WR Josh Gordon, KC (12 Viewers)

[KellysHeroes]

I smell diluted sample

 

[cstu]

If they are different, I don't understand how you can trust the validity of either.

You have it backwards. If they were the same you couldn't trust the validity of either. Variability is normal. If two different samples return the exact same result, that's one of the biggest indicators of tampering.

Yeah but swap the labels and it's a pass

And how many times he pass a test when a swap would have caused him to fail?

 

[placebo]

A disaster? Pretty sure the NFL will be juuuuust fine with or without Josh Gordon. Again, typical non--FF crazed fans outside of Cleveland don't even know who he is.

Is this really true? Football fans don't watch ESPN or see highlights unless they play FF? The NFL would be juuuust fine without a game every Thursday, a week-long draft and a team in London but that doesn't stop them from grasping for every dollar possible.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

If they are different, I don't understand how you can trust the validity of either.

You have it backwards. If they were the same you couldn't trust the validity of either. Variability is normal. If two different samples return the exact same result, that's one of the biggest indicators of tampering.

Yeah but swap the labels and it's a pass

And how many times he pass a test when a swap would have caused him to fail?

:mind blownlus a few posts up it outlined the whole deal. It said it could take up to 10 days to test sample B. it also said in that lab procedures page that its normal for levels to drop. I'm still wondering if this can happen eith s sealed sample and if that's why they account for a lower level in the B sample.

 

[chem]

Plus a few posts up it outlined the whole deal. It said it could take up to 10 days to test sample B. it also said in that lab procedures page that its normal for levels to drop. I'm still wondering if that's why they account for a lower level in the B sample.

yup, if you let it sit for a week or two the level will go down. What you have in this thread is a bunch of people who don't know chemistry grasping for straws to get their fantasy WR back in the pool. If B was the 'more accurate' test (although I haven't seen anything about using different methods) that wouldn't necessarily help him either. The threshold for sample A could be set with the wider error bars in mind, so a lower reading on B would not necessarily indicate he wasn't using the substance being tested.

 

[chem]

source: I'm actually a chemist

 

[cstu]

A disaster? Pretty sure the NFL will be juuuuust fine with or without Josh Gordon. Again, typical non--FF crazed fans outside of Cleveland don't even know who he is.

Is this really true? Football fans don't watch ESPN or see highlights unless they play FF? The NFL would be juuuust fine without a game every Thursday, a week-long draft and a team in London but that doesn't stop them from grasping for every dollar possible.

Yes, the league is just fine without him. They were fine in 2011 and they'll be fine in 2014.

 

[Adam Harstad]

If they are different, I don't understand how you can trust the validity of either.

You have it backwards. If they were the same you couldn't trust the validity of either. Variability is normal. If two different samples return the exact same result, that's one of the biggest indicators of tampering.

Yeah but swap the labels and it's a pass

Not necessarily. If we're arguing that Gordon's "true" level was 13.8 ng/ml, and the A Sample only read higher because the test was inaccurate, then couldn't performing the less accurate test on the B sample also have produced a reading over 15 ng/ml? Even if the samples were switched, we still very easily could have wound up with an identical outcome.

Also, even if we accept that swapping the labels would have turned this "fail" into a "pass"... reports are that Josh Gordon had passed 70 consecutive tests. If we swapped all of the labels on those 70 tests, too, would any of those "passes" turned into "fails"?

 

[GregR]

what's the link/source for saying A+B samples were tested with two different methods?

My understanding is the A sample was tested first with an ELISA immunoassay test, the NFL threshold for which is 20, and a 38 was returned. The immunoassay test is the cheaper of the two tests and less accurate, +/- 10% at best according to NorChem labs.

Having failed that first test, the A sample was then put through a second, much more accurate test, an LC/MS mass spectrometer test. It is more expensive so only done if the first test was failed. The threshold for this test is 15, with an accuracy of better than +/- 3. The threshold for the two tests would be different not only because of the error range expected is different, but because the immunoassay test measures more than one type of THC while the LC/MS test measures only 1, so the numbers they return will be different even if they were both perfect tests.

The error range on the LC/MS test is better than +/- 3ng. The A sample recorded a 16.

