What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

WR Josh Gordon, KC (3 Viewers)

I check into this thread every day wishing, hoping, that eventually there will be worthwhile news. Still wishing and hoping.

 
Depending on your point of view the NFL's drug testing program is (pick two):

a) designed to look like the league cares about drugs even though they don't (much)

b) designed to catch only the addicts/idiots who can't stop smoking for the ~month the test is coming

And, yes... pretty sure if the possession charges stick both guys will be go into stage one, which has an automatic pass-through to stage two and random testing after an evaluation period.

Again, all as negotiated by the NFL and the players. And if the players want heavier penalties for wife-beating and other more socially damaging offenses they can tell Roger Goodell today that they won't challenge them and I'm sure he'll be happy to oblige.

 
Bayhawks said:
amnesiac said:
Bayhawks said:
Ojaays said:
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
Click to expand...
1-The CBA says they need to fail a test, not admit to using a banned substance.2-The penalty for a first violation of the substance abuse policy is not a 4 game suspension; that's why we don't hear about most first violations.

3-Unless a player is already in the system/program, they are not (as far as I know) subject to random tests. They are tested once, at the preseason. Assuming Bell and Blount have no previous failed tests, and they CAN NOT be randomly tested, even if the league has very good reason to believe that they would fail.

4-I doubt that Bell's blood work could be used as a "failed test;" it would have to meet the specifications and requirements of the CBA, and even then, it would be subject to a legal defense (he'd probably hire Suh).
Click to expand...
iirc, the NFL can test at any time with probable cause, regardless of what stage a player is in.
Click to expand...
This is not true, at least not with regards to the substance abuse policy. Unless more frequent tests are written into a player's individual contract, he can only be tested once in the pre-season (I believe this usually happens at the beginning of TC), unless he has already had a failed test, in which case he can be tested, randomly, anytime.The steroids policy allows the NFL to randomly test 10 players each week, along with (at most) 6 random tests in the offseason.
Click to expand...
i thought i read the probable cause thing in the Manziel thread after the pic of him rolling the $20 bill came out. i could be wrong though.

 
Ojaays said:
Dr. Octopus said:
Ojaays said:
Dr. Octopus said:
Ojaays said:
Dr. Octopus said:
Ojaays said:
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
Click to expand...
They have not failed an NFL sanctioned drug test.

Their arrest will need to play out legally and then the NFL will step in; much like if it was Gordon and not his passenger that was in possession and/or Gordon's DUI.
Click to expand...
Did you read the story in the link?

They ADMITTED buying and using.
Click to expand...
So?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I thought that was a great defense argument too, no need for Suh on this one.
Click to expand...
My initial response is more than your fishing trip even deserved. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you can see the difference between what Gordon is currently facing and what will happen with the Steeler duo, since earlier your position was that Gordon will not face a suspension for his DUI until the legal process plays out.
Click to expand...
Seriously curious here.

Gordon's whole deal has gotten many of us more informed on the CBA , many here have been adamant that Gordon should be gone.

I'm curious what those same folks think of these two and how this whole scene kind of opens the league up to criticism that their anti weed program is really kind of a sham. One test per year, everyone knows when it is. Just don't reenact the Cheech and Chong scene and you can basically smoke all you want to and the league is basically looking the other way.

Gordon's DWI was alcohol, and there is precedent to such things, like being able to plead that down to a lesser charge. And that won't be acted upon until it goes thru the courts, as has happened with similar cases in the past.

Here we have the players admitting buying and using substances that get you entered into the drug program.

Not sure there is any precedent to being able to plead down something you already admitted to, but you never know.

I just don't recall any player saying the things Bell said.

After a quick,scan of the CBA, it would seem they both bought tickets into stage one based on the "behavior" clause and pending their evaluation, can be immediately placed into stage two, where they can be tested anytime.

It wouldn't seem that the league wouldn't need to wait for anything to play out in the courts on this one.

My guess is they don't get suspended over this but are both placed into stage one, and maybe stage two.

It certainly matters what your standing is with the league that will determine how much weed you can partake in and when, and that's the sham part to me.
Click to expand...
When you say CBA, did you mean the substance abuse policy? The CBA doesn't contain anything like what you mentioned, but the substance abuse policy does say that. That being said, I highly doubt this process is instantaneous. Assuming both players are entered into stage 1, via the arrest/charges for possession; they would then be subject to random tests, but that would probably have to wait until after the league makes it official that they are "in stage one."

