WR Josh Gordon, KC (2 Viewers)

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Reading "Ray Rice" in this thread makes me want to have Albert Haynesworth stomp on my face with his cleats.

 

[Coach3K]

I sense a few more "vacations" coming to this thread soon. Some people apparently skipped right to the last page and missed the warnings.

Either way, please don't get it locked, which is what's going to happen if people keep defying Mod's specific directions.

Thanks.

 

[biju]

Now its a beat down, did you see the video? He clearly hit her as he admitted it and he will pay his dues as he should, but I also do not think one bad mistake makes a bad person. Rice looked like he is sorry for his mistake, is Gordon sorry for all of his? Its about lessons learned which is the point of penalties both jail, financial and suspensions. Did Rice learn his lesson? It remains to be seen but maybe 2 games is all it will take to get to him. We have already seen that Gordon does not learn his lesson and that's why his suspension will be longer.

200 million, really? You are so disingenuous this isn't even worth discussing with you anymore.

I don't think anyone is arguing whether Rice is sorry for his mistake. I think the general opinion of people who want a stiffer penalty for Rice than Gordon is Gordon is only affecting himself with his pot smoking. Rice certainly affected more than his life with his mistake.

In my opinion, under-penalizing Rice is setting the wrong standard the NFL should expect from its employees, period, and perhaps (unfairly) it sends the message the NFL doesn't care about this type of abuse. Or, that it cares more about a non-performance enhancing drug over somebody's well-being.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I am not letting Gordon off the hook. I just believe that one public wife beatdown is worth about 200 million pot smoking violations.

No rational person would argue otherwise. Unfortunately that's not the issue here and Rice and Gordon have nothing to do with each other.

 

[montana_grizzly_bears]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

 

[amnesiac]

I am not letting Gordon off the hook. I just believe that one public wife beatdown is worth about 200 million pot smoking violations.

No rational person would argue otherwise. Unfortunately that's not the issue here and Rice and Gordon have nothing to do with each other.

exactly. i agree it's going to rub a lot of people the wrong way, but they are separate cases and will have no impact on each other. going back and forth on this tangent doesn't seem productive.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Whether you like Goodell or not, he's not a dumb man and had to know that the length of suspension he wound up giving to Rice was not going to be met with much applause. The fact is though that with Goodell's law background, on matter where there is CBA mandate and precedent, I would suspect that he would choose to err on the side of that. The only area of wiggle room that Gordon has is the two separate samples from the same test having irregularities. But I would be shocked if Goodell much cared about the juxtaposition of Rice's suspension with Gordon's.

 

[biju]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

 

[FBG Moderator]

Don't want to lose worthwhile conversation, but if you quote posts where people are throwing insults around as just happened, the only way to get that stuff out of here is to delete your post too, or edit your post. Would rather not get into editing others posts.

So please, don't include that stuff if you're quoting someone. Thanks all.

 

[NJ]

Reading "Ray Rice" in this thread makes me want to have Albert Haynesworth stomp on my face with his cleats.

Ironically, stomping on a guys face with your cleats also does not get you as long of a suspension as smoking weed does.

 

[montana_grizzly_bears]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Reading "Ray Rice" in this thread makes me want to have Albert Haynesworth stomp on my face with his cleats.

Ironically, stomping on a guys face with your cleats also does not get you as long of a suspension as smoking weed does.

This isn't Josh's 1st time, its his 4th that we know of

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Whether you like Goodell or not, he's not a dumb man and had to know that the length of suspension he wound up giving to Rice was not going to be met with much applause. The fact is though that with Goodell's law background, on matter where there is CBA mandate and precedent, I would suspect that he would choose to err on the side of that. The only area of wiggle room that Gordon has is the two separate samples from the same test having irregularities. But I would be shocked if Goodell much cared about the juxtaposition of Rice's suspension with Gordon's.

 

[Bayhawks]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."

Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

 

[Shutout]

Reading "Ray Rice" in this thread makes me want to have Albert Haynesworth stomp on my face with his cleats.