Later, the B sample was tested for the first time with the LC/MS test and a 13.6 was found. The testing policy only has the B sample tested to assure there is any THC in the sample, not to "double check" the first LC/MS test's result.

Edit to add: From what was posted about the test policy, the test of the B sample is conducted at the request of the player after the results of the previous two tests are made known. So there would be some intervening days gone by there, I'm not sure how many.

 

[Anarchy99]

If I am understanding this properly, Gordon failed test of Sample A (even if it was by a little bit), so then they test Sample B . If there is any residue at all in Sample B, then that is still a fail. All that was collectively bargained and part of the current CBA. So Gordon can or will essentially argue:

- The testing procedures are unfair

- The testing levels are too restrictive compared to other sports and organizations

- I barely failed, so the test really shouldn't count

- The average of the test or the second test alone would have passed

- I tested positive for second hand smoke

- I deserve special treatment and the rules should not apply

Essentially, his argument is that what the union agreed upon should be tossed aside. Is that pretty much it?

Bottom line, the things that he is arguing may in fact have some validity, but it still doesn't change what is written in the substance abuse policies that the players union agreed to. Why have rules, testing levels, procedures, or union negotiations at all if they will not be applied?

Also, when you add in his off field issues in college and the things that have developed since this incident, he has a half dozen or more total incidents. He already caught a break last time, so I guess the question becomes how many chances does he expect to get?

IMO, if he avoids suspension, it will be because the league caved. But to the letter of the CBA, he is open to a year long suspension.

 

[chem]

what's the link/source for saying A+B samples were tested with two different methods?

(...words...) Later, the B sample was tested for the first time with the LC/MS test and a 13.6 was found. The testing policy only has the B sample tested to assure there is any THC in the sample, not to "double check" the first LC/MS test's result.

yeah, if all is as you said, he has no merit to appeal based on the CBA or chemistry unless the sample A threshold value is set improperly low (seems quite unlikely). I'm curious though, what's the original source describing the LC/MS being used? You don't need to say mass spec after LC/MS, btw, that's implied by the MS in LC/MS.

 

[Bronco Billy]

Well, if we don't hear something today, it's bad news for Gordon. The NFL may not release information on the appeal for a few days, but Gordon's team will if they get the sentence reduced.

 

[placebo]

A disaster? Pretty sure the NFL will be juuuuust fine with or without Josh Gordon. Again, typical non--FF crazed fans outside of Cleveland don't even know who he is.

Is this really true? Football fans don't watch ESPN or see highlights unless they play FF? The NFL would be juuuust fine without a game every Thursday, a week-long draft and a team in London but that doesn't stop them from grasping for every dollar possible.

Yes, the league is just fine without him. They were fine in 2011 and they'll be fine in 2014.

Of course they are, my point is that the NFL isn't a league that says, "nah, we don't need that" very often. Don't see how you could argue that Gordon catching bombs from Johnny Football isn't good for their product. I'm not sure this helps Gordon get back on the field since they were stupid enough to have these rules in place to begin with, but if they were smart they'd let the man play. Obvious stuff.

 

[Ojaays]

Well, if we don't hear something today, it's bad news for Gordon. The NFL may not release information on the appeal for a few days, but Gordon's team will if they get the sentence reduced.

Just speculating, but the arbitrator likely won't rule today, will take in the arguments and make a ruling next week, hence the date with Rog.

 

[Anarchy99]

A disaster? Pretty sure the NFL will be juuuuust fine with or without Josh Gordon. Again, typical non--FF crazed fans outside of Cleveland don't even know who he is.

Is this really true? Football fans don't watch ESPN or see highlights unless they play FF? The NFL would be juuuust fine without a game every Thursday, a week-long draft and a team in London but that doesn't stop them from grasping for every dollar possible.

Yes, the league is just fine without him. They were fine in 2011 and they'll be fine in 2014.

Of course they are, my point is that the NFL isn't a league that says, "nah, we don't need that" very often. Don't see how you could argue that Gordon catching bombs from Johnny Football isn't good for their product. I'm not sure this helps Gordon get back on the field since they were stupid enough to have these rules in place to begin with, but if they were smart they'd let the man play. Obvious stuff.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. People could also look at it that the league is soft and won't enforce their own rules for a guy that was kicked off of two college teams and already suspended in the NFL. Does that help its image any?