I don't think you'll find many people disagree that the NFL's policy on weed is "dumb;" but it is what it is. Gordon, and now Bell & Blount have to live with it, until it's changed. It doesn't matter if it's dumb, it is one of the rules they have to abide by.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bayhawks said:
When you say CBA, did you mean the substance abuse policy? The CBA doesn't contain anything like what you mentioned, but the substance abuse policy does say that. That being said, I highly doubt this process is instantaneous. Assuming both players are entered into stage 1, via the arrest/charges for possession; they would then be subject to random tests, but that would probably have to wait until after the league makes it official that they are "in stage one."
Click to expand...
Don't know about "instantaneous" but there is wording in the Substance Abuse Policy which says that a player entering stage 1 needs to be evaluated "promptly".

My assumption is that they will enter stage 1 based on the "behavior" clause in the substance abuse policy.

Players enter Stage One of the

Intervention Program by a Positive Test, Behavior or Self-Referral more fully

described as follows:

a. Positive Test: Urine or blood toxicology Tests that meet the

concentration levels set forth in Article I, Section C.3.c.

b. Behavior: Behavior, including but not limited to an arrest related

to an alleged misuse of substances of abuse, which, in the

judgment of the Medical Director, exhibits physical, behavioral, or

psychological signs or symptoms of misuse of substances of abuse.
Click to expand...
Doesn't seem to mention anything about a conviction only an arrest related to an alleged misuse of substance of abuse. The players are then "promptly" evaluated.

A player entering Stage One of

the Intervention Program will be referred to a Regional

Team which shall evaluate the player promptly. After

receipt of the Regional Team’s evaluation, the Medical

Director, in his discretion, shall determine whether the

player should be referred for appropriate clinical

intervention and/or treatment
Click to expand...
In stage 1 they can be tested as often as the medical examiner deems necessary to evaluate them. Not sure if they would immediately test a player or not after a drug arrest but based on Bell's comments it seems likely they would fail.

In Stage One, the Medical Director may require

the player to submit to as many Tests for substances of

abuse as, in his discretion, are required to adequately

evaluate the player, and those Tests shall be administered

under the direction of the Medical Advisor.
Click to expand...
There seems to be different guidelines on what happens based on whether the player entered via a positive test vs. behavior.

A player who is referred to

Stage One solely for Behavior and who upon

evaluation in Stage One is deemed by the Medical

Director not to require specific clinical intervention

and/or treatment will immediately be released from

any further obligations to participate in the

Intervention Stages and will thereafter assume the

same status as players who have never been referred

to the Intervention Stages. However, a player who is

referred to Stage One solely for Behavior, and who

upon evaluation in Stage One, is deemed by the

Medical Director to require specific clinical

intervention and/or treatment, will be advanced to

Stage Two upon notification to the player by the

Medical Director. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a

player who has a Positive Test while in Stage One

shall be automatically advanced to Stage Two.
Click to expand...
So it seems like they could be A) Dismissed immediately from Stage 1 if the medical examiner determines no clinical intervention is required, B) advanced to Stage 2 if the medical examiner determines clinical intervention is required (that seems unlikely) or C) be tested at any time and if they fail, be automatically advanced to Stage 2.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
wdcrob said:
Depending on your point of view the NFL's drug testing program is (pick two):

a) designed to look like the league cares about drugs even though they don't (much)

b) designed to catch only the addicts/idiots who can't stop smoking for the ~month the test is coming
Click to expand...
I've seen this mentioned a couple of times now about there only being a few weeks a year that the player needs to stay clean and it doesn't seem to be completely true. The preseason testing period is more than a month. According to the Substance Abuse Policy:

Pre-Season: All players under contract with an NFL club will be

tested once during the period beginning April 20 and continuing

through August 9.
Click to expand...
So it seems like its closer to a 4 month window they could be tested and if you assume they need to not smoke for at least a few weeks prior to April 20th to make sure they are clean, then depending on when they actually get tested they could end up having to go close to 4-5 months without smoking to make sure they don't get busted.

I think its still applicable that a player is either a total idiot or has a real drug problem if they can't stay clean for a few months in the preseason, but just wanted to point out that it appears to be more than a 1 month window that they have to be clean for (assuming they aren't tested very early in the window).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ojaays said:
Greg Russell said:
Ojaays said:
Questions for the board as we have been following Gordon's escapades, we have the Steeler RB duo re enacting a scene from Cheech and Chongs " Up in Smoke".http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/08/22/Criminal-complaint-details-marijuana-citations-for-Steelers-Blount-Bell/stories/201408220161

Is there any reason they shouldn't immediately be suspended for 4 games for using a banned substance?

