Gawain
Footballguy
These odds seem a little high to me.and somewhere between 50-75% that he gets through the entire decision before it's decided.
These odds seem a little high to me.and somewhere between 50-75% that he gets through the entire decision before it's decided.
1st of all, I like the post, good summary of where we are at, a nice POV about how you feel as well, the only thing I would like to add or counter is that 50-75% is a bit high and if it is exactly as you say, he is an absolute must grab or steal after the 2nd or 3rd round basically, I cannot imagine that Goodell is gonna back down or off his stance but then again he only suspended Rice for 2 games and I thought there was a chance for the NFL which makes the players wear pink the entire month of October, it gave them a real opportunity to step up and hammer down on this type of behavior, and we all saw how that turned out.Not sure if this has been discussed ad nauseam here or not, but this thing is almost certainly going to court if the NFL rules any sort of suspension. With the possibility of a suit being filed hours after the suspension is announced, it makes sense that the NFL take their time and do their due diligence before this whole thing hits the fan. It also explains why Gordon has been reluctant to have settlement talks with the league. Why take a reduced suspension if you think you can beat any sort of suspension in court? It also then forces the league into an all-or-nothing decision, which puts them in a uncomfortable position with the public perception. All in all, I'd bet Gordon suits up for week one while the case is being fought in court, and somewhere between 50-75% that he gets through the entire decision before it's decided.
Updated it for more accuracy. I'm sure others will too. My guess is either an 8 game suspension. If he does get suspended, I agree that Suh and team will take this to state court and likely win, leaving Gordon to play the entire year as there is no way the case will be heard during the 2014-2015 NFL season.Let's just go over the list and correct me where I'm wrong.
-Missed a year in college.
-Already on the substance abuse policy/plan even before he was drafted. [supposedly entered the league in Stage 1]
-Supposedly failed drug test for marijuana in first year (never reported, but this moved him to Stage 2)
-Failed drug test with Codine Cough Syrup and moved to Stage 3
-Has been pulled over with marijauna in the car[he was never charged with possession, so this is a moot point to the case]
-Passed 70 drug tests over a 7 month period while in Stage 3
-Failedtheone NFL drug test however you want to slice it.
16 game season? less than 5%
14 game season? less than 10%
10-12 game season? 35%
8 game season or less? 50%
This is a great question. Granted I haven't studied this as much as others in this thread, but I can't find anything showing an arbitrator taking 3 weeks to make a decision. To go along with this question, I would also like to have an idea of what "a reasonable amount of time" means as that is the duration of time for an arbitrator to make a decision.Where you are wrong according to all reports is that there is an option between 0 games suspended and 16. Every single outlet has been in agreement on there being no settlement talks.
So given how long this has been going on...
0 games suspended 10% chance
16 games suspended 90% chance
Legal appeal of arbitrator decision if 16-game suspension - 100%
NFL delaying suspension pending outcome of legal appeal - ???
The last question is really the only question to me. Is there precedent here?
They delayed the enforcement of the suspension, but the decision came down very shortly after the appeal. The delay was due to it going to state/federal court.NFL did delay suspension in StarCaps case pending legal appeal. So I think Gordon plays 2014.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/02/starcaps-suspensions-finally-are-finalized/The suspensions were delayed due to litigation filed initially by all four players. Eventually, Pat and Kevin Williams were able to fashion theories under Minnesota law that blocked the suspensions pending the resolution of their lawsuit. The league opted not to impose the suspensions against Smith and Grant while the Williams case proceeded.
this is the only way he plays imo. people with money can do lots of interesting things utilizing the American court system.NFL did delay suspension in StarCaps case pending legal appeal. So I think Gordon plays 2014.
If true, how is any player suspended, ever. How does any player ever serve a suspension when lawyers can just keep firing stuff at the league.this is the only way he plays imo.people with money can do lots of interesting things utilizing the American court system.NFL did delay suspension in StarCaps case pending legal appeal. So I think Gordon plays 2014.