I know everyone wants to lump Ray Rice into this, but as already discussed the two cases are more apples to oranges than apples to apples.

 

[LOCO]

ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk 2m

Josh Gordon hearing currently is ongoing, with no resolution yet.

yikes, feels like waiting to speak to the prinicpal.

 

[ROYALWITCHEESE]

Well, if we don't hear something today, it's bad news for Gordon. The NFL may not release information on the appeal for a few days, but Gordon's team will if they get the sentence reduced.

Huh? What if the decision isn't made today?

 

[Bojang0301]

There was a link earlier stating we wouldn't hear the outcome today.

 

[False Start]

Goodell was just asked by a reporter about the pending Gordon suspension and the Rice suspension and the commish said (paraphrasing) as we all expected that there is a history with Gordon and no history with Rice and was punished based of CBA and Gordon will have to deal with the same CBA.

 

[GregR]

If I remember right, the league has to give the final decision in some inexact terms like "a timely manner" after the hearing is complete. Which the media was saying probably means on the order of 7 to 10 days.

Could come sooner of course, but anyone anxious over finding out today is probably in for a wait.

 

[Bayhawks]

The Gordon case is less cut and dried, and a bit more compelling than some here want to believe.

There was more than one occasion where Gordon's A and B sample were substantially different in the lab world.

Those close to the case are calling it rather compelling, take it for what it's worth.

Could he still be gone for the year, yes. However, it is not the slam dunk some are making it out to be, and he may get, nothing.

He doesn't provide links. He just states this stuff as fact. When asked for a link, he deflects the question, and avoids providing a link. When you call him on it, you get banned for "abusive behavior." Or at least that's how it went for me 5 days ago.

How in the h does cc Texan post that breaking news and that isn't the main topic of conversation from here on? Nobody has a reaction to that update?!

It doesn't fit the narrative that it's a forgone conclusion that Gordon is gone for 2014.

I'll give you a hypothetical , let's say Gordon was called by the legue to go test, told where to go, he went there, when he was supposed to, but guess what? It was the wrong place, but it WAS the place the league told him to go to.

Gordon finally , after telling the league, hey, this isn't the place, gets to the right place, it's a couple hours later, and he passes the test.

So in essence, we have a miscommunication on the leagues part to Gordon and No Failed test.

If that happened,

How many here think he's getting even one game?

But, but but, what about his speeding tickets, weed in the car, DWI?

Ok, I'll play, for just a minute.

Speeding: 50 in a 35. 71 in a 60 Really?, ... Shut the front door, we all do that, daily.

Weed in the car: some may not like to hear it, but, with this much money at stake, guilty by association isn't going to fly.

DWI: he blew a .09. Many of us have driven home a .09 after night out with two or three drinks depending on body size.

This is something he won't be suspended for unless and until the case is settled,which will be after the season is over.

Breathalyzers are known to vary as much as 20%, again, you might not like to hear this , but, Gordon has the jack to hire a good enough lawyer to make that go away and Goodell knows it.

In your hypothetical, I would 100% agree with you, Gordon would get 0 games, but let's be real, that's not what happened. If it was, this would have been resolved already.The NFL didn't tell Gordon to go to 1215 Main street to get tested, when they meant to say go to 1512 Main street to get tested. If it were truly that simple, Rosenhaus would be blasting that news all over the place, he wouldn't be keeping it a secret.

As to why this hasn't been discussed, it has been, two pages & 3 days ago when it was first reported. I hope that whatever "technicality" exists is able to get Gordon off, however, there has been no real news about what this technicality might be, so any further discussion would be nothing but wild guesses (like your impossible hypothetical).

Impossible?

Insiders are saying :

1.there was a definite miscommunication on the leagues part.

2. Gordon did not fail a test.

Yes, impossible.Who are these "insiders?" Where is the report of a "definite miscommunication?" It's IMPOSSIBLE that that would have been reported anywhere reputable and not be found in this 92 page thread.

Here is what Insiders are actually saying:

Gordon has been banned for a year.

I can link to my information (and that's only 1 of many), please provide one for yours.

