What's new
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 (7 Viewers)

I wouldn't call that "NBC" so much as I'd call it "Mike Florio."

He's usually pretty good on these types of issues, but he's also always willing to say whatever will get headlines.

 
A new drug testing agreement could benefit Welker, Gordon

Posted by Michael David Smith on September 4, 2014, 7:47 PM EDT
welker3-e1409872776931.jpg
AP
Broncos receiver Wes Welker is suspended for the first four games of the season, and Browns receiver Josh Gordon is suspended for the entire season. Both players have already appealed, and lost.

And yet there’s a chance that both players could still see their suspensions reduced.

As Mike Florio reported on NBC, Welker, Gordon and potentially other players in the midst of suspensions could benefit from a new drug testing policy that the owners and players could agree upon soon.

The new policy that may be forthcoming has received attention primarily because it would include testing for human growth hormone, which has never before been tested in the NFL. But the policy would also have some other changes.

One change is that offseason use of amphetamines would move from the performance-enhancing substance policy to the substance-abuse policy. That would mean that Welker would switch from a first-time offender in the PED policy (which carries an automatic four-game suspension) to a first-time offender in the substance-abuse policy (which carries no suspension).

Another change is that the threshold to trigger a positive result on a marijuana test would rise. That would affect Gordon because his positive marijuana test was just barely above the NFL’s current threshold for a positive, which is significantly lower than the threshold for other organizations like the World Anti-Doping Agency.

If the NFL changes its policy and agrees to apply it retroactively to players who tested positive this year, Welker and Gordon would benefit. Which means that while the players’ union is stopping short of saying an agreement is very close, Welker and Gordon would be wise to call their union representatives and urge them to get the deal done, and get it done soon.
 
Not to be a buzzkill but...

A new drug testing agreement could benefit Welker, Gordon

Posted by Michael David Smith on September 4, 2014, 7:47 PM EDT
welker3-e1409872776931.jpg
APBroncos receiver Wes Welker is suspended for the first four games of the season, and Browns receiver Josh Gordon is suspended for the entire season. Both players have already appealed, and lost.

And yet there’s a chance that both players could still see their suspensions reduced.

As Mike Florio reported on NBC, Welker, Gordon and potentially other players in the midst of suspensions could benefit from a new drug testing policy that the owners and players could agree upon soon.

The new policy that may be forthcoming has received attention primarily because it would include testing for human growth hormone, which has never before been tested in the NFL. But the policy would also have some other changes.

One change is that offseason use of amphetamines would move from the performance-enhancing substance policy to the substance-abuse policy. That would mean that Welker would switch from a first-time offender in the PED policy (which carries an automatic four-game suspension) to a first-time offender in the substance-abuse policy (which carries no suspension).

Another change is that the threshold to trigger a positive result on a marijuana test would rise. That would affect Gordon because his positive marijuana test was just barely above the NFL’s current threshold for a positive, which is significantly lower than the threshold for other organizations like the World Anti-Doping Agency.

If the NFL changes its policy and agrees to apply it retroactively to players who tested positive this year, Welker and Gordon would benefit. Which means that while the players’ union is stopping short of saying an agreement is very close, Welker and Gordon would be wise to call their union representatives and urge them to get the deal done, and get it done soon.
That's a pretty big conjectural "If" and an even bigger "and," and I'm one of the ones hopin' this train comes in.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, kind of left the thread after the ruling.

Report just now on the TNF pregame show that if the NFL comes to an agreement of reducing drug infractions prior to Sunday, which is possible. Both Gordon and Welker's suspensions could not only be reduced but completely removed?
Just heard that too, call BS or run and get Gordon off waivers?
I picked him up in one league and then came here.
Picked him up in 1 out of two. Someone was faster than me in the other. <_<

 
I wouldn't call that "NBC" so much as I'd call it "Mike Florio."

He's usually pretty good on these types of issues, but he's also always willing to say whatever will get headlines.
True... but he does have a pretty solid reputation. I'm sure if he's reporting it he has at least more than a rumor but less than a definite source that this is something that could happen. Possibly something in the range of, unlikely a deal gets done by Sunday but highly likely that if it did the suspensions would be reduced or eliminated.

 
Florio's line:

"If the NFL changes its policy and agrees to apply it retroactively to players who tested positive this year, Welker and Gordon would benefit."

That's where this is coming from. Any one of you could have posted the same thing here with as much inside knowledge that Florio has.

 
Why not. For my last roster spot, I'll grab him. Hopefully I don't regret cutting James White.

One thing I don't understand:

Why would the NFL retroactively reduce Welker & Gordon's suspensions on a policy change, immediately after they made a policy change on domestic assault and did not retroactively punish Ray Rice more. It seems pretty much like the same situation, which tells me it is very unlikely that anything happens here. But hey, Gordon is still worth the stash for a week.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Funny to think my league mates and I chastised the guy in our league who drafted Gordon at 12.03 after the appeal ruling upheld the 1 year suspension. It's unreal that there is still hope that he could actually play this year.

 
Man, I don't know...I could see the old commish pushing on that, hoping all the comparisons of these two vs Ray Rice will go away

 
I wouldn't call that "NBC" so much as I'd call it "Mike Florio."

He's usually pretty good on these types of issues, but he's also always willing to say whatever will get headlines.
True... but he does have a pretty solid reputation. I'm sure if he's reporting it he has at least more than a rumor but less than a definite source that this is something that could happen. Possibly something in the range of, unlikely a deal gets done by Sunday but highly likely that if it did the suspensions would be reduced or eliminated.
Well, I also wouldn't say that it's "reporting" as much as I'd say that it's speculating. He didn't indicate that he had a source. He's just saying that such-and-such could happen.