What percentage of players make enough money (or will have the potential to make a lot of money) to support a family AND potentially rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees? 5%? 10%? Plus, what percent of this small sample size of players are actually in trouble where they need top legal protection? Maybe 1%? It's a unique case where top earning players can afford to fight the league.If true, how is any player suspended, ever. How does any player ever serve a suspension when lawyers can just keep firing stuff at the league.this is the only way he plays imo.people with money can do lots of interesting things utilizing the American court system.NFL did delay suspension in StarCaps case pending legal appeal. So I think Gordon plays 2014.
not saying it's likely, just that this is the only scenario in which i see Gordon playing this year.If true, how is any player suspended, ever. How does any player ever serve a suspension when lawyers can just keep firing stuff at the league.this is the only way he plays imo.people with money can do lots of interesting things utilizing the American court system.NFL did delay suspension in StarCaps case pending legal appeal. So I think Gordon plays 2014.
PRoFootballTalk article early this week said don't be surprised if this is decided via a settlementWhere you are wrong according to all reports is that there is an option between 0 games suspended and 16. Every single outlet has been in agreement on there being no settlement talks.
So given how long this has been going on...
0 games suspended 10% chance
16 games suspended 90% chance
Legal appeal of arbitrator decision if 16-game suspension - 100%
NFL delaying suspension pending outcome of legal appeal - ???
The last question is really the only question to me. Is there precedent here?
They've also (as well as every other insider in the country) said that zero talks have been initiated by either party. As I said in another post earlier today, I wouldn't be shocked if the NFL is delaying the situation hoping that Gordon's attorneys approach them about a reduced settlement. Because they probably don't want to actually suspend him all 16 games, but they also don't want to let him walk scott free. So they're probably praying that Gordon's attorney's come in and say "How about a 4 game ban?" and then they can settle on 6 or 8. That's my personal opinion, not something I read somewhere. It's just something I feel makes a lot of sense for a reason to intentionally delay this whole thing. Otherwise, I really can't find a reasoning for the decision taking this long.PRoFootballTalk article early this week said don't be surprised if this is decided via a settlementWhere you are wrong according to all reports is that there is an option between 0 games suspended and 16. Every single outlet has been in agreement on there being no settlement talks.
So given how long this has been going on...
0 games suspended 10% chance
16 games suspended 90% chance
Legal appeal of arbitrator decision if 16-game suspension - 100%
NFL delaying suspension pending outcome of legal appeal - ???
The last question is really the only question to me. Is there precedent here?
Both specimens did test positive. The 'B' test fell under the NFL's specified limit but it was still positive.Gordon's legal case, as I understand it, would be that the NFL's drug testing policies violate Ohio employer law. Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” As everyone knows, Gordon's A cup tested over the limits, while his B cup tested under. Under Ohio law, this must cause a passing result. Precedence has already been set that the NFL, as the employer of every player, must abide by state laws where each player is employed. Whether or not Gordon can actually win this case is up in the air, but, I think it's strong enough to, at the very least, provide him with an injunction against the league that causes him to suit up. If it takes long enough--the Williams played two years for Minnesota before eventually serving their suspension--he should be able to suit up for all sixteen games.
DISCLAIMER: I picked Gordon in the seventh round of my 16-teamer two weeks ago.
Also, I realized now that I made a typo on my original post. I said I feel it's between fifty and seventy-five percent that he make it through the entire "decision" before it's decided. What I meant to say was that I think it's 50-75% that he makes it through the season. These court battles can potentially drag out for a very long time, a lot longer than the four months the season takes place.
Is tomorrow definite or just speculation?See you guys tomorrow
Xo
This is part of the Ohio Administrative code, which are rules and regulations promulgated by the state agencies of Ohio. This particular code deals with state agencies, and businesses who elect to participate in the state's drug-free workplace program; it DOES NOT apply to all businesses/individuals in the state of Ohio.Gordon's legal case, as I understand it, would be that the NFL's drug testing policies violate Ohio employer law. Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” As everyone knows, Gordon's A cup tested over the limits, while his B cup tested under. Under Ohio law, this must cause a passing result. Precedence has already been set that the NFL, as the employer of every player, must abide by state laws where each player is employed. Whether or not Gordon can actually win this case is up in the air, but, I think it's strong enough to, at the very least, provide him with an injunction against the league that causes him to suit up. If it takes long enough--the Williams played two years for Minnesota before eventually serving their suspension--he should be able to suit up for all sixteen games.