Good one. I'll just leave you and your awesome "link" to Nick Dudokovic and his 600 followers with this question.

If it was as simple as Gordon failing a drug test, wouldn't this have been concluded long ago?

Oh, that one isn't good enough for you? Hmm...interesting that Soulfly does the same thing; ignores and attempts to de-legitimize all information that doesn't suit him.

Here's 4 more:

Schefter

ESPN

CBS

Mary Kay Cabot

Still waiting for a link to any reputable reporter, news agency, Browns official, NFL official, Gordon, Rosenhaus, etc who can substantiate your fabricated claim that the NFL miscommunicated with Gordon, or the rumor that Gordon only missed a test.

Surely, you can provide one, right? You wouldn't just make stuff up without anything more than random speculation on a Browns message board or a vague comment from Greg Little as your "evidence," would you?

And no, yet again, the timeline that this "case" has proceeded fits in with the timeline of other similar situations like Fred Davis' leaked news of a failed test & his suspension, Rice's attack on his fiancee and his suspension.

So, please, stop using the tired (and dis-proven) argument of "it's taking too long, that msut be good for Gordon," and provide SOMETHING to back up your ridiculous claims of NFL miscommunication.

The bolded jabs at other posters are the kind of behavior we've repeatedly asked in this thread to stop. It only derails the kind of discussion we want here.

Please don't do this when you are allowed to post again.

 

[Bayhawks]

If they are different, I don't understand how you can trust the validity of either.

You have it backwards. If they were the same you couldn't trust the validity of either. Variability is normal. If two different samples return the exact same result, that's one of the biggest indicators of tampering.

Yeah but swap the labels and it's a pass

It's been stated several times that it doesn't matter what level sample B shows, as long as it shows any THC, it confirms the fail. That is, by all accounts, what happened.

I think Gordon's only chance (and at least he hired a good lawyer) is to argue that the test was done wrong, the samples were handled incorrectly, the testing levels are too low, etc. Because based on what the CBA says, he doesn't seem to have much of a case.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The Gordon case is less cut and dried, and a bit more compelling than some here want to believe.

There was more than one occasion where Gordon's A and B sample were substantially different in the lab world.

Those close to the case are calling it rather compelling, take it for what it's worth.

Could he still be gone for the year, yes. However, it is not the slam dunk some are making it out to be, and he may get, nothing.

He doesn't provide links. He just states this stuff as fact. When asked for a link, he deflects the question, and avoids providing a link. When you call him on it, you get banned for "abusive behavior." Or at least that's how it went for me 5 days ago.

Earlier he claimed that Lynch has never been suspended for any games as a result of his weapons charges or the DUI. That statement wasn't true (and he failed to acknowledge it when called out) - so I do think it's only right for people to try and verify what is being thrown out as "facts" when in actuality they aren't very accurate.

None of us know what will ultimately happen with Gordon, but for those trying to figure out if they should buy or sell or draft him, we should all try and put out accurate information at least.

 

[False Start]

The Gordon case is less cut and dried, and a bit more compelling than some here want to believe.

There was more than one occasion where Gordon's A and B sample were substantially different in the lab world.

Those close to the case are calling it rather compelling, take it for what it's worth.

Could he still be gone for the year, yes. However, it is not the slam dunk some are making it out to be, and he may get, nothing.

He doesn't provide links. He just states this stuff as fact. When asked for a link, he deflects the question, and avoids providing a link. When you call him on it, you get banned for "abusive behavior." Or at least that's how it went for me 5 days ago.

Earlier he claimed that Lynch has never been suspended for any games as a result of his weapons charges or the DUI. That statement wasn't true (and he failed to acknowledge it when called out) - so I do think it's only right for people to try and verify what is being thrown out as "facts" when in actuality they aren't very accurate.

None of us know what will ultimately happen with Gordon, but for those trying to figure out if they should buy or sell or draft him, we should all try and put out accurate information at least.

 

[JohnnyU]

Does it really matter how many games? We all know he will screw up again very soon and most likely will be out of the league this time next year. This guy can't get out of his own way.