Ironically, stomping on a guys face with your cleats also does not get you as long of a suspension as smoking weed does.

I guess there's not actual Josh Gordon news going on, huh?

But since I'm here. How is it that there are still people in this thread that don't understand that Gordon's issue is about repeated offences and not a single episode?

This is like saying you're mad at the wife because she won't buy the kid a goldfish. "It's only a gold fish, honey." But what you ignore is that the wife has told you that she has bought the kid four goldfish in the last year and the kid keeps feeding them to the cat. At some point, a small thing becomes a big thing when it is repeatedly ignored by those setting the rules.

FWIW, I thought the cleat stomping incident was borderline criminal and he should have been out, period. He maimed a guy. Left scars on him for life and could have gouged his eye out, slashed his throat, or killed him. And he did it purposely. You smoke dope or do drugs, you hurt yourself (maybe others also, but that's what the police are for). You go domestic violence on your spouse, same deal. You use a piece of football equipment as a weapon on the field of play, somebody should step in and say "that's not what we are about." That's no small thing with no victim.

 

[montana_grizzly_bears]

I misread. I always thought there were guidelines that were written into the player conduct portion that Goodell would use to hand out punishments. My main point was that the situations are not similar at all and that Gordon has been in trouble before and is being penalized based on the CBA that was negotiated for him by his union whereas Rice is being penalized based on no prior history (that we know) and on what Goodell knows about the CBA.

 

[Hu-Tang Clan]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."

Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Whether you like Goodell or not, he's not a dumb man and had to know that the length of suspension he wound up giving to Rice was not going to be met with much applause. The fact is though that with Goodell's law background, on matter where there is CBA mandate and precedent, I would suspect that he would choose to err on the side of that. The only area of wiggle room that Gordon has is the two separate samples from the same test having irregularities. But I would be shocked if Goodell much cared about the juxtaposition of Rice's suspension with Gordon's.

Building on what I said here, in addition to the area of exposure the NFL has with the sample irregularities, I also think the NFL might have some exposure with regard to their re-assessment of their stance on marijuana. If rumors are true, then if they were to reconsider their punitive measures within the next 12-24 months, might there be some exposure to litigation from Gordon at a later date for wages lost due to the fact that he was punished right before a drastic policy shift considering how strict the guidelines are right now to what rumors we're starting to hear about potential health benefits relating to pain management,.

Part of the negotiation might be a binding stipulation that prohibits Gordon from taking this course of action.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

Reading "Ray Rice" in this thread makes me want to have Albert Haynesworth stomp on my face with his cleats.

Ironically, stomping on a guys face with your cleats also does not get you as long of a suspension as smoking weed does.

I guess there's not actual Josh Gordon news going on, huh?But since I'm here. How is it that there are still people in this thread that don't understand that Gordon's issue is about repeated offences and not a single episode?

This is like saying you're mad at the wife because she won't buy the kid a goldfish. "It's only a gold fish, honey." But what you ignore is that the wife has told you that she has bought the kid four goldfish in the last year and the kid keeps feeding them to the cat. At some point, a small thing becomes a big thing when it is repeatedly ignored by those setting the rules.

FWIW, I thought the cleat stomping incident was borderline criminal and he should have been out, period. He maimed a guy. Left scars on him for life and could have gouged his eye out, slashed his throat, or killed him. And he did it purposely. You smoke dope or do drugs, you hurt yourself (maybe others also, but that's what the police are for). You go domestic violence on your spouse, same deal. You use a piece of football equipment as a weapon on the field of play, somebody should step in and say "that's not what we are about." That's no small thing with no victim.

Good posting... The victim in the ray rice and Albert haynesworth incidents were not in fact ray rice or Albert haynesworth... Josh Gordon was, however, his own victim

 

[JamesTheScot]

it seems Goodell has painted himself into a corner with the Rice suspension. I don't see how the league can give Gordon a year long suspension and still come out looking like they don't condone domestic violence, at least to some extent.

Simple, this was Rices first issue, this is not Gordons first. You see now?