Sure it could, but I don't think any rules changes along those lines have ever been applied retroactively. At least I can 't think of any. If Florio can't think of any either, and if he doesn't have a source indicating that discussions along those lines are taking place, then it's not just speculation, but baseless speculation.

 
Florio reporting that if ISIS conquers the planet and takes over the NFL and decides to get rid of the substance abuse policy AND decides to apply it retroactively, that may benefit Josh Gordon.

 
Florio reporting that if Doc Brown were to drop out of the sky, pick up current Josh Gordon in his 1985 DeLorean, travel back in time to past Josh Gordon and successfully convince him to not do drugs, that would alter reality in that Josh Gordon would never have been suspended in the first place. If this happened, it could benefit Josh Gordon.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm rostering him. Here's how I see it. He will be replacing the 15th spot on your team who won't be seeing any playing time for a MAJOR value play if he comes back. If he doesn't, you can drop him. If he does, you just got a top 1st-4th round pick on the waiver. It's like going to church. If there's no heaven after you die, w.e. But if there's a hell, well you just got insurance to the pearly gates.

 
For what it's worth, I'm in a dynasty league with nothing but lawyers and psychiatrists, and he's a free agent. No one is interested.

 
I'm rostering him. Here's how I see it. He will be replacing the 15th spot on your team who won't be seeing any playing time for a MAJOR value play if he comes back. If he doesn't, you can drop him. If he does, you just got a top 1st-4th round pick on the waiver. It's like going to church. If there's no heaven after you die, w.e. But if there's a hell, well you just got insurance to the pearly gates.
By all means, if your last player is Nate Washington, hold Gordon until the byes start. Nothing wrong with that.

 
Why would the NFL retroactively reduce Welker & Gordon's suspensions on a policy change, immediately after they made a policy change on domestic assault and did not retroactively punish Ray Rice more. It seems pretty much like the same situation, which tells me it is very unlikely that anything happens here.
It'd be a pretty interesting case if the NFLPA agreed to let the NFL increase Ray Rice's punishment retroactively. I think Ray Rice would have a valid suit in that case, possibly against both the NFL and the NFLPA.

I'm not sure whether the Gordon violation is different in that respect. If the NFL retroactively reduces Gordon's punishment, but not any of the other guys who've ever tested positive below the new threshold, all of those other guys might have a valid claim as well.

 
Seems a little out of character for the owners to pull something like this, but who the hell knows? Perhaps Welker is the straw that broke the rich old white men's backs.

Picked him up in a few deep redraft leagues where he was still available.

 
Why not. For my last roster spot, I'll grab him. Hopefully I don't regret cutting James White.

One thing I don't understand:

Why would the NFL retroactively reduce Welker & Gordon's suspensions on a policy change, immediately after they made a policy change on domestic assault and did not retroactively punish Ray Rice more. It seems pretty much like the same situation, which tells me it is very unlikely that anything happens here. But hey, Gordon is still worth the stash for a week.
I think the distinction is that the player (Rice) who saw his penalty increased would cry foul while the players who saw theirs reduced (Gordo/Welk) would rejoice.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.thewire.com/culture/2014/05/the-nfl-is-reportedly-set-to-loosen-its-anti-weed-drug-policy/370865/

Article about the possible changes to the drug policy, from May.

"The proposed changes would not be retroactive, so Cleveland Browns fans still have to worry about wide receiver Josh Gordon's reported year-long suspension for marijuana use that was handed down last week."
And that seemed like the import of the original reports.

One of my leagues has a hold on WW/FAAB until after week 1, I really do not feel like throwing my budget down just to keep up with the Joneses. (But if this happened this weekend I'd have no choice...).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
All joking aside, getting a regular job could be one of the best things to happen to him right now. Plus, helping out with the Wounded Warrior Project is cool.

 
Why would the NFL retroactively reduce Welker & Gordon's suspensions on a policy change, immediately after they made a policy change on domestic assault and did not retroactively punish Ray Rice more. It seems pretty much like the same situation, which tells me it is very unlikely that anything happens here.
It'd be a pretty interesting case if the NFLPA agreed to let the NFL increase Ray Rice's punishment retroactively. I think Ray Rice would have a valid suit in that case, possibly against both the NFL and the NFLPA.

I'm not sure whether the Gordon violation is different in that respect. If the NFL retroactively reduces Gordon's punishment, but not any of the other guys who've ever tested positive below the new threshold, all of those other guys might have a valid claim as well.
Just to be clear, he would have no case whatsoever.

What's the legal theory you think changing one part of CBA requires changing another such that it is actionable?

 
Rotoworld:

The Washington Post confirms it's "possible" Wes Welker and Josh Gordon could have their suspensions reduced or overturned as part of a new drug-testing agreement.
Reporter Mark Maske has confirmed Profootballtalk's report. The reduced or vanished penalties would be part of a pact that simultaneously allows HGH testing and raises the threshold for a positive marijuana test. Amphetamines would also be moved from the PED policy to substance-abuse policy. First time substance-abuse violations don't trigger automatic suspensions. NFL.com's Albert Breer has pegged Sunday as a "soft deadline" in the talks, so we could have a resolution shortly.

Related: Josh Gordon

Source: Mark Maske on Twitter
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top