DISCLAIMER: I picked Gordon in the seventh round of my 16-teamer two weeks ago.
Also, I realized now that I made a typo on my original post. I said I feel it's between fifty and seventy-five percent that he make it through the entire "decision" before it's decided. What I meant to say was that I think it's 50-75% that he makes it through the season. These court battles can potentially drag out for a very long time, a lot longer than the four months the season takes place.
So far, tomorrow has come every single day.Is tomorrow definite or just speculation?See you guys tomorrow
Xo
Really... you can't see any single way that he's suspended for any games?i just can't see any way he doesn't play every game in 2014.
that's a logical inference from what i said, yes.Really... you can't see any single way that he's suspended for any games?i just can't see any way he doesn't play every game in 2014.
Oh - maybe you haven't heard - he's been suspended for every game in 2014.i just can't see any way he doesn't play every game in 2014.
No, the logical inference is that you're fishing.that's a logical inference from what i said, yes.Really... you can't see any single way that he's suspended for any games?i just can't see any way he doesn't play every game in 2014.
Haven't been here for about a year. Man, I remembered why I was turned off. This whole exchange is garbage. This place has really went down the crapper and has been circling the sewage plant for years. Love the podcasts, the forums are a waste of time!No, the logical inference is that you're fishing.that's a logical inference from what i said, yes.Really... you can't see any single way that he's suspended for any games?i just can't see any way he doesn't play every game in 2014.
I don't want to say you're wrong, but from my understanding, any business in the state pursuing that participates in drug testing is automatically a part of the Ohio Drug Free Workplace Program. I don't believe it is some special, higher-standard program, but a program to set standards for all business drug testing in the state.Bayhawks said:This is part of the Ohio Administrative code, which are rules and regulations promulgated by the state agencies of Ohio. This particular code deals with state agencies, and businesses who elect to participate in the state's drug-free workplace program; it DOES NOT apply to all businesses/individuals in the state of Ohio.The Dynasty said:Gordon's legal case, as I understand it, would be that the NFL's drug testing policies violate Ohio employer law. Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” As everyone knows, Gordon's A cup tested over the limits, while his B cup tested under. Under Ohio law, this must cause a passing result. Precedence has already been set that the NFL, as the employer of every player, must abide by state laws where each player is employed. Whether or not Gordon can actually win this case is up in the air, but, I think it's strong enough to, at the very least, provide him with an injunction against the league that causes him to suit up. If it takes long enough--the Williams played two years for Minnesota before eventually serving their suspension--he should be able to suit up for all sixteen games.
DISCLAIMER: I picked Gordon in the seventh round of my 16-teamer two weeks ago.
Also, I realized now that I made a typo on my original post. I said I feel it's between fifty and seventy-five percent that he make it through the entire "decision" before it's decided. What I meant to say was that I think it's 50-75% that he makes it through the season. These court battles can potentially drag out for a very long time, a lot longer than the four months the season takes place.
So unless the Browns voluntarily participated in this DFWP, this code does not apply to Gordon. This particular legal strategy hasn't gotten much play. From what I can find, it has been discussed in only 2 places: the original article, where the author claims it is a foregone conclusion that Gordon won't be suspended, and (according to this thread) from an "insider" site that I don't have access to, who used the original article as it's only source. You would think that if this was a legitimate legal option, two things would have happened by now:
1-Gordon's legal team would have already pursued this course of action. If it is such a slam-dunk that the NFL policy violates Ohio law, why aren't the pursuing (or at least publicizing) this avenue?
2-This would have been discussed by ALL the major sports sites: ESPN, SI, CBS, NFL network, etc.
Also, I'm assuming the precedent you are referring to is the Williams' case? If so, you are mistaken. The state Supreme Court dismissed the Williams' appeal, asserting that they had not grounds on which to appeal the NFL's policy/suspension.