They after all, have admitted to it.

Also, shouldn't they have been called to drug test, immediately by the league?

Bell had blood drawn, can the league use the results to suspend him?

I'm curious how the league will respond here, because , you know , weed is a bad thing, and these two admitted to buying and smoking, so really, do you need to even test to suspend them?

Weigh in please, curious where you all stand on this given the Gordon case in front of us.
Click to expand...
The players and NFL agreed on the drug policy. What does it say should happen?
Click to expand...
First offense of banned substance = 4 games
Click to expand...
Dwayne Bowe = 1 game... Lots of NFL attorneys around these parts I suppose

 
NJ said:
wdcrob said:
Depending on your point of view the NFL's drug testing program is (pick two):

a) designed to look like the league cares about drugs even though they don't (much)

b) designed to catch only the addicts/idiots who can't stop smoking for the ~month the test is coming
Click to expand...
I've seen this mentioned a couple of times now about there only being a few weeks a year that the player needs to stay clean and it doesn't seem to be completely true. The preseason testing period is more than a month. According to the Substance Abuse Policy:

Pre-Season: All players under contract with an NFL club will be

tested once during the period beginning April 20 and continuing

through August 9.
Click to expand...
So it seems like its closer to a 4 month window they could be tested and if you assume they need to not smoke for at least a few weeks prior to April 20th to make sure they are clean, then depending on when they actually get tested they could end up having to go close to 4-5 months without smoking to make sure they don't get busted.

I think its still applicable that a player is either a total idiot or has a real drug problem if they can't stay clean for a few months in the preseason, but just wanted to point out that it appears to be more than a 1 month window that they have to be clean for (assuming they aren't tested very early in the window).
Click to expand...
I had a close friend who played for a couple of NFL teams in the late 90s/early 00's. Back then, at least, you knew WELL in advance of the testing date. We partied hard and he never had an issue passing. He made the comment to me that you have to be really stupid or an addict to fail the yearly testing. Things may be tougher now, but I still know some guys on a few teams and a lot of guys smoke "recreationally" without getting caught.

 
Here's my delimma--I draft on 9/2/14 but my keepers (4 keeper PPR) are due on 8/29/14, however, I do pick #1 & 4 overalll but do not have another pick until #51. As it stands today my keepers are Doug Martin, Gio Bernard, AJ Green and Gronk...on my roster is Cordarelle Patterson who I planned to take #1....do you take Gordon #4 overall or hope he makes it to #51?

 
Adam Schefterjust said on ESPN that the decision has been made and is ready to go but no timetable yet. The arbitrator he said is just re reading it before he announces it to make sure its all good. Could be announced at any time now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
damageinc said:
Adam Schefterjust said on ESPN that the decision has been made and is ready to go but no timetable yet. The arbitrator he said is just re reading it before he announces it to make sure its all good.
Click to expand...
that's very reasonable.

Im sure there's a legitimate excuse for this... right guys?

 
What is a time table anyway? What does he mean by time table and why is it called a time table?

My kid does times tables for school. But what is a time table? Is it a graph? Is it a wooden table that they sit behind? I never understood that reference.

 
I used the word time table. the exact wording (I had it on DVR) was that the Arbitrator has his decision ready , is reading it over again but has not said when he would announce it but it could be any time. They repeat sports center every hour so I am sure you will see it again next hour.

You can read it any way. he has suspended Gordon and is reading it over as he knows that Gordon will appeal and he wants to make sure it is legally sound OR he hass not suspended Gordon and know the league will get mad ( they suspended Gordon 1 year ) and he is removing it or lessening it) and is making sure his decision is sound.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With Cleveland on a high from the Kevin Love deal I think he'll get the year suspension announced today. Hoping against i, but feels like a long shot now.

 
Proven right? His willingness for hope that Gordon to get ZERO games has nothing to do with being right. He has never proclaimed inside info, just that it was his guess.

So if his hope or guess is proven right, is he gonna march around this thread like he knew something someone didnt? He might and will certainly get suspended for it from the mods, rational thought would include the CBA and the fact that this offense under the CBA merits a 16 game ban. Those saying Gordon is getting 16 games is not hoping for it, but using rational thought that 16 games is what is coming from being in stage three.