I see were you are going, but it doesn't change the odd dynamic.

I think we can agree that neither smoking pot nor beating a woman is performance enhancing in any way. So the league's interest in both cases is merely in the marketing of the league and the presentation of players as role models.

Given that, it is ridiculous that the league punishes repeated marijuana use worse than it does physical violence like Rice perpetrated.

Gordon is an idiot for not being able to put the bong away with so much at stake. But the league isn't punishing him because he's ####### generally. It punishes for very specific types of behavior. So the league absolutely IS saying that repeated use of marijuana and IIRC the perfectly legal consumption of cough medicine is 8 times worse than knocking your girlfriend the #### out.

The craziness is that the DUI is a much more serious concern from a public safety perspective and it's just a footnote to the drug test failures.

 

[ghostguy123]

Rice didnt slap a woman.

You're right, he didn't. He knocked her unconscious.

I haven't seen the video of him hitting her, have you?

lol.

I didnt see the video of Hernandez capping people, have you?

It's simple. Rice's suspension is less because it was a one time thing, not a repeated pattern of breaking a rule. It looks bad, and it IS VERY DUMB, but that just happens to be the way it is for now.

Stuff like this is why laws and rules change as time goes on. The weed rules in the NFL will be changed drastically in the coming years, I would bet a lot of money on that.

Unfortunately for Gordon and people in the real world, if you got in trouble in the past for something that USED to be illegal, you are still in trouble cause it was illegal at the time.

MAYBE the NFL will grow a brain and immediately stop all this nonsense about coming down on weed like it is worse than beating your wife, but you know they wont do it.

I agree with whoever said 200 million pot violations is much better than jacking your wife out cold. If you dont agree, something is wrong with you.

 

[Ojaays]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

Yes, he tested positive for codene, which he produced a prescription for.

Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

 

[montana_grizzly_bears]

Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

I do wonder if that is being brought up by his legal team as part negotiation as to what will happen if this suspension is reduced how will any punishment from the DUI incident be impacted.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

Yes, he tested positive for codene, which he produced a prescription for.

Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

Did we ever get a confirmation on this?

 

[Warhogs]

I sure hope we hear something soon. I'm getting tired of coming to this thread to find several new pages of no new information.

 

[amnesiac]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

Yes, he tested positive for codene, which he produced a prescription for.Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

Did we ever get a confirmation on this?

i could be wrong but i thought technically it's all confidential and all we know is what Gordon's side told the media. as a side note, i doubt it would be difficult to find someone to write Gordon a prescription after the fact.

 

[Ojaays]

ProFootballTalk ‏ @ ProFootballTalk 1m

Josh Gordon's appeal hearing has concluded, per league source. The substance-abuse policy requires a ruling within a "reasonable time."

 

[karmarooster]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

Yes, he tested positive for codene, which he produced a prescription for.

Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

Did we ever get a confirmation on this?

(1) do you seriously think people would be up in arms defending Rice if he got a full year ban for beating his wife in the face? I don't.

(2) why are the suspensions by rice and gordon irrelevant to each other? Of course they are relevant to each other. If the judicial penalty for murder is 6 years through some sort of 'good behavior' reduction, and the judicial penalty for possession of 1 pound of LSD with the intent to distribute is 60 years because that same defendant had a previous DUI, without the opportunity for early parole... obviously they are relevant to each other.

(3) if you're the kind of person that buys into the 'multiple offense' thing for Gordon, then you should also be the kind of person that buys into the 3 strikes and you're out policy that we saw in CA lead to the long-term imprisonment of non-violent offenders. You can't simply add up non-violent offenses and have them equal a violent offense if you want to have any fairness in sentencing.

You're point is obviously in connection to the CBA, and it's the letter of the law. That doesn't stop people from pointing out when it results in idiotic suspensions.

 

[Ojaays]

# Browns CB Joe Haden on Josh Gordon being on field: "It's always special. When Josh is out there it's like LeBron came back."

 

[Ojaays]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

Yes, he tested positive for codene, which he produced a prescription for.

Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

Did we ever get a confirmation on this?

(1) do you seriously think people would be up in arms defending Rice if he got a full year ban for beating his wife in the face? I don't.

(2) why are the suspensions by rice and gordon irrelevant to each other? Of course they are relevant to each other. If the judicial penalty for murder is 6 years and the judicial penalty for possession of 1 pound of LSD with the intent to distribute is 60 years because that same defendant had a previous DUI... obviously they are relevant to each other.

(3) if you're the kind of person that buys into the 'multiple offense' thing for Gordon, then you should also be the kind of person that buys into the 3 strikes and you're out policy that we saw in CA lead to the long-term imprisonment of non-violent offenders. You can't simply add up non-violent offenses and have them equal a violent offense if you want to have any fairness in sentencing.

You're point is obviously in connection to the CBA, and it's the letter of the law. That doesn't stop people from pointing out when it results in idiotic suspensions.

While it might be an issue the media would have a field day with, I'm quite sure the Rice suspension has Zero influence on how the arbitrator will rule here, and let's remember , it's the arbitrator ruling, not Goodell.

 

[Sabertooth]

Still nothing?

 

[Azhais]

Still nothing?

Most people think that we won't hear anything today. Wouldn't surprise me if it goes most of the week without news, but one can hope.

That fieldandcourt lawyer guy has another post on the likely outcome of a guilty verdict:

http://fieldandcourt.com/component/k2/item/246-what-to-expect-if-josh-gordon-loses-his-appeal.html

Basically pulling out the Pat Williams case and how the NFL testing procedures conflict with Ohio law, so even if Gordon is suspended it might well go to court (putting the suspension on hold) and two years from now get thrown out.

 

[Chaka]

I think the NFL likes to drop unpopular news when fewer people are watching, and preferably hidden by a bigger story, so I wouldn't expect to hear anything until late Friday or Saturday.

 

[amnesiac]

Still nothing?

Most people think that we won't hear anything today. Wouldn't surprise me if it goes most of the week without news, but one can hope.

That fieldandcourt lawyer guy has another post on the likely outcome of a guilty verdict:

http://fieldandcourt.com/component/k2/item/246-what-to-expect-if-josh-gordon-loses-his-appeal.html

Basically pulling out the Pat Williams case and how the NFL testing procedures conflict with Ohio law, so even if Gordon is suspended it might well go to court (putting the suspension on hold) and two years from now get thrown out.

interesting. what I can recall, the Williams case was for PEDs? something he took was similar to a masking agent.

also that would have been under the old CBA.

but who knows? IF they can find a legal ground to hold up the decision, that would be a win of sorts.

 

[amnesiac]

I think the NFL likes to drop unpopular news when fewer people are watching, and preferably hidden by a bigger story, so I wouldn't expect to hear anything until late Friday or Saturday.

most of the suspensions have been announced on Fridays, yes?

 

[lod01]

A lot of being devoured in this thread and it looks like we have to wait another week or 2. What a circus.

 

[Ojaays]

Still nothing?

Most people think that we won't hear anything today. Wouldn't surprise me if it goes most of the week without news, but one can hope.

That fieldandcourt lawyer guy has another post on the likely outcome of a guilty verdict:

http://fieldandcourt.com/component/k2/item/246-what-to-expect-if-josh-gordon-loses-his-appeal.html

Basically pulling out the Pat Williams case and how the NFL testing procedures conflict with Ohio law, so even if Gordon is suspended it might well go to court (putting the suspension on hold) and two years from now get thrown out.

Damn, I love the law.

The only thing missing from this is the OJ dream jury.

Gordon plays in 2014, and probably 2015, while it's tied up in the courts. Lol

 

[Ojaays]

Here's my favorite part:

The NFL will attempt to circumvent Ohio law by arguing only federal law applies to the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Substance Abuse Policy. This is a preemption doctrine that will effectively wipe out Gordon's state-law claims. The NFL attempted this argument against Kevin and Pat Williams in the StarCaps case and lost.