It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.I don't want to say you're wrong, but from my understanding, any business in the state pursuing that participates in drug testing is automatically a part of the Ohio Drug Free Workplace Program. I don't believe it is some special, higher-standard program, but a program to set standards for all business drug testing in the state.Bayhawks said:This is part of the Ohio Administrative code, which are rules and regulations promulgated by the state agencies of Ohio. This particular code deals with state agencies, and businesses who elect to participate in the state's drug-free workplace program; it DOES NOT apply to all businesses/individuals in the state of Ohio.The Dynasty said:Gordon's legal case, as I understand it, would be that the NFL's drug testing policies violate Ohio employer law. Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” As everyone knows, Gordon's A cup tested over the limits, while his B cup tested under. Under Ohio law, this must cause a passing result. Precedence has already been set that the NFL, as the employer of every player, must abide by state laws where each player is employed. Whether or not Gordon can actually win this case is up in the air, but, I think it's strong enough to, at the very least, provide him with an injunction against the league that causes him to suit up. If it takes long enough--the Williams played two years for Minnesota before eventually serving their suspension--he should be able to suit up for all sixteen games.
DISCLAIMER: I picked Gordon in the seventh round of my 16-teamer two weeks ago.
Also, I realized now that I made a typo on my original post. I said I feel it's between fifty and seventy-five percent that he make it through the entire "decision" before it's decided. What I meant to say was that I think it's 50-75% that he makes it through the season. These court battles can potentially drag out for a very long time, a lot longer than the four months the season takes place.
So unless the Browns voluntarily participated in this DFWP, this code does not apply to Gordon. This particular legal strategy hasn't gotten much play. From what I can find, it has been discussed in only 2 places: the original article, where the author claims it is a foregone conclusion that Gordon won't be suspended, and (according to this thread) from an "insider" site that I don't have access to, who used the original article as it's only source. You would think that if this was a legitimate legal option, two things would have happened by now:
1-Gordon's legal team would have already pursued this course of action. If it is such a slam-dunk that the NFL policy violates Ohio law, why aren't the pursuing (or at least publicizing) this avenue?
2-This would have been discussed by ALL the major sports sites: ESPN, SI, CBS, NFL network, etc.
Also, I'm assuming the precedent you are referring to is the Williams' case? If so, you are mistaken. The state Supreme Court dismissed the Williams' appeal, asserting that they had not grounds on which to appeal the NFL's policy/suspension.
You are incorrect, as far as I can tell. Employers in Ohio can choose to participate in the Drug-Free workplace program, they are not required to do so. I seriously doubt that the Browns would be allowed by the NFL to participate in a program that would supersede their CBA.I don't want to say you're wrong, but from my understanding, any business in the state pursuing that participates in drug testing is automatically a part of the Ohio Drug Free Workplace Program. I don't believe it is some special, higher-standard program, but a program to set standards for all business drug testing in the state.Bayhawks said:This is part of the Ohio Administrative code, which are rules and regulations promulgated by the state agencies of Ohio. This particular code deals with state agencies, and businesses who elect to participate in the state's drug-free workplace program; it DOES NOT apply to all businesses/individuals in the state of Ohio.The Dynasty said:Gordon's legal case, as I understand it, would be that the NFL's drug testing policies violate Ohio employer law. Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” As everyone knows, Gordon's A cup tested over the limits, while his B cup tested under. Under Ohio law, this must cause a passing result. Precedence has already been set that the NFL, as the employer of every player, must abide by state laws where each player is employed. Whether or not Gordon can actually win this case is up in the air, but, I think it's strong enough to, at the very least, provide him with an injunction against the league that causes him to suit up. If it takes long enough--the Williams played two years for Minnesota before eventually serving their suspension--he should be able to suit up for all sixteen games.
DISCLAIMER: I picked Gordon in the seventh round of my 16-teamer two weeks ago.
Also, I realized now that I made a typo on my original post. I said I feel it's between fifty and seventy-five percent that he make it through the entire "decision" before it's decided. What I meant to say was that I think it's 50-75% that he makes it through the season. These court battles can potentially drag out for a very long time, a lot longer than the four months the season takes place.