This sure sounds like an outstanding wakeup call! A lot of Football stars talk about supporting their Mom etc. (Josh almost lost that) Now Josh is pretty close to his older brother, so Im feeling a bit more positive tbh I believe being around family that hears everything being said/told,should have a positive effect on Josh

Lets save this discussion, because it may be too soon too.

But yeah, its probably playing w Fire, just like We all knew from the start..

If he can't stay away from his "so called" friends he won't make it. If you play in the gutter you're going to get dirty.

 

[LawFitz]

Does it really matter how many games? We all know he will screw up again very soon and most likely will be out of the league this time next year. This guy can't get out of his own way.

This sure sounds like an outstanding wakeup call! A lot of Football stars talk about supporting their Mom etc. (Josh almost lost that) Now Josh is pretty close to his older brother, so Im feeling a bit more positive tbh I believe being around family that hears everything being said/told,should have a positive effect on Josh

Lets save this discussion, because it may be too soon too.

But yeah, its probably playing w Fire, just like We all knew from the start..

If he can't stay away from his "so called" friends he won't make it. If you play in the gutter you're going to get dirty.

I dunno. There have been plenty of dirty superstars in the this league. One (extremely borderline) fail after 70 passes, tells me he has better odds of turning his ship around than you are projecting.

 

[Sabertooth]

Does it really matter how many games? We all know he will screw up again very soon and most likely will be out of the league this time next year. This guy can't get out of his own way.

This sure sounds like an outstanding wakeup call! A lot of Football stars talk about supporting their Mom etc. (Josh almost lost that) Now Josh is pretty close to his older brother, so Im feeling a bit more positive tbh I believe being around family that hears everything being said/told,should have a positive effect on Josh

Lets save this discussion, because it may be too soon too.

But yeah, its probably playing w Fire, just like We all knew from the start..

If he can't stay away from his "so called" friends he won't make it. If you play in the gutter you're going to get dirty.

I you saying that everyone who smokes pot is dirty? Or is this a racist comment or something? Serious question.

 

[Warhogs]

Does it really matter how many games? We all know he will screw up again very soon and most likely will be out of the league this time next year. This guy can't get out of his own way.

This sure sounds like an outstanding wakeup call! A lot of Football stars talk about supporting their Mom etc. (Josh almost lost that) Now Josh is pretty close to his older brother, so Im feeling a bit more positive tbh I believe being around family that hears everything being said/told,should have a positive effect on Josh

Lets save this discussion, because it may be too soon too.

But yeah, its probably playing w Fire, just like We all knew from the start..

If he can't stay away from his "so called" friends he won't make it. If you play in the gutter you're going to get dirty.

I you saying that everyone who smokes pot is dirty? Or is this a racist comment or something? Serious question.

No need to play the race card here. I think the point being made is if you hang with a circle of friends who actively participate in illegal activities you run a greater risk of running into trouble as well. I can't disagree with that concept.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

Does it really matter how many games? We all know he will screw up again very soon and most likely will be out of the league this time next year. This guy can't get out of his own way.

This sure sounds like an outstanding wakeup call! A lot of Football stars talk about supporting their Mom etc. (Josh almost lost that) Now Josh is pretty close to his older brother, so Im feeling a bit more positive tbh I believe being around family that hears everything being said/told,should have a positive effect on Josh

Lets save this discussion, because it may be too soon too.

But yeah, its probably playing w Fire, just like We all knew from the start..

If he can't stay away from his "so called" friends he won't make it. If you play in the gutter you're going to get dirty.

I you saying that everyone who smokes pot is dirty? Or is this a racist comment or something? Serious question.

I honestly don't think there is an anti-pot crusade here. It is more about breaking rules outlined in the CBA and in conjunction with the stage of the program he is already on. You're not the only one in this thread that has friends that smoke. I'm sure just as many people that are speculating/interpreting the facts as a negative for Gordon are themselves smokers or have plenty of friends/family that are smokers. There is no correlation here to "thinking Gordon will be suspended or will get in trouble again equaling 'I hate weed smokers, etc' "

 

[treat88]

At this point, it seems that unless there was some type of procedural violation, or unless there is a truly compelling second hand exposure argument all the signs point to Gordon being done for the year.

Seems as if much of the conversation has turned to whether the 15ng/dl threshold is reasonable or not rather than the reality of the situation.