Those saying he dont deserve 16 games is a fan of him and/or the Browns and owns him on their fantasy team. I think it is obvious that is the case if anyone is going to defend this habitual rule breaker that has to be the case.

The time it is taking is unreal, I have firmly said Gordon will get 16 because of the rules he broke, but with the league taking this long who knows.

Edited to remove quoted fake info

 
Last edited by a moderator:
supreme court decisions that create precedent for years to come haven't taken this long to be decided. Murder cases have been argued and decided in less time. It's completely ridiculous that something in the grand scheme of things means absolutely nothing and was argued over 2 days has taken 3 weeks to decide.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Man, it would be beautiful if he somehow got 0-4 games. That would be like getting a free 2nd round draft pick added to any team that took him.

 
Banger said:
supreme court decisions that create precedent for years to come haven't taken this long to be decided. Murder cases have been argued and decided in less time. It's completely ridiculous that something in the grand scheme of things means absolutely nothing and was argued over 2 days has taken 3 weeks to decide.
Click to expand...
Beginning to think we might get peace in the Middle East before this verdict.

 
Ilov80s said:
Man, it would be beautiful if he somehow got 0-4 games. That would be like getting a free 2nd round draft pick added to any team that took him.
Click to expand...
It would be beautiful if a person who broke the rules in stage 3 got 0-4 games?

This is the problem with this thread and has been. People being irrational to the discussion because they own him or are a fan.

You own him on a team now, now everything you say regardless if you believe it or not will be defending him or pulling for a 0 game suspension.

 
False Start said:
Ilov80s said:
Man, it would be beautiful if he somehow got 0-4 games. That would be like getting a free 2nd round draft pick added to any team that took him.
Click to expand...
It would be beautiful if a person who broke the rules in stage 3 got 0-4 games?

This is the problem with this thread and has been. People being irrational to the discussion because they own him or are a fan.

You own him on a team now, now everything you say regardless if you believe it or not will be defending him or pulling for a 0 game suspension.
Click to expand...
No, if he broke the rules , he should get suspended.

The arbitrator will decide if did or didn't.

If he didn't , it's 0, and then Yes, That would be a beautiful thing.

 
False Start said:
This is the problem with this thread and has been. People being irrational to the discussion because they own him or are a fan.
Click to expand...
Or maybe the problem with this thread is that one side has made up their minds, despite signals that this case isn't as shut or as black/white as they presume. It's a matter of perception, my friend.

Frankly, I understand the desire for the "Gordonites" to keep searching for glimmers of hope, since a $1 or 10th+ round lottery ticket could turn into a 1st/2nd round producer if he plays. What I don't understand is the vitriol and constant badgering by the other side. At every turn, you guys are quick to hurl insults and proclaim your superior "rationality."

Why do you care so much? If this is so obviously a done deal, why haven't you moved on to more relevant threads?

 
False Start said:
Ilov80s said:
Man, it would be beautiful if he somehow got 0-4 games. That would be like getting a free 2nd round draft pick added to any team that took him.
Click to expand...
It would be beautiful if a person who broke the rules in stage 3 got 0-4 games?

This is the problem with this thread and has been. People being irrational to the discussion because they own him or are a fan.

You own him on a team now, now everything you say regardless if you believe it or not will be defending him or pulling for a 0 game suspension.
Click to expand...
The rule is stupid. Weed doesn't impact what happens on the field, and it isn't all that bad for you. I hope the NFL stops testing for it altogether.

 
Weed doesn't impact what happens on the field, and it isn't all that bad for you
Click to expand...
but so addictive people can't stop using it and will risk a future $50-75 million contract

pretty powerful wouldn't you say ?

 
Stealthycat said:
Weed doesn't impact what happens on the field, and it isn't all that bad for you
Click to expand...
but so addictive people can't stop using it and will risk a future $50-75 million contract

pretty powerful wouldn't you say ?
Click to expand...
You can't get addicted to weed,

Stupid people don't stop using it and risk a future $50-$75 million contract.

...and I say that as a Gordon owner.

That said, it is stupid that they test for it. If anything, it makes you worse at football.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
WR Tory Horton, SEA
2
Replies
67
Views
5K
sushinsky4tsar
S
JohnnyU
WR Jaylin Lane, Washington Commanders
Replies
13
Views
1K
Harjiran
Harjiran
P
D'Andre Swift with Ben Johnson
Replies
19
Views
4K
menobrown
M

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top