for a year.
He doesn't get automatically reinstated, he has to PROVE to the NFL that he deserves it. Staying away from bars, nightclubs, Vegas, tattoo parlors might have been a good idea.
When suspended, each player is enrolled in a "Treatment Plan;" as far as I know, these Treatment plans have NEVER been made public, so whether he's passed those guidelines or not is "anyone's guess."
Again, try actually doing some research, so you have SOME CLUE about what you're rambling.
https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/Player Development/2015 Policy and Program on Substances of Abuse.pdf
ghostguy123
Footballguy
I am going to ramble on for an indefinite period of time. I will stop rambling when I have met Soulfly's guidelines.
Wow. I mean, wow. They can, and do test him. But that's not the extent of it (this is the part that you seem unable to comprehend).
He has given up his right to play in the NFL by violating the league's policy MULTIPLE TIMES. The drug policy that his union agreed to specifies this.
IF he does everything that the NFL asks, they CAN (if they want to) allow him to play in the NFL again. If they want him to stay away from bars, Vegas, Johnny Manziel, tattoo parlors, etc, they can say that.
This is not "regardless of any factual info," this IS the factual info. He has to convince them to give him another chance, he IS NOT entitled to it.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Wait, I'm sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying they have a policy? Gordon didn't follow it? Wait, this is news to me. What?
DallasDMac
Footballguy
flapgreen
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
Um, of course it does. How would it not? You know, there were these slimy bankers who did some really shady things a few years back and the US economy really suffered from it. Most, rightfully so, lost their jobs because of it. Let say they got hired back and did the same crap again - you're telling me that wouldn't make the banks look bad?
You're telling me if Vick had gotten caught up in another dog fighting ring after serving time (and being reinstated to the NFL) that it wouldn't show poorly on the NFL itself? Of course it would. Now should they care or not is a different question, but it would show poorly on the NFL.
I've got a 9 month old son, who I hope will one day watch and enjoy the NFL. If he's anything like his dad, he'll be a Washington fan - but maybe he'll follow another team, and as long as it isn't the Cowboys or Eagles I'll be fine with it. Say he's a Browns fan. Say he's a huge fan of Gordon. I would rather not like him to see a knucklehead like him repeatedly (and publicly, due to it being the NFL) break the rules of the game/his employment and get chance after chance after chance, only to screw up again. I'd like for him to have positive role models to look up to. Like me back in the day with Dexter Manley. I was a huge fan of his as a young child, but after his multiple drug related offenses and subsequent suspension, my dad didn't really enjoy me looking up to him as a favorite player - so he wasn't my favorite player anymore.
These players represent the teams and the league they play for (it's part of what they are paid to do in a positive manner). Not much different from Jared Fogel representing Subway (and being paid to do so).
I don't know about you guys, but I'm 36 years old and still screw up my judgement at work on a daily basis. I don't always make the right decisions. Most of the time I feel I do a good job, but I still slip up. Fortunately they are usually minor things and my discipline structure is more simple than the NFL. I make sure I explain to my kids that it's ok to mess up as long as you learn from it and make a tremendous effort to not repeat it. I would be ok with my kid being a Gordon fan and seeing him make mistakes and work through fixing them. It's part of being a human. Some people take longer to learn than others. Everything is a teachable moment in my opinion.
If the reason Gordon is still suspended is because he slipped up one time while on a probationary period and had one drink on a plane, I find this whole situation really messed up. I just feel like there is more to the story that we don't know. At least I hope there is. I do agree that his social media posts aren't painting him in the best light to the eyes of the NFL brass, but if he has passed every test so far then I think Goodell is being unfair here.
If the reason Gordon is still suspended is because he slipped up one time while on a probationary period and had one drink on a plane, I find this whole situation really messed up. I just feel like there is more to the story that we don't know. At least I hope there is. I do agree that his social media posts aren't painting him in the best light to the eyes of the NFL brass, but if he has passed every test so far then I think Goodell is being unfair here.
I think it's hilarious that anyone pretends that they know the conditions presented to Gordon when he screwed up this last time. And anyone buying the 'one beer on a team flight' nonsense needs their heads examined.
No one knows what Gordon was told he could and couldn't do, nor does anyone know if he broke any of those rules/conditions.
fridayfrenzy
Footballguy
People need to change their mindset about this suspension. Playing in the NFL is now a privilege for Gordon and not a right.
The NFL has total control in this situation because Gordon has allowed it to get this far in the process. That means that if the NFL doesn't like the cut of Gordon's jib they can decide not to reinstate him.
The NFL has total control in this situation because Gordon has allowed it to get this far in the process. That means that if the NFL doesn't like the cut of Gordon's jib they can decide not to reinstate him.
Soulfly3
Footballguy
See, yet you have no problem defending the stance that the NFL has their suspension policy ducks in a row.
The NFL has NO issue w the jib of spouse and child abusers, drug pushers, animal murderers etc.
But smoking a joint? Now that's where they draw the line!!!!
matttyl
Footballguy
Of the 4 things you mentioned, isn't drug use the only one specifically spelled out in the CBA?
Soulfly3
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
Understood, but do those conduct policies spell out spouse/child abuse, pushing drugs, or animal murderers specifically like it does with drugs?