16ng/dl and .09...just painfully razor thin margins for Gordon owners to come to grips with...let alone Gordon himself.

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

I'm still incredibly confused. Didn't he piss a 39 his first piss test and then he pissed in container A and container B to validate the very first hot piss test?

yeah We all should consider using links more Personally I do not recall seeing or hearing of any test recorded at 39. Do you recall where you came across that info?

It's been linked in the thread.First he miserably failed the quick and dirty piss test for pot.

He then failed, by a small amount, the 2nd A piss test, which is much more accurate. He petitioned and had the 2nd B piss test done, which not only showed pot (the req is detectable levels) but enough to just barely pass the criteria.

With the standard deviations on all 3 tests, nothing appears to give his camp much hope unless they go for flawed process...

 

[BustedKnuckles]

A source with knowledge of the situation tells Profootballtalk.com there's a "slight chance" Josh Gordon could reach a settlement with the NFL where his one-year suspension is reduced.
Per PFT's Mike Florio, "Any deal presumably would entail a suspension for Gordon that lasts less than a year." This would be much better news for Gordon than the original notion of an "all or nothing" situation in Friday's appeal sitdown with hearing officer Harold Henderson, whereby either the one-year suspension would stand in full, or be erased. (The suspension isn't getting erased, by all accounts.) Florio reports "a ruling is expected fairly soon."

 

[Ditka Butkus]

A source with knowledge of the situation tells Profootballtalk.com there's a "slight chance" Josh Gordon could reach a settlement with the NFL where his one-year suspension is reduced.
Per PFT's Mike Florio, "Any deal presumably would entail a suspension for Gordon that lasts less than a year." This would be much better news for Gordon than the original notion of an "all or nothing" situation in Friday's appeal sitdown with hearing officer Harold Henderson, whereby either the one-year suspension would stand in full, or be erased. (The suspension isn't getting erased, by all accounts.) Florio reports "a ruling is expected fairly soon."

These reports are ridiculous........Of course there is a slight chance......The minute you provide an appeal process there is a chance the outcome can be favorable to the appealer.

 

[dickey moe]

I smell diluted sample

Especially if Gordon ate asparagus.

 

[towney]

From Rotoworld Source: Cleveland.com

A decision on Josh Gordon's year-long suspension appeal is not expected until Monday at soonest.
Gordon is in New York on Friday having his appeal heard by Harold Henderson, but no final decision will be made until commissioner Roger Goodell returns from this weekend's Hall of Fame festivities in Canton, Ohio. "Josh is going through the process right now," Goodell told reporters Friday. "I am not a part of that process. At some point in time, I may have an opportunity to be involved. When I am, I look forward to meeting with him."

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

These reports are ridiculous........Of course there is a slight chance......The minute you provide an appeal process there is a chance the outcome can be favorable to the appealer.

It helps if you add "I hope" or "I want" or "I wish" to about 95% of what Florio reports editorializes.

 

[Shutout]

From Rotoworld Source: Cleveland.com

A decision on Josh Gordon's year-long suspension appeal is not expected until Monday at soonest.
Gordon is in New York on Friday having his appeal heard by Harold Henderson, but no final decision will be made until commissioner Roger Goodell returns from this weekend's Hall of Fame festivities in Canton, Ohio. "Josh is going through the process right now," Goodell told reporters Friday. "I am not a part of that process. At some point in time, I may have an opportunity to be involved. When I am, I look forward to meeting with him."

Pure speculation on my part, but is it possible that Goodell is distancing himself from this? The outcome (relative to Rice) may be a little bit of a media hot potato. Could he be positioning himself as "not involved" on purpose? Maybe I am wrong but it seems he is always a part of the process.

I don't think so. I think its just because there is so much attention about this that we really aren't tuned in to what normally happens. How many of us knew who Harold Henderson is before yesterday, yet he has been a major part of these things for a long time. Also, with the HOF this weekend, that's a big deal for the NFL; mandatory attention needs to be put into that by the commish and the NFL never allows outside issues to dominate their events. They just go on like the person never existed.

 

[Soulfly3]

I bet Gordon was praying the appeal woud end by 4:20

Amiriteguys?

