Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
WR Josh Gordon, KC (16 Viewers)
- Thread starter Matt Waldman
- Start date
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Ramsay. Jump was still upset about all of those poor turkeys that plummeted to their death.
identikit
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Incredible wasted talent
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
0.01 nanograms per milliliter is what he failed by....that is not a lot for you non-scientists.
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
See you guys in the next controversial thread..... 
DaveGrumbles
Footballguy
Well we could do dueling analogies all day but since you've opened up another one...Because the NFL does not indiscriminately test all players during the offseason at the same frequency your twitter example doesn't fly. It would be closer to something like this...your co-workers are allowed to tweet it up during their off hours however you've previously been labeled a big mouth by your company so you're not allowed to even have a twitter account.
I do get your point...he knew the rules and he's an idiot for breaking them but it still stands that the rules are waaay too stringent when compared to the consequences of the crime or any average workplace. Seriously how is the NFL hurt by players smoking up in the offseason? Do NFL fans actually hold players to a higher standard than rock stars, actors or any celebrity for that matter?
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
NJ
Footballguy
I don't think there is anything in the substance abuse policy about a lifetime ban. It's just that once you're in stage 3, you stay there forever and any violation in stage 3 results in a MINIMUM 1 year ban. Its always at the sole discretion of the commission if/when the player is reinstated to the NFL.
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
Is this policy in place to protect the players or appease the fans?
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
Bronco Billy
Footballguy
Gopher State
Footballguy
Doesn't matter if it was 0.01 or 100,000,000, he failed, broke the rules and got his punishment. In most workplaces you fail a drug test your done for life with that firm, no one year lay off
FUBAR
Footballguy
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Oh, I don't think the rule should be in place, my only point was in refuting the notion that something being legal doesn't mean that a private employer cant legislate against it.
Honestly the NFL creates its own black-eye by even drug testing and handing out suspensions for it. No one would even know Josh Gordon smoked some pot if otherwise.
Bronco Billy
Footballguy
Yeah. Imagine expecting a guy who can make tens of millions in a part time job to be responsible for his own behavior. We must have a nanny state, dammit!
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
remember about 10 yrs ago when it seemed there was an NFL incident just about every week during the off-season. That's why its so strict.
cloppbeast
Footballguy
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
:IBTL: .
It.
DOWN.
Start again.
It.
DOWN.
Start again.
GreenBaySnackers
Footballguy
Right, if it was .01 over that time, how many times was it .01 under and how long until it would have been a .05 or a .1 over.
Proust Loves Cake
Footballguy
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
What if he was an got a second hand exposure?
I mean, he probably WASNT smoking weed.
Wrong place, wrong time, plainly but he barely failed a test and one was clean.
Policy for policy sake with a commissioner who has written the book on being discretionary is tough to take.
Gordon did his "crime" and will do his time, that's fine. It's a closed issue.
And if the responsibility quotient is what you feel, your thoughts on Irsay and Rice, who have no grey area in their offenses.
NJ
Footballguy
I wonder if the NFL strategically made this a one season suspension vs. a one year suspension to lessen the strength of any potential lawsuit on Gordon's side. I think Gordon would have had a legitimate beef about the time it took to get this settled and the fact that if it were 1 calendar year he would miss next year's preseason too. But if they NFL says he's eligible for reinstatement at the end of the 2014 season, he really doesn't have much grounds for a lawsuit or obtaining a TRO IMHO.
White Lightning
Footballguy
I hope you never get pulled over and blow a .080. I would assume there is some built in clinically accepted margin of error for the amount? If so, Gordon and his legal staff should have definitely challenged the result and possible suspension. I'm assuming they had expert toxicology testimony stating that Gordon's results were well within the accepted margin of error, and I'm surprised that didn't create enough doubt to carry the day.
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
I wouldn't object to this notion if there was some consistency to it.
Does it extend to management as well?
ericttspikes
Footballguy
cstu
Footballguy
The General
Footballguy
Sucks for this guy that in 5 years they won't test for weed.
Bronco Billy
Footballguy
He could have avoided the whole thing through his own behavior. Just like a drunk driver can. Not sure why this is such a difficult concept to grasp.
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
we CELEBRATE lt and joe Namath partying the night before games but string up the Gordon's of the world
Ketamine Dreams
Footballguy
The way this played out everyone had doubts. The timeframe, reports, legal speak, and questions about drug testing all combined to introduce some element of doubt for all. It just did.
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
DaveGrumbles
Footballguy
I remember ten years ago very well...What I dont recall is an inordinate number of 'NFL incidents' during baseball season, however I do remember some great football games in the fall.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Technically he already has an indefinite suspension. IIRC, he has to stay clean, abide by the rules of the NFL drug policy, and must apply for reinstatement. So at a minimum he misses all games from this season, but he could miss more.
The General
Footballguy
Just landed in Seattle, cross country flight that got me up way to early. Gonna finish up a bit of work, get a light workout in, pickup some stuff to grill and then decide if I want to smoke a bowl or have a bourbon.
Sometimes it must suck to play in the NFL.
Sometimes it must suck to play in the NFL.
Lifetime bans come after a second indefinite suspension. I think Blackmon is closer to that fate than Gordon at this point, but I'm not sure.
Also, on the DUI, that probably falls under the personal conduct policy, not the substance abuse policy (he wasn't caught drunk/high by the NFL), so that might just land him a 2 game suspension for a first offence same as Rice.
Gopher State
Footballguy
Where I work I have a company vehicle. If I get a DUI, I am fired, done, kicked to the curve, no appeal. Margin of error doesn't matter, I know the company policy. You know how I handle this, I have a designed driver when I go out and have a few drinks. It's really not that hard to play by the rules. The NFL drug policy is the same for every player, doesn't matter if it was second hand smoke etc,. when you know the rules you don't get yourself into those situations or hang out where drugs are being used. It's not that hard.
Proust Loves Cake
Footballguy
Namath wasn't subject to any policy back then around this. The NFLPA agreed to the current substance abuse policy. Like the rules, don't like the rules, it doesn't really matter what your position is on marijuana. The league and the players association felt that repeated violations of the drug policy they constructed should result in a year suspension. Not sure why there's so much angst around this.
cstu
Footballguy
If you're not a moron who gets into the substance abuse program then you can do blow in Vegas bathrooms and get caught doing it.
The written decision hasn't been made available yet, but I suspect that this point is being misreported.
I suspect that the initial suspension handed down in May was for one calendar year.
I also suspect that the arbitrator's ruling was simply to uphold that suspension based on his conclusion that Gordon really did fail the drug test.
The length of the suspension, I suspect, was not something that the arbitrator was given to rule on, so he would not have taken it upon himself to do so, except just to uphold the original suspension.
I believe, therefore, that talk of less than a full calendar year is coming not from the arbitrator's decision, but rather from a league source discussing the league's intention to allow Gordon to apply for reinstatement early (perhaps in return for Gordon's promise not to sue in court).
I could be proven wrong about all of that whenever the arbitrator's written decision is released, but that's my guess.
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
That was then and this now, sorry but that's just the way it is.