What I mean is, when Ray Rice's video came out, someone had to look at the conduct policy and ask "how does this apply to the situation at hand?" With Gordon, or any drug situation, they don't have to ask that question as the course of action (duration of suspension) is specifically listed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Those other suspensions weren't indefinite like Gordon's is - so those other players weren't reinstated, their time was served and they came back.
Gordon's suspension requires him to apply for reinstatement after sitting out "at least one year", so that is what is happening now.
Gordon's suspension requires him to apply for reinstatement after sitting out "at least one year", so that is what is happening now.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Wait, are people really posting in here pretending that the league's actions, policies, and rulings make any sort of sense. For reals?
Their decision making makes drunk teens at a frat party look like Nobel laureates by comparison. The NFL literally makes stuff up as they go along. They have had ZERO consistency in how they operate, the rules or processes they follow, their determinations, the appeals process, or their outcomes. Everything they do is a shotgun blast. On a good day, they MIGHT be aiming at the same target as they did the day before
Look no further than there's-no-proof-that-football-has-anything-to-do-with-CTE but there is OVERWHELMING proof that Tom-Brady-conspired-to-lead-a-ball-tampering-ring-and--rewarded / bribed / paid off-his-co-conspirators. And that's ignoring the wife beaters get off lighter than the weed smokers, the Jets tamper and get fined while the Chiefs lose picks, and a catch is not a catch unless it shouldn't be a catch rule. At this point, there is likely more wrong with the league than there is right with it.
Their decision making makes drunk teens at a frat party look like Nobel laureates by comparison. The NFL literally makes stuff up as they go along. They have had ZERO consistency in how they operate, the rules or processes they follow, their determinations, the appeals process, or their outcomes. Everything they do is a shotgun blast. On a good day, they MIGHT be aiming at the same target as they did the day before
Look no further than there's-no-proof-that-football-has-anything-to-do-with-CTE but there is OVERWHELMING proof that Tom-Brady-conspired-to-lead-a-ball-tampering-ring-and--rewarded / bribed / paid off-his-co-conspirators. And that's ignoring the wife beaters get off lighter than the weed smokers, the Jets tamper and get fined while the Chiefs lose picks, and a catch is not a catch unless it shouldn't be a catch rule. At this point, there is likely more wrong with the league than there is right with it.
Until this weekend and the little blurb from the Cleveland paper... I had been of the mindset that Josh Gordon would be coming back, and soon. After that blurb about him having not "shown enough commitment to sobriety" combined with Cleveland being on record as saying they are anticipating not having him/view it as a bonus if they get it back... I'm going to go ahead and say the red flags are numerous enough that he may *never* come back into the league again.
What Anarchy99 said up there rings true. I don't know what Gordon submitted to the league as evidence he was taking sobriety seriously, but I think the NFL basically looked at the facts of any situation and replies with "yea, but still..."
I had been somewhere around 80% sure Gordon would be coming back this year. Now I'm more like 40%... you would think if the NFL had any sort of decency (hint: they don't), they would make a firm ruling prior to the draft so Cleveland could get their board in order. But the NFL has little incentive here to allow Gordon back into the fold.
What Anarchy99 said up there rings true. I don't know what Gordon submitted to the league as evidence he was taking sobriety seriously, but I think the NFL basically looked at the facts of any situation and replies with "yea, but still..."
I had been somewhere around 80% sure Gordon would be coming back this year. Now I'm more like 40%... you would think if the NFL had any sort of decency (hint: they don't), they would make a firm ruling prior to the draft so Cleveland could get their board in order. But the NFL has little incentive here to allow Gordon back into the fold.
I agree with this. Unless they've talked to Gordon and he's under some kind of magnascope from now until training camp, there's no reason they can't let Cleveland know before they have to draft.
Slight semantics....Manziel is living with Gordon.
But it does not change much. Gordon is an idiot. Pics with the guy, parties with the guy, and the NFL states they need more time to evaluate the re-instatement, so hey, Gordon opens his door to Manziel?
Gordon is not very bright
matttyl
Footballguy
I'm not sure of which "other suspensions" you're referring to, so forgive me if we're talking about different people - but Vick was suspended indefinitely, and applied for reinstatement and it was granted. The same could be said of Richie Icognito, Adrian Peterson, Tanard Jackson (twice), Brandon Browner, Fred Davis, and even theoretically Travis Henry.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I was talking about the ones Soulfly mentioned (Rice and Hardy) - sorry if it was unclear.
Also Peterson wasn't reinstated by the league but a Court overturned him being placed on the exemption list (plus he was paid during his time on that list).
matttyl
Footballguy
Yeah, didn't know who you were talking about. I didn't read back far enough to see, these non embedded quotes have their flaws. I just meant that there have been both drug related as well as personal conduct related indefinite suspensions overturned in the past. At this point, I'm not sure which of the two would be the reason for his not being reinstated (personal conduct or drug/alcohol).
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
Johnny Walker Manziel and Josh Puff Gordon........Maybe they are each others rehab sponsor...
Braktastic
Footballguy
Oof. This all seems like the kind of controlled information leak the NFL would do to prime its audience for the news Gordon isn't going to be reinstated so that both the NFLPA and fans and Soulfly3 don't run riot in the Cleveland streets. 
Last edited by a moderator:
You'd think with his gramps oil money. With that to fall back on, Johnny couldn't care less about his NFL career.