Federal courts have already found that the NFL is an employer of each NFL player and therefore is bound by the state laws where that player is employed. So Ohio courts should ultimately decide the case and Ohio law should control the outcome of the case.

 

[Ojaays]

Time to bump Gordon in the draft dominator cheat sheet?

 

[amnesiac]

well there may be a chance he has redraft value.

dynasty, still don't regret selling him.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Seems like opening a Pandora's box if either side that doesn't like a ruling under the CBA can go to a state where the law is different and have the CBA thrown out there.

 

[amnesiac]

Seems like opening a Pandora's box if either side that doesn't like a ruling under the CBA can go to a state where the law is different and have the CBA thrown out there.

agree to an extent, but Gordon's not going anywhere. he is employed in Ohio, and likely has residency there as well.

 

[Ojaays]

Seems like opening a Pandora's box if either side that doesn't like a ruling under the CBA can go to a state where the law is different and have the CBA thrown out

Has to be in the state they play.

 

[KellysHeroes]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

Yes, he tested positive for codene, which he produced a prescription for.Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

Going 67 in a 65 is still speeding, blowing a .09 is still DWI and a 16 whatever is still testing positive in the NFL. These are little things but when u have a rap sheet and have used up your 3 strikes already you have to follow the rules and swallow your crow.

 

[Sabertooth]

I think the issue with Rice is that there is nothing else on his record and Goodell is bound by the contract to hand down x amount of games for each offense. In this case whether Rice should have gotten more or not is irrelevant based on what Goodell has given to Gordon. They are 2 different offenses that cannot be compared. The situations are completely different. How many people would have flown off the hook for Rice being a first time offender and getting a full season suspension for it. Instead of 110 pages of Josh Gordon we would have 110 pages of Ray Rice. I do not agree with the either suspension (Rice being to short and Gordon being to long, but that doesn't matter). The only thing that matters is the language of the CBA.

I could be wrong, but I think this is only the case for testing positive for drugs. From a personal conduct policy I think this is not as set in stone.

Don't forget the Codien last year and the failed tests in college put him the program. True this is the first positive for "drugs" the codien is a banned substance all the same.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to "this" being that Goodell has to give "X amount of games."Goodell DOES NOT have a specific consequence for violations of the personal conduct policy under the CBA, where there is a specific consequence for each violation of the banned substance policy. That was your mistake he was correcting, not that he was implying that Gordon has only 1 positive test for drugs.

From what I understand, he had the positive test for codeine, but also one other test that we weren't aware of until recently, then this most recent failed test (plus all the issues from college).

Plus didn't he just get a DUI using someone else's vehicle about a month or so ago?

Yes, he tested positive for codene, which he produced a prescription for.Yes, he has been charged with a DWI( blew a .09, limit was .08).

It is largely understood, the DWI has nothing to do with this hearing as it has not been adjudicated yet.

Going 67 in a 65 is still speeding, blowing a .09 is still DWI and a 16 whatever is still testing positive in the NFL. These are little things but when u have a rap sheet and have used up your 3 strikes already you have to follow the rules and swallow your crow.

Not if you are an awesome player you don't.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot 46s
Source said #Browns Josh Gordon expecting a decision on suspension appeal in one to three weeks.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

 

[Azhais]

Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot 46s
Source said #Browns Josh Gordon expecting a decision on suspension appeal in one to three weeks.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Finally the proof we need that the rapture happened and we've all been left behind

 

[Ojaays]

Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot 46s

Source said #Browns Josh Gordon expecting a decision on suspension appeal in one to three weeks.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

WTH? Why is this going to take that long?

It's an inside joke, you have to know Mary Kay

 

[cstu]

Really hurts his chances of starting week 1 next year. Even if he does he'll have had a year off and missed all of training camp.

 

[mvereb]

Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot 46s
Source said #Browns Josh Gordon expecting a decision on suspension appeal in one to three weeks.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

WTH? Why is this going to take that long?

Maybe the NFL is waiting to see if Gordon will 'slip up' again?