So unless the Browns voluntarily participated in this DFWP, this code does not apply to Gordon. This particular legal strategy hasn't gotten much play. From what I can find, it has been discussed in only 2 places: the original article, where the author claims it is a foregone conclusion that Gordon won't be suspended, and (according to this thread) from an "insider" site that I don't have access to, who used the original article as it's only source. You would think that if this was a legitimate legal option, two things would have happened by now:
1-Gordon's legal team would have already pursued this course of action. If it is such a slam-dunk that the NFL policy violates Ohio law, why aren't the pursuing (or at least publicizing) this avenue?
2-This would have been discussed by ALL the major sports sites: ESPN, SI, CBS, NFL network, etc.
Also, I'm assuming the precedent you are referring to is the Williams' case? If so, you are mistaken. The state Supreme Court dismissed the Williams' appeal, asserting that they had not grounds on which to appeal the NFL's policy/suspension.
As for Gordon's legal team not already pursuing this legal action, it would be impossible for them to do so until the NFL hands down a suspension. You can't sue over a suspension that hasn't been ruled; a judge would never allow it.
Also, the Williams' case and Gordon's case are fundamentally different. The Williams were arguing that the NFL lacked the authority to punish them, that only the state possessed that power--if I'm remembering correctly. Gordon would be trying to prove that the NFL drug testing policies actively violate state law, something federal courts have already ruled the are required to abide by. Regardless, it doesn't matter if Gordon wins the case or not. If he files a suit against the NFL, which I believe he will, he plays this year.
Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.
https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf
Read page 4 of that.
And, from page 6:It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.I don't want to say you're wrong, but from my understanding, any business in the state pursuing that participates in drug testing is automatically a part of the Ohio Drug Free Workplace Program. I don't believe it is some special, higher-standard program, but a program to set standards for all business drug testing in the state.Bayhawks said:This is part of the Ohio Administrative code, which are rules and regulations promulgated by the state agencies of Ohio. This particular code deals with state agencies, and businesses who elect to participate in the state's drug-free workplace program; it DOES NOT apply to all businesses/individuals in the state of Ohio.The Dynasty said:Gordon's legal case, as I understand it, would be that the NFL's drug testing policies violate Ohio employer law. Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” As everyone knows, Gordon's A cup tested over the limits, while his B cup tested under. Under Ohio law, this must cause a passing result. Precedence has already been set that the NFL, as the employer of every player, must abide by state laws where each player is employed. Whether or not Gordon can actually win this case is up in the air, but, I think it's strong enough to, at the very least, provide him with an injunction against the league that causes him to suit up. If it takes long enough--the Williams played two years for Minnesota before eventually serving their suspension--he should be able to suit up for all sixteen games.
DISCLAIMER: I picked Gordon in the seventh round of my 16-teamer two weeks ago.
Also, I realized now that I made a typo on my original post. I said I feel it's between fifty and seventy-five percent that he make it through the entire "decision" before it's decided. What I meant to say was that I think it's 50-75% that he makes it through the season. These court battles can potentially drag out for a very long time, a lot longer than the four months the season takes place.
So unless the Browns voluntarily participated in this DFWP, this code does not apply to Gordon. This particular legal strategy hasn't gotten much play. From what I can find, it has been discussed in only 2 places: the original article, where the author claims it is a foregone conclusion that Gordon won't be suspended, and (according to this thread) from an "insider" site that I don't have access to, who used the original article as it's only source. You would think that if this was a legitimate legal option, two things would have happened by now:
1-Gordon's legal team would have already pursued this course of action. If it is such a slam-dunk that the NFL policy violates Ohio law, why aren't the pursuing (or at least publicizing) this avenue?
2-This would have been discussed by ALL the major sports sites: ESPN, SI, CBS, NFL network, etc.
Also, I'm assuming the precedent you are referring to is the Williams' case? If so, you are mistaken. The state Supreme Court dismissed the Williams' appeal, asserting that they had not grounds on which to appeal the NFL's policy/suspension.
https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf
Read page 4 of that.
The Drug-Free Workplace Program:
- Is voluntary.
Your second link includes text about exactly what I'm saying:Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.
https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf
Read page 4 of that.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html
http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm
But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
If employers want the discount = they implement the Ohio drug free workplace program. If they don't, they don't.Like a number of other states, Ohio has a drug-free workplace program regulating drug testing. Employers who establish such a program can qualify for a discount on their workers’ compensation insurance premiums. However, employers must follow the state’s rules to get their discount.