 

[Soulfly3]

Real Talk tho ...

If this meeting is STILL ongoing, Im inclined to believe that they may be ironing out a deal for tonight.

 

[Soulfly3]

@RapSheet 3m
#Browns WR Josh Gordon’s appeals hearing… is still going

 

[jdswan922]

I'm still incredibly confused. Didn't he piss a 39 his first piss test and then he pissed in container A and container B to validate the very first hot piss test?

yeah We all should consider using links more Personally I do not recall seeing or hearing of any test recorded at 39. Do you recall where you came across that info?

It's been linked in the thread.First he miserably failed the quick and dirty piss test for pot.

He then failed, by a small amount, the 2nd A piss test, which is much more accurate. He petitioned and had the 2nd B piss test done, which not only showed pot (the req is detectable levels) but enough to just barely pass the criteria.

With the standard deviations on all 3 tests, nothing appears to give his camp much hope unless they go for flawed process...

The drug policy does not call for this mystery "3rd test". That he allegedly scored a 38 on. It also only has one threshold for THC and that is 15 ng. I would be interested in the source of this other test.

 

[Azhais]

@RapSheet 3m
#Browns WR Josh Gordon’s appeals hearing… is still going

It is my understanding that there is a hearing today, and then they have 5 or 10 days to actually come back with the verdict. I'd honestly be shocked if there's any decision one way or the other until after the HoF weekend just because the NFL wouldn't want the distraction during their ceremony.

 

[Soulfly3]

@RapSheet 3m
#Browns WR Josh Gordon’s appeals hearing… is still going

It is my understanding that there is a hearing today, and then they have 5 or 10 days to actually come back with the verdict. I'd honestly be shocked if there's any decision one way or the other until after the HoF weekend just because the NFL wouldn't want the distraction during their ceremony.

they can give a verdict as early as today.

or anytime within a "reasonable time frame"

 

[grateful zed]

Who posted in: Baylor WR Josh Gordon
Member name Posts
Soulfly3 373
cstu 186
amnesiac 130
Bracie Smathers 119
Chaka 109
Ditka Butkus 107
BustedKnuckles 96
Adam Harstad 88
Faust 86
ROYALWITCHEESE 86

 

[Soulfly3]

And every single one will be worth it, very shortly

 

[MAC_32]

No matter the result, this thread will be a train wreck.

 

[Sabertooth]

No matter the result, this thread will be a train wreck.

quite a prediction considering it's been a train wreck for month.

 

[Dismattle]

Does it really matter how many games? We all know he will screw up again very soon and most likely will be out of the league this time next year. This guy can't get out of his own way.

This sure sounds like an outstanding wakeup call! A lot of Football stars talk about supporting their Mom etc. (Josh almost lost that) Now Josh is pretty close to his older brother, so Im feeling a bit more positive tbh I believe being around family that hears everything being said/told,should have a positive effect on Josh

Lets save this discussion, because it may be too soon too.

But yeah, its probably playing w Fire, just like We all knew from the start..

If he can't stay away from his "so called" friends he won't make it. If you play in the gutter you're going to get dirty.

Im not sure I can truthfully argue the point in regards to friends in so far as the immediate future. I mean this could be part of his "sentencing" No involvement w THC/Alcohol for the rest of the yr.

Now if you play anywhere, you can get dirty (Mayors for example)

Basically I believe we have read differing amt of posts, and whatnot. Because my view of Gordon has changed for the better...

 

[MAC_32]

No matter the result, this thread will be a train wreck.

quite a prediction considering it's been a train wreck for month.

just a month? You're generous.

 

[Soulfly3]

The Gordon case is less cut and dried, and a bit more compelling than some here want to believe.

There was more than one occasion where Gordon's A and B sample were substantially different in the lab world.

Those close to the case are calling it rather compelling, take it for what it's worth.

Could he still be gone for the year, yes. However, it is not the slam dunk some are making it out to be, and he may get, nothing.

Souflly...did you ever find that link???? This is potentially critical info. I would like to see the source so we can see who said it, just in case it is from a credible source versus some ######## blogger or clown making up stuff on a message board

Im on my cell, but Im pretty sure its on one of the previous pages... I think I posted it. If not, ill find it when I get home