Under Ohio law, an employer who wants the workers’ compensation discount must drug test employees and applicants, in some circumstances. Employers may qualify for a deeper discount if they also perform random testing and commit to helping employees with rehabilitation.
You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.
https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf
Read page 4 of that.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html
http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm
But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
3 months of discussion about Gordon, and NOW you want it to end?Guys......
Seriously, guys.
Tomorrow. We celebrate
All great things must come to an end.3 months of discussion about Gordon, and NOW you want it to end?Guys......
Seriously, guys.
Tomorrow. We celebrate
You're killing the buzz in here, manIt's going to be funny when he's suspended tomorrow and the Gordonites start digging up Plessy vs. Ferguson and whatnot looking for more legal ways out.
LOL. Yeah man, we gotta keep the positive vibes flowing'.You're killing the buzz in here, manIt's going to be funny when he's suspended tomorrow and the Gordonites start digging up Plessy vs. Ferguson and whatnot looking for more legal ways out.
Harshing the flow
We all get along in here now... No need to laugh at anyone regardless of the outcome
You're not being excellent :(Oh I will be laughing. By reading all of the crazy pro gordon theories and predictions without any recognition of the huge odds against against gordon getting anything less than 8 games and most likely 16 games, gives me plenty of reason to laugh...after that we can get along and enjoy the buzzYou're killing the buzz in here, manHarshing the flowIt's going to be funny when he's suspended tomorrow and the Gordonites start digging up Plessy vs. Ferguson and whatnot looking for more legal ways out.
We all get along in here now... No need to laugh at anyone regardless of the outcome
The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.
https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf
Read page 4 of that.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html
http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm
But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
Also, your contention that all Gordon has to do is file a lawsuit to play in 2014 is flawed. If his lawsuit has no merit (or if he can't sue, because the CBA says NFL players can't sue the NFL except for under certain circumstances), then the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.
I agree. I think if they had no plans to fight any suspension in court, we wouldn't be hearing reports of the lack of settlement talks, as Gordon's legal team would be trying to reduce the suspension any way possible.I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)
But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon
Can you please describe the judge shopping process and how that works with these lawsuits?The Williamses attempt to sue the league was far more ridiculous than Gordon's potential suit, yet they had no trouble finding a judge that would hear their case. You are correct that the players are not allowed to sue the league over certain issues, but banned substances is not listed among them. I find it difficult to imagine that Gordon's defense team will be unable to find a judge in the entire state that will hear Gordon's case.You didn't see in both your links the terms "may," "can," "are able to," etc? Or the multiple times they say employers who CHOOSE to participate in the program can qualify for insurance discounts IF they follow the administrative rules?Here's a couple of resources that lead me to believe that all employers drug-testing in Ohio have to follow these regulations.It's not. Go read about it. Pretty obviously something that employers can enroll in as a resource if they want.
https://www.bwc.ohio.gov/downloads/brochureware/publications/DFWPtechmanual.pdf
Read page 4 of that.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/drug-testing-laws-ohio.html
http://www.testcountry.com/StateLaws/Ohio.htm
But like I said, he doesn't have to win the case. All that needs to happen for him to play this year is a suit be filed.
Also, your contention that all Gordon has to do is file a lawsuit to play in 2014 is flawed. If his lawsuit has no merit (or if he can't sue, because the CBA says NFL players can't sue the NFL except for under certain circumstances), then the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.
Shocking interpretation of the lack of settlement talks.I agree. I think if they had no plans to fight any suspension in court, we wouldn't be hearing reports of the lack of settlement talks, as Gordon's legal team would be trying to reduce the suspension any way possible.I have 2 drafts in Sunday and if he is suspended I still expect to draft him late in my redraft leagues just in case he skates... In reality we need to know for sure whether this whole ohio working code applies... I'm leaning toward it being voluntary and this not applying in this case (cause I'm guessing browns didn't opt for that program)
But I'm encouraged that Gordon's lawyers reportedly haven't come to the bargaining table which leads me to believe they are planning to fight in the event of an unfavorable decision for Gordon